Challenging First Officers!

[SpaceBetweenThoughts]

Well here goes with this one!

How do you deal with First Officers who are reluctant to accept advice when they are operating a sector?

For example, we get to circa 15 miles out when it is clear we need to start slowing up to achieve a stable approach. I think I am a pretty reasonable guy to fly with (although not in training with my current company I have extensive experience in the role) but when I suggest that it's time to slow up and/or select another mode (Level Change vice V/S) and/or take speedbrake etc the reply I get is "I am flying the aircraft!" - I then insist that changes are made and we just manage to be comfortably stable although a flap setting is called for above the limit speed.

I believe this event is quite a serious CRM issue. It is obvious to me that this FO is weak in certain areas despite being quite an experienced aviator.

Any helpful comments/observations appreciated!

[parabellum]

I think in the case you mention I would be inclined to let him continue until it was obvious he was not going to meet the SOP requirements for a stabilised approach, (and don't give him flap above the limit speed!), and as soon as it is obvious tell him to go around, he can't refuse and if he does then you have control, he is unsafe.
Fortunately the vast majority of FOs I have come across are only too keen to get things right as it is one less problem when it is time for upgrade if their personal SOPs are identical to the company's!

[Bealzebub]

when I suggest that it's time to slow up and/or select another mode (Level Change vice V/S) and/or take speedbrake etc the reply I get is "I am flying the aircraft!"

Then the answer is simple, you state "I have control" and the Commander then becomes the pilot flying. As a Captain you will have a comfort zone, outside of which you need to be doing something positive and corrective. With increased experience, that comfort zone will change and adapt. It is also important to realize that the First Officer will also have a comfort zone, and in many cases will need some latitude from you that allows them flexibility to learn and acquire experience. Obviously it as the edges of these two zones that the situation requires a high level of discrimination and increased vigilance.

Nevertheless as the commander you are "in charge" and the final decision rests with you. That is why they promoted you and why they pay you more. If you are at any time unhappy, it is your responsibility to ensure the situation is resolved. Most F/O's are very receptive to advice as it is part of the learning process that assists them in becoming good Captains. It has to be said that on occaisions, the "advice" may not qualify as a golden nugget, but a good F/O can make that distinction for themselves. Similarly advice that is proffered late, or that simply overloads the other pilot when they may already be reaching saturation point, may fail to have the desired or indeed any effect.

In summary my advice is don't be afraid to take control, and don't be afraid to break off an approach if things start getting too rushed or late. I know it is obvious advice, but there are few of us who are not guilty of failing to always do this when we should.

[ssg]

Interesting question...

Not being a CRM guy, I find these threads interesting...always comes down to the same old queston...'who's flying the plane?'

[justlooking_tks]

SpaceBetweenThoughts

Yes there are F/O's who are certainly a challenge!

What concerns me also is the fact the F/O in question has passed "through the hoops" at the selection stage. How do these people get through? Should this F/O have been weeded out previously? Maybe it is CRM that is out of control in some cases.

As to previous comments on this thread, letting it get as late as a missed approach, before sorting the handling pilot out. It is tempting of course to let them "get on with it" but the question will be asked as to why the missed approach accured? Why did you, the PIC allow events to develop to the extent when a missed approach was required? Of course a missed approach should never be discouraged should the need arise for a safe operation. However some "chiefs and managers" would not be easily convinced, a MA was necaessary in this senerio.

The handling pilot, in his/her breif should encourage input or critisim from the NHP or PNF, as none of us are perfect. We all screw up, once in a while and it is nothing to be ashamed of. Invite constructive input.

[wap101]

If one looks at a behaviour marker system such as NOTECHS ( as recommended within JAA Regulations) this can give some guidance to measuring this scenario.

Assessment of Non Technical skills are always to be associated with a technical incident/consequence and are mandated for crew and individual crew members in JAR/EASA regulations. This scenario is therefore suitable for assessment.

The first question to ask under assessment is " Was this flight actually or potentially unsafe in operation or intention" If yes then assessment almost always indicates a failure in behaviour somewhere that was associated with the technical consequence.

Look at CAP 737 ( available from UK CAA website free) and one can see examples of good and bad behaviour under Leadership and Managerial Control, Decisionmaking, Cooperation and Situation Awareness.

Diagnosis of these markers including communication will give an idea of where this scenario is acceptable and where not acceptable.

The debriefing and remedies are best contained within this NOTECHS or chosen BM vocabulary so that the meaning of the remedies are understood in a uniform way by both crew members.

Can't fill up the page as this requires a five day course but hope this directs thinking towards why this was unacceptable/acceptable and where it was remedied and how it might be remedied in the future.

WAP

[Octane]

Someone has to seriously address this issue otherwise the person involved will end in the left seat influencing others with a suspect attitude to aviation...

Octane

[Norrington]

To let him do the mistake or removing him from the control is not an option. This will only exaggerate the situation.

I think you should talk to your FO on the ground, first explain to him that this is not a criticism on his flying, but inform him that you are a team, and that you as captain don’t feel comfortable or safe with this behavior. If he does not realize the problem, you have to take this higher, talk to the chief pilot.

[parabellum]

Norrington and others. If you allow your FO to fly an unstable approach, exceed the limitations of the aircraft, make a dirty dart at the ground and then get away with it he will regard it as satisfactory, as far as he is concerned, probably quite pleased with himself, certainly, I would say, the "I'm flying the aeroplane" character.
If, on the other hand, you let him demonstrate that he has made a total cock-up, (exercised poor judgement), requiring a GA after you have tried to advise him where he is going wrong then he is unlikely to forget it. A GA may be expensive but it is much cheaper than an accident, I can remember each and every go-around I made in my entire career, (five and not all my fault!).

[Tigs2]

At the end of the day it is really simple, as the Captain, you are, under international law, responsible for the safe conduct of the Flight. In this case I would have taken control, and when on the ground, made sure the FO knew why.

You tried all the CRM techniques, by suggesting and advising, but all said and done if it all goes wrong you as the Captain will be at fault, with the FO saying, 'well if he didn't like it he should have taken control, it's not my fault'. CRM does not mean we can teach FO's how to walk all over Captains and get away with it.

[fernytickles]

I agree with the poster who said talk to the FO on the ground. Away from the aeroplane and the relatively stressful environment. Its very hard to see yourself as others see you, especially when in a situation. Often its easier to understand the situation when you look back at it.

Try talking with other captains and see if they have experienced similar problems, so you are sure its not just a personality clash on top of inexperienced handling. If they have seen similar traits, then consider the option of a couple of you talking to that person together, that way making it clear it isn't a personality issue.

Tempting tho' it is, I definitely would not leave it until you have to take control, or the FO has to commence a go around. The trusting travellers down the back have put their faith in you to operate a safe and efficient flight, not a training flight for a curmudgeonly, or under-confident FO.

Good luck. It would be interesting to hear how you get on.

[Farmer 1]

always comes down to the same old queston...'who's flying the plane?'

More like, "Who signed for the plane?" I would suggest.

[LH2]

we get to circa 15 miles out when it is clear we need to start slowing up to achieve a stable approach

Reminds me of an anecdote when I was doing my IR.

Getting close to destination (on the sim) my instructor says "might be an idea to slow down".

"Nah, be alright" says I.

Nope, it wasn't. At all. Taught me a lesson.

[Bealzebub]

To let him do the mistake or removing him from the control is not an option. This will only exaggerate the situation.

Actually they are options, which is why they were suggested. The First officer is only in control under the Captains supervision. You need to remember that in the air moving at anywhere between 130 and 300 knots you need to carefully plan ahead and when the plan changes for whatever reason it is incumbent on the aircraft commander to take the necessary action to rectify the situation. In some cases this may well involve abandoning the approach and starting again. Your suggestion that "this is not an option" belies a lack of experience in this regard.

I think you should talk to your FO on the ground, first explain to him that this is not a criticism on his flying, but inform him that you are a team, and that you as captain don’t feel comfortable or safe with this behavior. If he does not realize the problem, you have to take this higher, talk to the chief pilot.

Yes indeed, but that is as you say on the ground. The posters problem was concerning what was happening in the air. It is relevant that much more timely and positive action is likely to be required. It is quite unusual to find F/O's who are not receptive to corrective suggestions and input, as I am sure the author of this thread would readily acknowledge. However the problem related with what to do with an individual who was less receptive. In this case the Captain must decide on a course of action that they deem appropriate.

[cjam]

I have had a similar situation and found it quite tricky to deal with. I had only had my command for a few months and it was my first ever real CRM issue. It wasn't as black and white as this situation. It was as if there was zero authority gradient in the cockpit (he was senior f/o and me junior captain). I talked to a senior captain about it and in the end had a chat to him on the ground, basically I said that if i suggested something while operating the a/c he needed to do it unless it compromised safety rather than think about it for ten seconds and decide if he thought it was the best course of action. He was very good about it, we flew together a few times after that and had a good working relationship. I'm still not sure why it happened like it did but it was good to get it sorted, it feels wrong when the authority gradient is dead flat. I think my relaxed approach to authority when we first started flying together had something to do with it, I was aware that he was senior and treated him as such but it seems he took advantage of that a bit, he may have had a heightened awareness that I was a junior captain and felt an added responsibility because of that. Regardless, it worked out well in the end and thankfully it is still my only CRM issue of any consequence.
Personally I would be hesitant to let your situation slide without at least saying to him on the ground " did you think there was any fat built into that approach for an unexpected wind etc?" I'm also unsure I would let it slide in the air either but it is difficult to tell in a forum like this how hot you really were and just how uncomfortable you felt.
Anyway, tricky these ones. Ya can't always be Mr nice guy.

[ABX]

Hi cjam,

I didn't think we had SFOs here in Oz?

I am under the impression that the Capt. is senior to the FO under all circumstances - except those that disqualify the Capt. from exercising command, such as incapacitation.

I hope I have not misunderstood you mate.

ABX

[Dream Land]

I come from a small company and I know most FO's by first name, I would certainly make a mention like "you're getting a bit high on the profile bla bla", not much more, if the FO does blow it, no big deal, when on the ground talk about the 3 to 1 rule and try not to make him or her feel bad about it, part of the learning curve.

[kingoftheslipstream]

We have a little mnemonic we use 'round here thet works pertty good:

ASI ( I remember it as tha 'breviation fer AirSpeedIndicator)

Ask - a leadin' type question, in the non personal manner of includin' yerself: "Are we gettin' a little high on our profile?"

Suggest - "It might be a good idea if we began to slow down - we're only 15 miles from landin' an' we're still doing 250"

Insist - Pure 'n simple: Do this: or Do that: whatever's appropriate, or if necessary: "I have control".

Always remember, yer the guy/gal that signs fer the wreckage!

Happy Contrails!
k-o-t-s

[weido_salt]

Hang on just one minute please! Let us give the F/O a break.

Let us be open minded on this and consider if the Captain was right at getting agitated at 15 miles out. Maybe the captain did not give us all the facts therefore the whole story. We haven't been told what type of aircraft was involved. Maybe the aircraft in question was a CESSNA 150 for example.

Only trying to stick up for F/O's, who think they should be Captains!

[SNS3Guppy]

Not being a CRM guy, I find these threads interesting...always comes down to the same old queston...'who's flying the plane?'

If that's the question, it's the wrong one. The question might better be phrased as "Who's responsible for the same outcome of the flight."

If I understand the scenario correctly, the F/O is the one flying the airplane; it's "his" leg. He seems to feel that he's going to do it his way, and even appears to be attempting to assume that he has the ultimate responsibility for the airplane. Who is flying has nothing to do with who is pilot in command of the flight, and the F/O is NOT pilot in command.

I like the Ask-Suggest-Insist method described above. It's very much the way I prefer to conduct business in the cockpit. However, when confronted with a F/O who states "It's my leg, I'll do it my way," my response is inevitably going to be "It's not your leg any more. You may resume non-flying pilot duties and we'll talk about it on the ground."

On the ground we can carry on a rational discussion to explore his reasoning or purpose. If his attitude continues, then he can be referred to the Chief Pilot or Professional Standards.

A PIC should always be fully open to the suggestions, questions, or comments of the crew, but it's got to go both ways. A crewmember who stipulates that it's his airplane and he's doing it his way regardless of another's input (particularly that of a more experienced member...such as the Captain), has become a serious detriment to safety. Time for either an attitude change or a change of employment.