Air France does a 'Memmingen'.

[gazumped]

The first officers REAL role

Bubbers makes a very good point, he intervened to prevent his chief pilot from continueing an unstable approach ..... well done.

I wonder what the mental resistance to intervene actually was.

This resistance, almost always unsaid, is highly dangerous. For example the captain as PM would intervene at a fairly early stage, given similar circumstances. Why is that so? Let me answer my own question, captains intervene if they are unhappy with profile ( or other issue) because they are used to dispensing authority, they are practiced at giving orders and they expect compliance.
The First Officer usually is not so equipped.

80% of hull losses involve the captain as PF, and making a tactical error (or series of errors) , and critically, the FO fails to effectively "speak up".

I have a little routine I employ on the first sector. I share the above statistics with my FO, and I inform him that he is the most important safety feature of my aircraft. I then tell him, nay actively encourage him to speak up, to not be the slightest bit hesitant to point out my errors and oversights. Because I will make errors and oversights, because I am human.
I will guarantee you if I ever have a complete brain fart and attempt to get in from a ridiculously stupid high and hot approach, my FO will speak up!

How do you speak up to a captain who is fixated on getting in regardless?

Our company had an over-run many years ago, 178 kts flap load relief valve doing its job, landing flap still not selected, check list not done, 2 dots high, and all this at 400'. Gues what the FO actually said? "........ You're a bit hot are you happy to continue....? Gues what he captain did? Yep you guessed it..... he continued.

Let me suggest what the FO should have said?.........." You're too hot (or high, or check list not done, or ........ Some such thing).....I THINK YOU SHOULD GO AROUND! DON'T YOU?....." Basically, whatever you suggest to an overloaded fixated crew member, he will most likely do!

That's how Bubbers did it. He gave his captain a solution to the problem........" It's not going to work.... Go around" simple really isn't it?

No psychobabble, just give the poor guy an option, and have the courage to speak up. After all the PF, does not see nearly as much of the situation as the PM does.

[fireflybob]

Agree with all the comments about FO advocating position and (if necessary) initiating a Go Around.

Notwithstanding that as human we can all "screw up" the best fix is to ensure that anyone who gets into the LHS is totally competent in that role.

One aspect is he/she must have an intimate knowledge of the aircraft performance. My observation is that some pilots don't seem to understand that if you are high "close in" the only way you stand a fighting chance of making the approach gates is to slow up and configure, if necessary, all the way through to full (in this case 40 degrees) flap. This seems to be an area which is rarely taught and practised these days.

[roulishollandais]

The first officers real role ?
FO's role or TEAM work ?
French"elites" have a real problem with autority : decreed, often undeserved and poor team work after the flight, in administration, in management, etc..

@ alf5071h
Thank you for the references

[ATC Watcher]

Regarding cultures , or better said, cultural background :
Fact is that the "latin " approach to Team work is totally different than . say the Asian one, jut to take an example. CRM principles were initially designed by and for anglo-saxons , where respect for authority is average but adherence to rules strong. It does not fit all cultures unfortunately, and as we know changing a culture is not easy. Changing a latin culture into an ango saxon one has been tried before. Results were mixed to say the least.

I fly regularly in jump seats with a large airline whose policy is : if any crew member say " Go around" the PF must ( and will) go around first , and ask (or debate) why afterwards.
This simple rule seem to be difficult to transpose into other airlines whose main culture is totally different . I am not sure what is the current AF policy in that matter, and if it had changed after the Brest CL60 crash. (2003) Before that F/O were to " suggest" actions to Capt. I believe.

[bubbers44]

gazumped, in my case with my chief pilot I pushed the thrust levers to go around thrust so continuing the botched landing attempt was no longer an option. Sometimes words alone can't fix the problem. Most of the times, in my experience, if time permits talking works to fix a bad situation but sometimes there is not enough time so more aggressive action must be taken to protect your crew and passengers. If you have to do this more than twice in a career of flying then you have to decide why was it necessary if both crew members were fully qualified and not doing training.

[tom775257]

It is worth remembering that if you tell the other person to go around, there is a chance that they are so out of the loop the go around will not proceed as it should.

This happened to me upon telling a captain to go around, who then proceeded to select MCT and yank the nose up, still in g/s *, loc *, I called 'TOGA,' he selected TOGA, now with correct modes but also now approaching and about to bust missed approach alt, full nose down input with TOGA thrust, flap overspeed almost straight away. I took control then, too late in retrospect.

[RAT 5]

One aspect is he/she must have an intimate knowledge of the aircraft performance. My observation is that some pilots don't seem to understand that if you are high "close in" the only way you stand a fighting chance of making the approach gates is to slow up and configure, if necessary, all the way through to full (in this case 40 degrees) flap. This seems to be an area which is rarely taught and practised these days.

This discussion is not quite in touch with the focus of the thread, but.... I was shown this in anger on B732. It still works as I put it to good use in the good old days of Spanish surprise ATC on B733; much to the F/O's amazement & education. The comment I take issue with is "This seems to be an area which is rarely taught and practised these days."I came across it by force of circumstance in my apprentice years. The attitude now is DO NOT get yourself into a position where you need to use it. Thus demo/training/practice do not apply. It is an escape manoeuvre and not one to be taught except in sim. Perhaps you can explain the philosophy and hope it is remembered when required. Sadly, teaching the a/c envelope is not the modern philosophy/training technique. Re-lighting an old chestnut there are airlines that discourage visual approaches. Sad days ahead. Good days long gone.

[bubbers44]

Pushing thrust leavers to go around thrust takes all of the question of what we are going to do next out of the question. Just do it and deal with what happens next later.

[safetypee]

For a range of views, issues, problems, etc, about ‘Go Around’, see Go Around Safety Forum.

[PAX_Britannica]

Originally Posted by bubbers44

in my case with my chief pilot I pushed the thrust levers to go around thrust so continuing the botched landing attempt was no longer an option. Sometimes words alone can't fix the problem.

Originally Posted by gazumped

80% of hull losses involve the captain as PF, and making a tactical error (or series of errors) , and critically, the FO fails to effectively "speak up".

I have a little routine I employ on the first sector. I share the above statistics with my FO, and I inform him that he is the most important safety feature of my aircraft. I then tell him, nay actively encourage him to speak up, to not be the slightest bit hesitant to point out my errors and oversights. Because I will make errors and oversights, because I am human.
I will guarantee you if I ever have a complete brain fart and attempt to get in from a ridiculously stupid high and hot approach, my FO will speak up!

How do you speak up to a captain who is fixated on getting in regardless?

Is this taught in sim ? There seem to be training folk round here.
It seems like a classic sim lesson.
Captain (15k hours on type) is landing because the FO doesn't have enough hours.
Captain's behaviour is generally exemplary. But today he's having a brain fart.

[One Outsider]

I think the safe bet is to ignore the input from people like Bubbers44, also known as always knows best. People sure of their own infallibility and excellence usually have a poor understanding of their situation or surroundings.

[PAX_Britannica]

Originally Posted by One Outsider

I think the safe bet is to ignore the input from people like Bubbers44, also known as always knows best. People sure of their own infallibility and excellence usually have a poor understanding of their situation or surroundings.

I think the question remains valid regardless of Bubbers44's overestimation - or conceivably underestimation - of his abilities.

I thought the point of his comment was that calmly and quietly saying "Go Around! Go Around! Go Around Now!" might not always be sufficient if the PF's overload or fixation is causing deafness.

[One Outsider]

Anyone can eliminate choices by such moves as advancing throttles and destabilizing an approach. The real question is weather is was a prudent move or not. When one's posting history is mostly about polishing one's own halo the motives become questionable.

[Prober]

Always knows best

Bubbers44 might be a ‘know all’, but that does not mean that one should ignore his posts. I once saved an aircraft full of people – and I am hardly a ‘know all’. I joined a fairly big airline from the military and went from a position of command to No. Zero. I was 3rd pilot on a night flight. I had flown with the captain before and found him very affable and that night he was training another captain to be a training captain. On that particular aircraft there was almost a book of pre-take off checks and, as we approached the runway with no likelihood of holding, I started the check list. I was sharply told to ‘speak when you are spoken to and NOT before’. The flight continued in this vein until, during the procedural letdown, the captain surreptitiously pointed out to me that the ‘student’ was displaying VOR and not ILS. So, we were both aware. The approach continued but the lights of the city disappeared (on a clear night) and I began to get one of those muscle clenching feelings. I leant forward and switched on the landing lights (pre-10,000ft days). As the lights swung into position, they illuminated a farm house just below us. I could see the wireless aerial with one of those old fashioned porcelain insulators holding it up like a washing line – we were that close. I shouted ‘Climb, climb, for f…’s sake climb!’ He did, and soon the lights of the city came back into view.
After landing, when the dispatcher came into the flight deck, he realized that there was at atmosphere and he quickly withdrew. It took about 5 minutes of extreme discomfort all round before the ‘student’ said that he had made a right …. Whatsit … of himself and asked for MY forgiveness. We became friends thereafter.
All it needed was for someone to SPEAK UP!

[One Outsider]

Sure, Proper, there will always be moments when speaking up is appropriate. But when all you have to contribute is when you saved the day and how you save the day, it becomes a bit tedious and contrived. I've lost count of the times he saved the day flying into Tegucigalpa And just to expand on my indignation, the amount of no-nothing, retired pipe-salesmen and whatnot's adding their 2 pence-worth-nothing to any subject around here, really get's up my nose. And I am sure I am not the only one feeling the same way. The amount of completely useless opinions that completely useless people absolutely wants to share here is just mind blowing.

[Capn Bloggs]

If you don't like it, Outsider, leave.

Bubbers can get a little carried away with the warries but most of his stuff is very good. If there were more of him in the seats the industry would be a lot better off, safety-wise.

[safetypee]

OO #151,

If the industry is going to maintain safety by avoiding similar incidents, then it’s not knowing ‘what’ has to be done or even ‘having done it’. The key points are knowing ‘why and when’ a course of action should be changed, based on an understanding of the developing situation.
This is tacit knowledge; it’s difficult to explain and communicate, but of vital importance – situation awareness, decision making.
Thus those who might know, have done it, or ‘really’ have it, might try to explain ‘why and when’ to the rest of us fallible humans.

[PAX_Britannica]

While folks seem to have more to say about my Bubbers44 quote, I thought Gazumped's quote was more interesting.

Bubbers44 seems to have a high opinion of himself. But here, I don't see that it matters if Bubbers44's anecdote is entirely fictitious, and Bubbers44 is, in fact, a Siamese Cat with an overactive imagination and overdeveloped keyboard skills. Bubbers44's anecdote illustrated what Gazumped was attempting to train his FO to do.

Gazumped appears to be attempting to train his FO. A part of this may be to break the ice, and make it clear to the FO that [s]he is not merely PAX in a front seat. Perhaps Gazumped seems concerned that corporate training may have been not been entirely adequate. Gazumped should be flying in an Airline where he is confident that he does not need to do this.

[Machinbird]

1. I personally like Bubbers, and I think I understand where he is coming from. With probably 20,000+ hours of varied flying, he sees things about the direction that modern aviation is going regarding loss of aircraft handling skills, and that probably gives him heartburn. Now that he is no longer in the pointy end of things, able to influence other pilots in a one on one basis, all he has left is the ability to reach out and pass on his hard won lessons to those who will listen.

2. Bubbers lesson in how to "save" a bad approach of the person flying by forcing the go around shows personal courage and readiness to act when things begin to go pear shaped. I would be willing to bet that the decision to over-ride was made by him months or years before and was waiting for an opportunity to activate.

3. Assuming that Outsider is juniorl aircrew, perhaps he is uncomfortable with taking a necessary but courageous action to over-ride and would rather go with the flow and take his chances. If Outsider is in a command position, perhaps he is uncomfortable with the concept of a junior pilot forcing him to go around, but his posts lead to my belief that CRM is not his strong suite.

4 Apologies to Bubbers if I have mis-attributed your motivation.
Aplogies to Outsider if I have mis-identified your motivations.

[One Outsider]

Bubbers posts are mostly about himself. And nothing else.