First Officer "assertiveness" versus Captain's "authority"???
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ...
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all FF I have no doubts about your skills in anyway. But your wrong
I enjoy the RHS very much
LHS is still some years away.
Your right btw my company doesn't fly to cat c airfields unfortunately. I don't really see what is simplistic about stating you should put an experienced f/o in the rhs when going to cat c airfields. Is that a stupid idea????
I just disagree with you on the point you are trying to make.
IMHO most f/o's / captains do a good job. There is only few out there who start screaming speed each time there is a change in wind on final app, also captains btw.
Furthermore being a good or bad pilot has nothing to do with how much money daddy owns. Most f/o's paid for all their training themselves! And worked very hard to get where they are.
Do you really have the bad luck of constantly flying with f/o's who call for a go-around at samos?!??
And I am sorry but no matter what you think of transitioning into the LHS, if the other guy calls for a go-around, I think you should have a very very good reason not too. Like no fuel to try it another time or being on fire. That has nothing to do with an utopian picture of the world. No re read of that HPL section required btw I still remember it.
There is absolutely no defense for saying "I am trained to do this and the F/O got it wrong. And that's why I continued" He is trained as well! And by going around he gains experience. And he will see that the situation at samos is exactly the same as the previous attempt.
I agree totally with gatbusdriver, if there is time go-around. And if you have
doubt's about anything a captain does, ask him why!
I enjoy the RHS very much LHS is still some years away. Your right btw my company doesn't fly to cat c airfields unfortunately. I don't really see what is simplistic about stating you should put an experienced f/o in the rhs when going to cat c airfields. Is that a stupid idea????
I just disagree with you on the point you are trying to make.
IMHO most f/o's / captains do a good job. There is only few out there who start screaming speed each time there is a change in wind on final app, also captains btw.
Furthermore being a good or bad pilot has nothing to do with how much money daddy owns. Most f/o's paid for all their training themselves! And worked very hard to get where they are.
Do you really have the bad luck of constantly flying with f/o's who call for a go-around at samos?!??
And I am sorry but no matter what you think of transitioning into the LHS, if the other guy calls for a go-around, I think you should have a very very good reason not too. Like no fuel to try it another time or being on fire. That has nothing to do with an utopian picture of the world. No re read of that HPL section required btw I still remember it.
There is absolutely no defense for saying "I am trained to do this and the F/O got it wrong. And that's why I continued" He is trained as well! And by going around he gains experience. And he will see that the situation at samos is exactly the same as the previous attempt.
I agree totally with gatbusdriver, if there is time go-around. And if you have
doubt's about anything a captain does, ask him why!
Last edited by flash2002; 30th Jun 2007 at 10:54.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are a crew, and you operate as such - if he is uncomfortable, your briefing is deficient - if he isn't listening, it is your responsibility to make sure he is.
You ALWAYS go around on the call, and he learns from the fact that you LATER tell him it was unnecessary to call a go-around in those conditions stated.
In what world do you think that your experience enables you to continue in strong windshear??!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scandiland
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's this about not having the FO cat c airport qualified when going to one?
Both crewmembers need the sign in the loggbook to say they are qualified. And by qualified it means reading up on the special requirements for that airport, having seen the approach as an observer OR having flown the approaches in the sim. Both pilots need this. Being the FO and acting as an observer at the same time is not acceptable.
The FO might have been a bit touchy feely about it, but had he been properly qualified he would have been more in the loop and would've had a higher threshold for what's acceptable or not. It is most likely an experience thing, but in experience, proper training is the fundamental building blocks. I would call the training manager and discuss it...
As regards to "stop" and "go-around" there is no such thing as not following up on those calls. If I would have called a GA and this was not commenced withing 5 seconds I would have said it again. If no reaction, treat it as an incapacitation and take control if you deem it absolutely necesary. If the result of all of this is no GA and a safe landing, I'd file a report. That's how serious I think this issue is. There is no way of knowing what the reason for going around is (if it's in VMC) and there's no time to discuss it in that situation. It may screw up the days schedule if tight turnarounds are planned, but other than that, there's nothing except a few gallons of fuel to loose.
/LnS
Both crewmembers need the sign in the loggbook to say they are qualified. And by qualified it means reading up on the special requirements for that airport, having seen the approach as an observer OR having flown the approaches in the sim. Both pilots need this. Being the FO and acting as an observer at the same time is not acceptable.
The FO might have been a bit touchy feely about it, but had he been properly qualified he would have been more in the loop and would've had a higher threshold for what's acceptable or not. It is most likely an experience thing, but in experience, proper training is the fundamental building blocks. I would call the training manager and discuss it...
As regards to "stop" and "go-around" there is no such thing as not following up on those calls. If I would have called a GA and this was not commenced withing 5 seconds I would have said it again. If no reaction, treat it as an incapacitation and take control if you deem it absolutely necesary. If the result of all of this is no GA and a safe landing, I'd file a report. That's how serious I think this issue is. There is no way of knowing what the reason for going around is (if it's in VMC) and there's no time to discuss it in that situation. It may screw up the days schedule if tight turnarounds are planned, but other than that, there's nothing except a few gallons of fuel to loose.
/LnS
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Manchester
Age: 79
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an old chestnut! In modern times it would be a very poor captain who could not be "challenged" by the 1st Officer. They are "supposed" to be a team! Surely, the 2 pilots ought to be communicating all the time.
I've lost track of how to find it now but there were some accidents on 3 pilot operations which might have been prevented. The two pilots "handling" ignored the 3rd pilot (who was often rather junior in rank).
As I'm now retired it would be good to have some reassurance that this old "rank" etc. nonsense was history! Give the question itself, it probably isn't.
I've lost track of how to find it now but there were some accidents on 3 pilot operations which might have been prevented. The two pilots "handling" ignored the 3rd pilot (who was often rather junior in rank).
As I'm now retired it would be good to have some reassurance that this old "rank" etc. nonsense was history! Give the question itself, it probably isn't.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure that you are not trying to wind people up
other half of the crew is certified by competent authority.
This is exactly the attitude leading to CFIT or collision with other traffic for example.
In what world do you think that your experience enables you to continue in strong windshear??! Are you some god who out-flies windshear
I think we understand each other now.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to your f/o call go-around (and doing so) is not unsafe.
Presumeably, with the weather forecast, fuel has been carried for such an eventuality. Once the missed approach has been flown, and above msa, you can find out why you went around. If you think you were 'in the box' and should have landed, explain this and suggest another approach. This time he is even more prepared for the conditions.
If he calls go-around on the next approach, IMHO, you still go-around.
What if he has seen something that you haven't.
The most chilling (last) words I've heard on a CVR is 'I told you so'.
If you have issues, take it up with the training department. If you end up in KGS because the f/o called g/a on you every approach (when you think he shouldn't), something will soon be done about it.
Presumeably, with the weather forecast, fuel has been carried for such an eventuality. Once the missed approach has been flown, and above msa, you can find out why you went around. If you think you were 'in the box' and should have landed, explain this and suggest another approach. This time he is even more prepared for the conditions.
If he calls go-around on the next approach, IMHO, you still go-around.
What if he has seen something that you haven't.
The most chilling (last) words I've heard on a CVR is 'I told you so'.
If you have issues, take it up with the training department. If you end up in KGS because the f/o called g/a on you every approach (when you think he shouldn't), something will soon be done about it.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The center of the earths surface
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instrument scans:
"QUOTE" the point is that unless you are monitoring the ASI constantly, you may not have seen airspeeds that are so low as to be unsafe. Your experience in flying in conditions with variable winds is irrelevant - if won't stop you dying if the windshear is greater than forecast and so great that you are close to stalling.
What the hell are you doing getting into this situation in the first place.
Any Competent Pilot, speeds up his SCAN, and PRIORITISES IE the ASI, if you have any chance of encountering these conditions, also if local knowledge plays apart, why was it not briefed prior:
If you use any strip or runway that has a cliff or mountain at the end of it, you will get WIND SHEER:
As for S.O.P's they are there for the foolhardy to follow implicitly, and for the Sensible to use with Captains discretion:
Now when to use discretion??? amongst some today it does not exist, and some will and indeed have followed a S.O.P to their demise:
Poor wife & Kids, but they adhered to company S.O.P's.
H/Snort.
What the hell are you doing getting into this situation in the first place.
Any Competent Pilot, speeds up his SCAN, and PRIORITISES IE the ASI, if you have any chance of encountering these conditions, also if local knowledge plays apart, why was it not briefed prior:
If you use any strip or runway that has a cliff or mountain at the end of it, you will get WIND SHEER:
As for S.O.P's they are there for the foolhardy to follow implicitly, and for the Sensible to use with Captains discretion:
Now when to use discretion??? amongst some today it does not exist, and some will and indeed have followed a S.O.P to their demise:
Poor wife & Kids, but they adhered to company S.O.P's.
H/Snort.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where its at
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion, but FF why the constant mentions of daddy and wealth? No, obviously nobody'd suggest that because you did it the hard way, blood, sweat and tears and all that, that you weren't more deserving of those who have the good fortune to be in your presence whilst you complete another near miracle in Samos. However, whilst we're berating those with, is it 600hrs, for doing what I imagine you never did - ie scrabble around at the bottom, spare a thought that your experience, from here, looks dangerously close to arrogance.
Wino- yep, even if you did twenty go-arounds a month, that is not even a drop in the bucket compared to the money/stock that is siphoned out of some airlines' operations by our 'leaders by example' , after each pilot took paycuts which exceed 35%. The CEO told the media that it was not their decision, but "was the Board's decision" to award them all about US $350,000,000.
There is little motivation here to reduce fuel costs except for having plenty at our destination and whatever suitable alternates are nearby with no weather in between.
One problem is when you take off on a two-hour flight after thunderstorms/very long ground delays at both runways 9 and 15R, running both the APU and an engine, in order to keep the plane from getting too hot (
in IAH ) you are 5-10 minutes from minimum fuel at the destination as soon as you take off.
And this was after I told Dispatch during the preflight that we would increase contingency by 1,000 lbs.
, after each pilot took paycuts which exceed 35%. The CEO told the media that it was not their decision, but "was the Board's decision" to award them all about US $350,000,000.There is little motivation here to reduce fuel costs except for having plenty at our destination and whatever suitable alternates are nearby with no weather in between.
One problem is when you take off on a two-hour flight after thunderstorms/very long ground delays at both runways 9 and 15R, running both the APU and an engine, in order to keep the plane from getting too hot (
in IAH ) you are 5-10 minutes from minimum fuel at the destination as soon as you take off.And this was after I told Dispatch during the preflight that we would increase contingency by 1,000 lbs.
Last edited by Ignition Override; 8th Jul 2007 at 07:23.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any Competent Pilot, speeds up his SCAN, and PRIORITISES IE the ASI, if you have any chance of encountering these conditions
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: here and there but mostly lgw
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Claudillo,
The only arrogance Icome up against these days is from the (some) chaps who confuse wealth and subsequent access to an approved school, a quick job on a jet, and the opinion that they know more than god himself, coupled with the actual flying skills of a penguin.
Now we all know that is my job
The only arrogance Icome up against these days is from the (some) chaps who confuse wealth and subsequent access to an approved school, a quick job on a jet, and the opinion that they know more than god himself, coupled with the actual flying skills of a penguin.
Now we all know that is my job
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some time ago around Longitude 110 East, and during type rating in simulator on large jet a start problem is introduced by instructor. Local captain calls for wrong checklist and is corrected by the F/O. The captain then demands again the checklist he asked for. F/O (non-local) has no choice given local culture mores to read out the demanded checklist. Captain soon realises he has indeed called for inccorrect checklist and directs the F/O to read the correct checklist, which he does. No further drama until de-brief by local instructor who fails the F/O for not displaying assertiveness. The captain gets off scott free.... As the Americans say "Go figure....."
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Daghdaghistan
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Hey Bob.. how do you feel about this approach? Do you reckon we're a bit low and might need a bit of power"
Bob, We're below glideslope and speed is decaying... I request a return to the S.O.Ps"
"Bob, YOU MUST LISTEN TO ME, GO AROUND, IF YOU DO NOT RETURN TO S.O.Ps I WILL ASSUME CONTROL"
"Bob I got control....."
Bob, We're below glideslope and speed is decaying... I request a return to the S.O.Ps"
"Bob, YOU MUST LISTEN TO ME, GO AROUND, IF YOU DO NOT RETURN TO S.O.Ps I WILL ASSUME CONTROL"
"Bob I got control....."
You ALWAYS go around on the call, and he learns from the fact that you LATER tell him it was unnecessary to call a go-around in those conditions stated.
(a) You have NO way of knowing at the time whether he has called a go-around for the weather conditions or something else - he called go-around (you say), and did not/would not typically have time to explain why
(a) You have NO way of knowing at the time whether he has called a go-around for the weather conditions or something else - he called go-around (you say), and did not/would not typically have time to explain why
But to say that the captain must ALWAYS (the original writer's "shouting" - not mine) go around simply because of the personal opinion of the RH seat, is poor airmanship indeed.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scandiland
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus, again I'd like to ask a question: How do you know the reason for the F/O's decision to call G/A or Stop? There's no way of nowing is the correct answer. In this case it might be the PIC's personal judgement of the carachter in the RHS that will jeopardise the whole thing. Just because we're young doesn't necesarily say that we blurt out "stops" and G/A orders just because we feel a bit nervous!? Have you seen it happen? Have you gone against a F/O on a call like this? If so, what was the situation? Stabilized approach concept?
I would say that it's bad airmanship no to listen to the F/O when he says something as serious as stop or G/A. My personal opinion.
/LnS
I would say that it's bad airmanship no to listen to the F/O when he says something as serious as stop or G/A. My personal opinion.
/LnS
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the guy in the rhs calls go around then you must do so - there is no time for discussion. If you do not have enough fuel left to do so then the Captain would have briefed that fact and there would be no decision to make (God forbid).
To you FOs - low hours or otherwise - if you decide a GA is the only option then please CALL IT - talk about it on the ground later. At worst you will look a prat, at best you will save your life and everybody else's on board.
That's my 5 penn'orth, goodnight.
To you FOs - low hours or otherwise - if you decide a GA is the only option then please CALL IT - talk about it on the ground later. At worst you will look a prat, at best you will save your life and everybody else's on board.
That's my 5 penn'orth, goodnight.
Not relating to go-arounds specifically, but in any situation where my old mate in the RHS is feeling a little uncomfortable then I believe an experienced pilot will announce the fact fairly early in the proceedings whereas a pilot with less experience will probably be a bit more reticent and if he does feel the need to speak up it’s probably for a very good reason. Maybe even a little late in the scheme of things and therefore to be acted on promptly.
On the other hand, before I started my command training I’d been a Captain in a previous life and I was sometimes happy to let a situation develop to see what was about to ensue, even if things weren’t quite SOP, though when I felt the need I had no hesitation in speaking up. I never had to call a go around on a Captain but I did have to fairly forcefully upwardly manage, as it’s called, at times.
I would never debate a go around call from any first officer, there’s always fuel for one and we can discuss it later when the dust has settled.
Only very rarely have I objected to monitoring calls by a first officer, one called me one knot slow on Vref, but I wouldn’t debate it there and then I just fixed the perceived problem and had a chat about it later.
Regards,
BH.
On the other hand, before I started my command training I’d been a Captain in a previous life and I was sometimes happy to let a situation develop to see what was about to ensue, even if things weren’t quite SOP, though when I felt the need I had no hesitation in speaking up. I never had to call a go around on a Captain but I did have to fairly forcefully upwardly manage, as it’s called, at times.
I would never debate a go around call from any first officer, there’s always fuel for one and we can discuss it later when the dust has settled.
Only very rarely have I objected to monitoring calls by a first officer, one called me one knot slow on Vref, but I wouldn’t debate it there and then I just fixed the perceived problem and had a chat about it later.
Regards,
BH.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Daghdaghistan
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That was actually out of our S.O.Ps..
Three strikes and the "Captain you must listen to me" is the catch phrase that when said, must be acknowledged by the captain.
Using the other guys name helps as people tend to react more favorably to their name rather than a tittle.
The first call was to tell the captain of a percieved problem and a bit of a hint to help get out of the situation.
The second is to let the other person know that the problem still exists and is getting worse. The phrase "I request a return to the SOPS" is meant to be a catchphrase warning to the captain that things are trending to getting worse.
The 3rd is meant to be emphasized. You don't have to shout.
Thats how our SOPs are.. not saying that they are the end all and be all.. but they seem to work well in anger.
I can see some captains probably resenting a call from a younger more inexperienced F/O, esp the bit about how to fix a potential problem. It's a suggestion.. not an order... and maybe if you think you are above and beyond all and you know it all.. maybe you shouldnt be flying in the first place and retire while your still ahead.
Three strikes and the "Captain you must listen to me" is the catch phrase that when said, must be acknowledged by the captain.
Using the other guys name helps as people tend to react more favorably to their name rather than a tittle.
The first call was to tell the captain of a percieved problem and a bit of a hint to help get out of the situation.
The second is to let the other person know that the problem still exists and is getting worse. The phrase "I request a return to the SOPS" is meant to be a catchphrase warning to the captain that things are trending to getting worse.
The 3rd is meant to be emphasized. You don't have to shout.
Thats how our SOPs are.. not saying that they are the end all and be all.. but they seem to work well in anger.
I can see some captains probably resenting a call from a younger more inexperienced F/O, esp the bit about how to fix a potential problem. It's a suggestion.. not an order... and maybe if you think you are above and beyond all and you know it all.. maybe you shouldnt be flying in the first place and retire while your still ahead.