Husband and wife prohibited to share cockpit
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After reading all posts, we can see that there more cases like this one around the world.
We don’t know how many incidents happened , duet both pilots being a couple.
I know that when they meet , she was a flight attendant, and decided to take the pilot course ATPL. And internally she moved for F/O.
Ie in this case was "taken like a baby in the lap"
During long time, it went well.
Already since the incident, they should have been separated.
But did not.
And it is "Murphy's Law”, this day had to happen.
This case is a sample, but I think it serves as a great example for everyone.
Who is reading here, perhaps you should warn your companies.
We don’t know how many incidents happened , duet both pilots being a couple.
I know that when they meet , she was a flight attendant, and decided to take the pilot course ATPL. And internally she moved for F/O.
Ie in this case was "taken like a baby in the lap"
During long time, it went well.
Already since the incident, they should have been separated.
But did not.
And it is "Murphy's Law”, this day had to happen.
This case is a sample, but I think it serves as a great example for everyone.
Who is reading here, perhaps you should warn your companies.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust & familiarity inevitably leads to complacency and relaxed monitoring, regardless of relationship. Being paired with a competent stranger is the safest combination, as both sides will be alert to what the other is doing.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, I'm willing to grant that most professional couples can keep it professional. But personal relationships can influence crew dynamics, and that's especially true for close relationships. In my case, I can't captain a double scull with my wife aft, due to CRM issues.
In this case, if they let the CVR overwrite the tailstrike, then the tie goes to keeping them apart.
In this case, if they let the CVR overwrite the tailstrike, then the tie goes to keeping them apart.
HD,
Maybe I should take out inevitably, for persons with a high level of professional standards and discipline it should make no difference. But safety is a numbers game, on the balance of probabilities I do not think it is a good idea to allow the same crew pairing for an extended time in a commercal airline environment, regardless of the reasons. Same reason why having two training captains up front, with a third on the jumpseat for good measure, is a sure way of asking for trouble.
Maybe I should take out inevitably, for persons with a high level of professional standards and discipline it should make no difference. But safety is a numbers game, on the balance of probabilities I do not think it is a good idea to allow the same crew pairing for an extended time in a commercal airline environment, regardless of the reasons. Same reason why having two training captains up front, with a third on the jumpseat for good measure, is a sure way of asking for trouble.
Last edited by andrasz; 1st Nov 2016 at 17:44.
and in the (hypothetical) case of a hijack and one of the partners is threatened with harm unless the other does what they say... you'd find it impossible to explain that to your child/ren...
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Norway
Age: 30
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not that good with statistics, but I'd estimate the chances of that happening to be about the same as a piano randomly falling on your head. How would this hijacker know that they are in a relationship together? Sounds a bit far-fetched to me.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Netherlands
Age: 71
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote Andrasz:
The problem is/was not their relationship, but the fact that they paired for 85% of their flights. Trust & familiarity inevitably leads to complacency and relaxed monitoring, regardless of relationship. Being paired with a competent stranger is the safest combination, as both sides will be alert to what the other is doing.
I forgot the exact date but about 2-3 years ago an exec jet crashed due to the gust lock still in place. (overran the RWY at high speed, not able to rotate). Some serious CRM issues there like an almost non existent checklist discipline. I think this is an issue with private companies that fly their own bizz jet with a small number (2?) of pilots.
I agree that a non familiar combo tends to have all crew adhere to standard calls and procedures from the start. However there must be numerous cases, the other member tackeld a problem, knowing the other's weak points. I have a very personal recollection about at least one experience.
The problem is/was not their relationship, but the fact that they paired for 85% of their flights. Trust & familiarity inevitably leads to complacency and relaxed monitoring, regardless of relationship. Being paired with a competent stranger is the safest combination, as both sides will be alert to what the other is doing.
I forgot the exact date but about 2-3 years ago an exec jet crashed due to the gust lock still in place. (overran the RWY at high speed, not able to rotate). Some serious CRM issues there like an almost non existent checklist discipline. I think this is an issue with private companies that fly their own bizz jet with a small number (2?) of pilots.
I agree that a non familiar combo tends to have all crew adhere to standard calls and procedures from the start. However there must be numerous cases, the other member tackeld a problem, knowing the other's weak points. I have a very personal recollection about at least one experience.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect any restrictions on this pairing could come under TEM philosophy. There will never be a definitive right/wrong answer. It'll be 'opinions are like rear orifices; everyone has one'. It can be argued, and not completely discounted, that there is a risk of familiarity, family feuding, cockpit gradient, who's in charge, slack oversight to avoid confrontation that has to be endured for days etc. etc. It could also be that all is in the rose garden. If a DFO does not want to take the risk then no problem.
If it considered a near certain disaster to try & teach your wife to drive why would it be considered strange to avoid being locked up in a flight deck for hours when one of you is the ranking boss.
I used to fly, occasionally & in 2 different companies, with my wife as purser. Service was impeccable and it gave us a crew party room on night stops, or a snore escape boudoir. Once we arrived home she said, "uniform off and now we are in my territory."
I'm sure that somewhere, sometime, probably the USA, there was a crew with Dad & Son up front and mama ruling the roost in the cabin. It's the sort of thing that might be organised for Dad's last flight. Those in the know.........
If it considered a near certain disaster to try & teach your wife to drive why would it be considered strange to avoid being locked up in a flight deck for hours when one of you is the ranking boss.
I used to fly, occasionally & in 2 different companies, with my wife as purser. Service was impeccable and it gave us a crew party room on night stops, or a snore escape boudoir. Once we arrived home she said, "uniform off and now we are in my territory."
I'm sure that somewhere, sometime, probably the USA, there was a crew with Dad & Son up front and mama ruling the roost in the cabin. It's the sort of thing that might be organised for Dad's last flight. Those in the know.........
I'm sure that somewhere, sometime, probably the USA, there was a crew with Dad & Son up front and mama ruling the roost in the cabin. It's the sort of thing that might be organised for Dad's last flight. Those in the know.........
