Who Flys, Who Lands ??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who Flys, Who Lands ??
Who Fly`s, Who Lands ??
Quick question for all you multi-crew IFR pilots. When conducting an instrument approach to an airport, who generally flys the aircraft to min`s and who looks up and lands, left seat, right seat or always the PIC and why ?? I`m looking at some alternatives to our company SOP`s and would appreciate any feedback.
Cheers Max
Quick question for all you multi-crew IFR pilots. When conducting an instrument approach to an airport, who generally flys the aircraft to min`s and who looks up and lands, left seat, right seat or always the PIC and why ?? I`m looking at some alternatives to our company SOP`s and would appreciate any feedback.
Cheers Max
This is as simple as I can make it.....
There appears to be some confusion over the new concept of pilot roles. I hope this post clears up some misunderstandings.
The titles P1,P2, and Co-Pilot have been replaced by Handling Pilot, Non-handling Pilot, Handling Landing Pilot, Non-Handling Landing Pilot, Handling Non-Landing Pilot, and Non Handling Non-Landing Pilot.
The Landing Pilot, is initially the Handling Pilot and will handle the
take-off and landing except in role reversal when he is the Non-Handling Pilot for taxi until the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, hands the Handling to the Landing Pilot at sixty knots. The Non-Landing (Non-Handling, since the Landing Pilot is Handling) Pilot
reads the checklist to the Handling Pilot until after Before Descent
Checklist completion, when the Handling Landing Pilot hands the
handling to the Non-Handling Non-Landing Pilot who then becomes the Handling Non-Landing Pilot.
The Landing Pilot is the Non-Handling Pilot until the "decision
altitude" call, when the Handling Non-Landing Pilot hands the handling to the Non-Handling Landing Pilot, unless the latter calls "go-around", in which case the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, continues Handling and the Non-Handling Landing Pilot continues non-handling until the next call of "land" or "go-around", as appropriate.
I hope this helps out in your quest. It is simple really.
There appears to be some confusion over the new concept of pilot roles. I hope this post clears up some misunderstandings.
The titles P1,P2, and Co-Pilot have been replaced by Handling Pilot, Non-handling Pilot, Handling Landing Pilot, Non-Handling Landing Pilot, Handling Non-Landing Pilot, and Non Handling Non-Landing Pilot.
The Landing Pilot, is initially the Handling Pilot and will handle the
take-off and landing except in role reversal when he is the Non-Handling Pilot for taxi until the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, hands the Handling to the Landing Pilot at sixty knots. The Non-Landing (Non-Handling, since the Landing Pilot is Handling) Pilot
reads the checklist to the Handling Pilot until after Before Descent
Checklist completion, when the Handling Landing Pilot hands the
handling to the Non-Handling Non-Landing Pilot who then becomes the Handling Non-Landing Pilot.
The Landing Pilot is the Non-Handling Pilot until the "decision
altitude" call, when the Handling Non-Landing Pilot hands the handling to the Non-Handling Landing Pilot, unless the latter calls "go-around", in which case the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, continues Handling and the Non-Handling Landing Pilot continues non-handling until the next call of "land" or "go-around", as appropriate.
I hope this helps out in your quest. It is simple really.
Hey MaxNr Buddy, thought you'd be in a 212 in the artic by now???
If we are crabbed one way or t'other on approach, whoever has the best view of the runway as she looms out of the mist, he'll be the guy calling "Visual, I have control" , "Overshoot, goddammit" or the ever popular, "Visual, but not really, so see if you can get er any lower before I take responsibility for this beast" while the other fellow stays glued to the dials.
Call each other whatever turns your crank.
When do you get back on this side of the big blue ball?
If we are crabbed one way or t'other on approach, whoever has the best view of the runway as she looms out of the mist, he'll be the guy calling "Visual, I have control" , "Overshoot, goddammit" or the ever popular, "Visual, but not really, so see if you can get er any lower before I take responsibility for this beast" while the other fellow stays glued to the dials.
Call each other whatever turns your crank.
When do you get back on this side of the big blue ball?
who's who
SASless ..... after reading your post about three times I am still not quite sure what you mean .... complicated stuff that .....
Anyway, it's really quite simple with multicrew IFR to an airport. One pilot stays on Instruments for the entire approach - flys it down to minima and shouts DECIDE at the appropriate time. If at this point pilot2 says GO AROUND, pilot1 remains on instruments and carries out the go around procedure. If however pilot2 tells him "visual I have control" then pilot1 hands over control and pilot2 does the landing.
At any stage of the approach pilot2 can take control if he aquires the necesarry visual reference.
It is entirely up to the PIC of the aircraft to asign these duties however most PIC's tend to let the other guy fly the approach and do the landing at the end, since this gives them a better overview of the situation and they can monitor the flying pilot. And really - flying the ILS is the easy bit! Landing the Aircraft in 500m Vis is the problem.....
Woolf
Anyway, it's really quite simple with multicrew IFR to an airport. One pilot stays on Instruments for the entire approach - flys it down to minima and shouts DECIDE at the appropriate time. If at this point pilot2 says GO AROUND, pilot1 remains on instruments and carries out the go around procedure. If however pilot2 tells him "visual I have control" then pilot1 hands over control and pilot2 does the landing.
At any stage of the approach pilot2 can take control if he aquires the necesarry visual reference.
It is entirely up to the PIC of the aircraft to asign these duties however most PIC's tend to let the other guy fly the approach and do the landing at the end, since this gives them a better overview of the situation and they can monitor the flying pilot. And really - flying the ILS is the easy bit! Landing the Aircraft in 500m Vis is the problem.....
Woolf
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maxnr,
Keep it simple, the pilot flying does just that, the pilot non flying monitors and when approaching minima looks out the window and calls "lights" and then "runway", the pilot flying calls "looking up" and lands.
if at MAP the pilot flying has not heard the calls runway/lights they go straight into the missed approach procedure. Simple!
I have over the years used both systems and by far the most relaxing is the one above.
Good luck
Keep it simple, the pilot flying does just that, the pilot non flying monitors and when approaching minima looks out the window and calls "lights" and then "runway", the pilot flying calls "looking up" and lands.
if at MAP the pilot flying has not heard the calls runway/lights they go straight into the missed approach procedure. Simple!
I have over the years used both systems and by far the most relaxing is the one above.
Good luck
Woolf....that is just what I said in my post.....as I read it....I clearly differentiated between the handling..non-handling pilots and who landed and such...along with when to hand over the controls or not......or did I make an errror somewhere. Can you straighten out my error if I made one......don't want to put out bad poop here! Other posters have said bascially the same thing but not in the detailed manner I did but do go back over my post and sort out where I went wrong for me.
OopsNearly
What you have described is viewed as an unsafe procedure this side of the N Sea. To have the "approach" handling pilot look up at (M)DH aquire the runway/rig and then land is not good SOP. At a critical point of the flight you have one pilot switching from IF to visual in very poor conditions and nobody on instruments should inadvertent return to IMC take place. In the UK it is SOP for the "approach" handling pilot to call "decide" at (M)DH and the "approach" non handling pilot to call "visual I have control " and land the helicopter. This is particularly important on a rig approach where one pilot is usually unable to see the deck in the final stages of a landing. What you describe is feasible if you cloud break well above (M)DH but not in the usual conditions of a winter approach in the N Sea.
HF
What you have described is viewed as an unsafe procedure this side of the N Sea. To have the "approach" handling pilot look up at (M)DH aquire the runway/rig and then land is not good SOP. At a critical point of the flight you have one pilot switching from IF to visual in very poor conditions and nobody on instruments should inadvertent return to IMC take place. In the UK it is SOP for the "approach" handling pilot to call "decide" at (M)DH and the "approach" non handling pilot to call "visual I have control " and land the helicopter. This is particularly important on a rig approach where one pilot is usually unable to see the deck in the final stages of a landing. What you describe is feasible if you cloud break well above (M)DH but not in the usual conditions of a winter approach in the N Sea.
HF
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hummingfrog,
I don't think we can settle this and have a clear winner. We have been using this system for donkeys years, it's no different to the way our big airline worked when we were part of it. Two sales later we are still using this system, converting our new owners from their own methods.
Your system obvioulsy works or you would not be doing it, however the same goes for us. I have spent around 14 years split almost evenly between using the two methods both in the Northern and Southern North Sea.
I am a man of many years and am in the twilight of my career, so I am happy to use our old mothers' (KLM) concept and save the excitement for the drive home.
Until you have used this concept in its total form it is difficult to understand, and over the years many friends from other companies have mocked us, till a few joined and were converted!
OopsNearly
I don't think we can settle this and have a clear winner. We have been using this system for donkeys years, it's no different to the way our big airline worked when we were part of it. Two sales later we are still using this system, converting our new owners from their own methods.
Your system obvioulsy works or you would not be doing it, however the same goes for us. I have spent around 14 years split almost evenly between using the two methods both in the Northern and Southern North Sea.
I am a man of many years and am in the twilight of my career, so I am happy to use our old mothers' (KLM) concept and save the excitement for the drive home.
Until you have used this concept in its total form it is difficult to understand, and over the years many friends from other companies have mocked us, till a few joined and were converted!
OopsNearly
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With my company, it's up to the captain, & is specifically briefed as part of the approach briefing. Personally, I tend to let the pilot flying keep the controls if the weather permits breaking out into VMC 200' or more above the DH/MDA, the PNF takes over if it's less. In all cases, I brief that the PF keeps the controls until told otherwise. As someone said, I prefer having my copilot fly while I monitor, but that's chancy, as the right seat normally flies the approach, & custom dictates that seats are exchanged daily. Getting the runway lights in sight at 100' AGL at 3:00AM, & trying to transition to visual from the instruments isn't an easy thing. At minimums, I far prefer the PNF to land. But hard-and-fast rules don't enhance safety, in my opinion.
Pretty much go along with what Stan has to say....so long as the Left Hand and.....operative word....and....Right Hand both know what is to happen. I especially like the concept of swapping seats....anything that breaks down the autocratic captain syndrome is beneficial......and anything that promotes teamwork is good.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Can
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Stan has hit it on the head once again.
In our company we swap legs.....that way every flight everyone gets a kick at the cat....
My only concern is an approach to minimums with a low time co-pilot. If we are going to fly a leg where I feel we will get to minimums on the approach I prefer to have the co-pilot fly (right seat) so that I can monitor and then I will take control at minimums when we become visual...
If the roles are reversed then I have to rely on him to decide if we are visual or not..... maybe not the best option with a low time co-pilot.
This transfer of controls only happens at minimums in poor weather.....if we break out well above minimums it is simply "visual... look up"
Cheers
In our company we swap legs.....that way every flight everyone gets a kick at the cat....
My only concern is an approach to minimums with a low time co-pilot. If we are going to fly a leg where I feel we will get to minimums on the approach I prefer to have the co-pilot fly (right seat) so that I can monitor and then I will take control at minimums when we become visual...
If the roles are reversed then I have to rely on him to decide if we are visual or not..... maybe not the best option with a low time co-pilot.
This transfer of controls only happens at minimums in poor weather.....if we break out well above minimums it is simply "visual... look up"
Cheers
Xnr.....
Don't reckon...."Visual! Look out!" has been uttered before either?
Don't reckon...."Visual! Look out!" has been uttered before either?
Xnr....did not say I was advocating using that terminology.....suggested that it had been used before......should have typed the post this way....
Visual! LOOKOUT!!!!!!!!!
Visual! LOOKOUT!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
xnr,
All our pilots whether co-pilot or captain are trained to the same standard, we can have a captain-co-pilot crew, a two captain crew, or a two co-pilot crew in the simulator. We spend around 12 hours covering training and check rides and all are checked in both the right and left seats i.e. as pilot flying and as pilot non-flying. All the young co-pilots are missing is experience.
We don't fly legs, instead we do a complete flight and then swop seats and for offshore work whoever has the best approach and go-around carries out the landing.
As far as worrying about low time co-pilots making the decision, I really don't feel it is a problem. If they see the lights you can continue, if they don't you can't.
Or am I being too simplistic.
All our pilots whether co-pilot or captain are trained to the same standard, we can have a captain-co-pilot crew, a two captain crew, or a two co-pilot crew in the simulator. We spend around 12 hours covering training and check rides and all are checked in both the right and left seats i.e. as pilot flying and as pilot non-flying. All the young co-pilots are missing is experience.
We don't fly legs, instead we do a complete flight and then swop seats and for offshore work whoever has the best approach and go-around carries out the landing.
As far as worrying about low time co-pilots making the decision, I really don't feel it is a problem. If they see the lights you can continue, if they don't you can't.
Or am I being too simplistic.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Can
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ooops
Most of our crews are experienced also.
Sounds like the initial training we give our new guys is almost identicle. ( except ours is aircraft time not sim. time) There is no doubt that when it comes to IFR training sim. time is better. You get the weather and the emergencies you want.
I was just saying that if I was concerned about a co-pilots abilities, and the weather is at minimums, I would let him fly the approach so that I could make the decision to land the aircraft or not.
Don't forget that other than "Visual.... lookup" or "Not visual ...Missed approach" there may be "Visual ....Continue" until I have a better site picture and then "I have control" if the weather is at minimums.
This is a critical point in the flight and if I had any concerns at all about the co-pilots ability to assess this situation .....I would let him fly the approach and I would make the decision.
Like you said they are well trained to fly the approach.....but our guys receive zero training in this regard.
Cheers
Most of our crews are experienced also.
Sounds like the initial training we give our new guys is almost identicle. ( except ours is aircraft time not sim. time) There is no doubt that when it comes to IFR training sim. time is better. You get the weather and the emergencies you want.
I was just saying that if I was concerned about a co-pilots abilities, and the weather is at minimums, I would let him fly the approach so that I could make the decision to land the aircraft or not.
Don't forget that other than "Visual.... lookup" or "Not visual ...Missed approach" there may be "Visual ....Continue" until I have a better site picture and then "I have control" if the weather is at minimums.
This is a critical point in the flight and if I had any concerns at all about the co-pilots ability to assess this situation .....I would let him fly the approach and I would make the decision.
Like you said they are well trained to fly the approach.....but our guys receive zero training in this regard.
Cheers
Last edited by Xnr; 22nd Oct 2002 at 12:17.