Unnecessary first officer...

[xrba]

We've all flown pilot incapacitation drills in the sim, and had F/Os that have proved to be more of a hindrance than an asset, so when is the pilot community going to be halved?

[Deep and fast]

If airlines thought that trading conditions were harsh in any of the recent crisis points ie Gulf war, SARS and credit crunch, this will be a drop in the ocean compared the the drop in load figures should one or more of the flight deck crew be removed!

And as for first officers gaining handling skill in the right seat, all I know is that they seem to diminish in an airliner! I'm sure I was a better stick and rudder jockey on joining, although I didn't put the jet on the runway in 30 knot crosswinds on the first day. I left that for day 2

D and F

[sekant]

People here seem not to realise that there are already today hundreds of aircrafts that fly day in day out pilotless. They are named drones, UAVs or UCAVs and you find them mostly over Afghanistan and/or Irak, with the pilots bunkered somewhere in Florida.

These aircrafts fly in and out without particular glitches and it is not out of the imagination that such technology be extended to civil aviation. In other words, that planes fly without a pilot on board, fly mostly based on automation with a remote pilot in a position to intervene in case required or for some specifically sensitive parts of flights.

[BristolScout]

I'm a retired airline pilot now working withy UASs. Having had a number of incidents during my flying career that required counter-intuitive problem solving, I'm convinced of the validity of the human brain in the loop but I'm also content that there is a valid argument for a single pilot on shorter-haul routes, although there are many technical and institutional hurdles to be surmounted before we see it. Mr O'Leary is only voicing, in his peculiar fashion, thinking that is going on in the industry at large. Like some other more thoughtful posters here, I foresee unmanned cargo aircraft in the not-to-distant future, launching and landing at coastal airfields for trans-oceanic flights. The reality is that a freighter full of widgets going down in the Atlantic/Pacific is not going to worry anyone anything like four hundred souls perishing in the same circumstances. Nothing stays the same, especially in the fast-moving technology of today. The pilot community will always be needed, albeit in lesser numbers than at present, so it is better to embrace and help to guide the technology, rather than adopt a Luddite mentality. For what it's worth, the more I fly UAVs, the more problems I encounter so it certaintly is not silver bullet technology.

[bigdaviet]

Surely the main reason for having two pilots on board is quite simply in case one has a heart attack (or similar 'event,' ) and therefore is no longer able to perform his duties, or worse dies!

In this situation, even the worst FO in the world is still a far better proposition in the cockpit than having nobody who can fly at all!

Thats the end of the debate surely?

[parabellum]

sekant - Be a good chap and go and read through the 184 posts previous to yours before posting please. Thanks.

[Nigd3]

Cactusbusdr

That was a wind up post right? Please tell me you that you do not actually believe what you wrote, especially the last paragraph.
If not that has got to be the worst example of ill thought out stereotyping of pilots, engineers and CEOs that I have read for a while.

[Huck]

The reality is that a freighter full of widgets going down in the Atlantic/Pacific is not going to worry anyone anything like four hundred souls perishing in the same circumstances.

Yes, but they tend to crash at one end or the other of the flight plan - Amsterdam and Narita just in the last year or so.....

[BristolScout]

Bigdaviet.

The situation envisaged is a completely automated aircraft of the future, capable of controlling all movement from departure gate to arrival gate. The single pilot is there to override in the 10E-9 scenario where the computer can't cope. The chance of the pilot having a total incapacitation at the same time as the computer needs his input is infinitesimal - equivalent to both pilots having a simultaneous incapacitation today. (He may, of course, have died from boredom.)

[oxenos]

Someone has suggested that you would be able to do without an F/O on short flights. Some years ago I suffered from a kidney stone. It produced excruciating pain just 25 minutes into a 45 minute flight. Prior to take off all I had felt was mild backache. I was not totally incapacitated, but the pain came in waves, and had a wave hit me as we were landing, I would not have been much use.
Moreover short flights tend to be overland, with the potential to kill people on the ground as well as the passengers.
A lot of you are waffling on about technology marching on. Can I suggest before you go on waffling, you consider the question I posed in #153. If there are no F/O's, where do your Captains come from?

[aguadalte]

Well, look!..as a sim instructor I flew the 737 and the A320 many times, single pilot IFR after the crew had departed for the boozer.
Piece of cake to carry out a single pilot EFATO, S/E ILS, rapid descent etc, you name it.
Just one big computer game...easy as pie. Airplanes only need one pilot who knows what he's doing!...

or a sim instructor!!

Well look, here is another example of a poor soul convinced he is a professional "star" with a simplistic view of his own work. A man who is a simulator instructor who hasn't the slightest clue of what an instructor is and how his profession really goes way beyond the computer game...if you were an SLF, I could understand your point, but coming from a professional pilot (specially from an instructor) I feel sorry for your students. To compare "playing with your simulator" in an environment you create as a playground, with the real world and the inadvertent emergency situations that some of us have already experienced is so naive that I hardly believe you were talking seriously. If you ever had a real emergency, you would understand how important would be, to have by your side, an experienced and proactive co-pilot. This is not a game where you touch "pause" to avoid a crash. This is real life and real people who trust the guy's in front are adult and well prepared. I've seen many "great game players" on ground, to become less confident in the real world...and it was not even a hardworking emergency... so please spare us all...

[captplaystation]

"Those that can do, those that can't teach"

"talk the talk. . easy, walk the walk ?" Hmnn

BTW, I know some TRI's/TRE's in a well known loco who I wouldn't like to be sitting next to when the sh1t hit the fan, they probably also feel quite up to operating daily "single crew"
Perhaps it was a little tongue in cheek, I do hope so, yep, anyone could easily do the odd sector single crew Sheesh, with some guys you nearly ARE, but day in day out in all weathers, and when you too might be feeling as sharp as a beachball after 11hr of night duty ? Not much safety margin being left there.
If that margin is enough for you though, we may as well save some more dosh and sack the instructors and sell the sims to an amusement arcade, as that is the level of dumbing down of safety you are advocating.

[Jovi Runner]

Was reading this forum yesterday and spotted comments about people saying there are already unmanned trains and then spotted this on today's BBC News website - not the best advert for unnmanned trains (or planes for that matter!)

BBC News - Train in deadly crash in Norwegian capital

[Piltdown Man]

If there are no F/O's, where do your Captains come from?

Why, that's simple! There are enough plonkers out there who will pay to fly. So, you simply stick a banner ad somewhere and just like in a well known film "They will come." A quick tweak in aviation law and you are home and dry. One further tweak, and you can get rid of cabin crew as well and then put vending machines in their place. From then on, all seats can be sold. The only way that you can improve on that is to charge people NOT to fly - now there's a though!

PM


PS. Hang on a minute, I've forgotten about traps. How much should you charge to sit on on of these? You could probably tell some half wit that unless he does six months toilet cleaning duty for free he can't be captain.

[Pilot Positive]

BTW, I know some TRI's/TRE's in a well known loco who I wouldn't like to be sitting next to when the sh1t hit the fan, they probably also feel quite up to operating daily "single crew"

Dont we all - some of them are frighteningly bad. How did they get to the LHS?

[fly_antonov]

Nigd3,
I think i concur with desk pilot, automation do fail ive experienced a situation on a full automation go around where the airplane is designed to fly within a safe margin in terms of attitude speed and config takin the enviromental factors like gusts n windshear into consideration but after clean up n still in vnav mode the aeroplane simply couldnt hold speed n almost went into overspeed, as pilots do we sit n wait for the situation to deteroriate to that level jus to prove that automation do fail, jus like desk pilot intervened before things got out of hand thats what we did, you dont put over 150 lives at risk tryin to prove failure of automation if it aint doin what its suppose to u take over n make a decision for them they dont think

Did you get a confirmation from your mechanics that it was the automation failing? Most of the times it' s the pilots failing to read the little lines in the FCOM and then imagining that the automation is the one failing.

It could be, just asking.

[Piltdown Man]

Most of the times it's the pilots failing to read the little lines in the FCOM and then imagining that the automation is the one failing.

Really? Based on my experience, OK only 15 years or so - not much really, I suppose, I'd suggest that you don't know what you are talking about. The important stuff is written in small sentences in big letters. However, automation and flight mode confusion still trips up pilots, but rarely to the point where things get broken. Normally what happens is the aircraft approaches a limit (Speed, AoA, Level etc.) and the "monitors" intervene. The offending lump of Honeywell strangled forthwith and stone age flying (partial or full) commences. If you are correct, aircraft would be safer to fly without aircrew than with. But I'd suggest that modern aircraft are sufficiently unreliable enough to get insurance with single aircrew, let alone none.

PM

[obie2]

Strewth! I feel embarrassed!...
to get the serious response I did from aguadalte and the semi serious response from the following poster, cat something or other, regarding my send up of myself, makes me wonder about you blokes!!

PS: Stick your cursor on the smilies for assistance, don't take yourself too seriously, and don't take prune seriously either!

[parabellum]

Th trouble is, John Smith, I knew someone very similar to fly_antanov and sadly he managed to get into aviation management, just imagine what a pain in the arse that was! Probably not the only one, either.

[Clandestino]

Certain PhD, CEO of the airline for last 12 years and former AEA chairman has told me: "Your job as a pilot is very easy, you just follow procedures and if something out of the ordinary happens, there are checklists for everything". He wasn't in the joking mood at the time.

So that's how you get the captains when there are no first officers; everyone reads the rulebooks, complies with them and they're good captains for that.