Young ATPL F.O. 200Hrs TT on right seat.....
cessnapete
Nope, it wasn't too hard a task. I'm sure if they did it again they'd not make the same mistakes.
However, surface wind of 310° at 19 kt, with gusts to 29 kt, cbs at 2,500 ft, TCUs at 3,500 ft etc. Relatively normal conditions in what sense? My airline doesn't allow hand flown visuals in such conditions.
Personally, yes, after a 5 hour flight into a fairly lax ATC environment with no radar coverage, I would do the procedural ILS in those conditions.
However, surface wind of 310° at 19 kt, with gusts to 29 kt, cbs at 2,500 ft, TCUs at 3,500 ft etc. Relatively normal conditions in what sense? My airline doesn't allow hand flown visuals in such conditions.
Personally, yes, after a 5 hour flight into a fairly lax ATC environment with no radar coverage, I would do the procedural ILS in those conditions.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards training. The day the TRTOs became sausage factories tasked with churning out type rated candidates to airlines, was the day pilots started rocking up to line training with limited knowledge of the aircraft, but a nice shiny pair of sunglasses.
As with everything else in aviation, it's cost driven, until it causes a crash nobody cares. How tired were these pilots for instance? While we all get slaughtered by stupid EASA regs, then expect to perform perfectly a manual approach. Anyone who says they aren't more fatigued since EASA isn't a full time pilot.
As with everything else in aviation, it's cost driven, until it causes a crash nobody cares. How tired were these pilots for instance? While we all get slaughtered by stupid EASA regs, then expect to perform perfectly a manual approach. Anyone who says they aren't more fatigued since EASA isn't a full time pilot.
Point taken, but in my airline you were trained and expected if required, to be able to handle the aircraft to the appropriate height and vis limits and in the max crosswind (FOs had 2/3 of the Capt X wind limit)
Also whoever was PF was able to call Stop and reject the takeoff. I believe some companies only allow the Capt that decision and he controls the thrust levers on all takeoffs.
Presumably because of not having the confidence in the training and competence of their pilots.
Also whoever was PF was able to call Stop and reject the takeoff. I believe some companies only allow the Capt that decision and he controls the thrust levers on all takeoffs.
Presumably because of not having the confidence in the training and competence of their pilots.
Presumably because of not having the confidence in the training and competence of their pilots.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, surface wind of 310° at 19 kt, with gusts to 29 kt, cbs at 2,500 ft, TCUs at 3,500 ft etc. Relatively normal conditions in what sense? My airline doesn't allow hand flown visuals in such conditions.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mikehotel152
What this incident has got to do with weather or all off and all on philosophy? The knowledge of both the pilot's of auto flight and flight controls system was not up to the required standard and the incident or accident would have happened even in clear skies like SFO or Bangalore.
However, surface wind of 310° at 19 kt, with gusts to 29 kt, cbs at 2,500 ft, TCUs at 3,500 ft etc. Relatively normal conditions in what sense? My airline doesn't allow hand flown visuals in such conditions.
cessnapete
This is the same mentality as I was referring to. Just because you're allowed or trained to be able to do something, doesn't mean it's always the safest option when engaged in the carriage of passengers.
To your second point: I honestly do not think someone with a few hundred hours experience will make the right go-no-go decision as assuredly as someone with thousands of hours. Again, what's safer?
Vilas
Yes, I take your point. My original point was a corollary to the criticism of the pilots' knowledge, but this incident highlighted an issue of poor airmanship nonetheless, and something I believe is an increasing concern: pilots with low experience of certain manoeuvres choosing the wrong option and then executing them badly.
This is the same mentality as I was referring to. Just because you're allowed or trained to be able to do something, doesn't mean it's always the safest option when engaged in the carriage of passengers.
To your second point: I honestly do not think someone with a few hundred hours experience will make the right go-no-go decision as assuredly as someone with thousands of hours. Again, what's safer?
Vilas
Yes, I take your point. My original point was a corollary to the criticism of the pilots' knowledge, but this incident highlighted an issue of poor airmanship nonetheless, and something I believe is an increasing concern: pilots with low experience of certain manoeuvres choosing the wrong option and then executing them badly.
Also whoever was PF was able to call Stop and reject the takeoff. I believe some companies only allow the Capt that decision and he controls the thrust levers on all takeoffs.
Presumably because of not having the confidence in the training and competence of their pilots.
Presumably because of not having the confidence in the training and competence of their pilots.
Ever heard of TORA? It's a model for how decision making should happen depending on how critical the decision is and the experience levels of the crew.
Together. A non-critical decision with an experienced crew member should be done together.
Offer. A non-critical decision with an inexperienced crew member should be offered to them so they may learn from it.
Refer. A critical decision with an experienced crew member, the captain should refer to the other crew member.
Alone. A critical decision with an inexperienced crew member. The captain makes the decision alone.
The first three assume time available to make the decision. The final method, "Alone", is not only dependant on the experience level of the other crew member but also the time available. A decision to abort is a critical decision and there is no time to make it together, or offer it to the other person, or refer to the other person, so it should be done alone.
There are very few times that a captain should make a decision entirely alone, but the decision to abort is definitely one of those times.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are very few times that a captain should make a decision entirely alone, but the decision to abort is definitely one of those times.
Some 'STOP' calls are best made, more promptly by PM. That's not always the captain!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no decision at V1
The whole point of the takeoff emergency brief is that there is no time to make a decision at V1. Most airlines brief "we will stop for X, Y & Z, anything else we continue". To say that an F/O is intrinsically incapable of following the logic tree is nonsense. On the other hand in the sim I see plenty of captains who can't!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But BJJ
If the captain makes their "decision entirely alone", presumably you don't need to bother with a takeoff emergency brief?
What would you say? "I'll decide, using criteria I know. I'll close the thrust levers. I'll ensure auto brake is operating, or I'll apply max manual braking. I'll select my own reverse. I'll cancel reverse as we come to a halt. Then I'll set the park brake. You just watch and learn. Is that clear?"
If the captain makes their "decision entirely alone", presumably you don't need to bother with a takeoff emergency brief?
What would you say? "I'll decide, using criteria I know. I'll close the thrust levers. I'll ensure auto brake is operating, or I'll apply max manual braking. I'll select my own reverse. I'll cancel reverse as we come to a halt. Then I'll set the park brake. You just watch and learn. Is that clear?"
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4468
First action of rejection near V1 is either you did it or didn't. This one is not a community decision it simply cannot be, the only input from PM is or can be announcing the malfunction. Both Boeing and Airbus permit only the captain or CM1 to reject.I have trained pilots of 10 airlines but none of them permit copilot to do it. Even in type rating they are trained for seat oriented duties.
First action of rejection near V1 is either you did it or didn't. This one is not a community decision it simply cannot be, the only input from PM is or can be announcing the malfunction. Both Boeing and Airbus permit only the captain or CM1 to reject.I have trained pilots of 10 airlines but none of them permit copilot to do it. Even in type rating they are trained for seat oriented duties.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4468
What does it mean? Off course rejecting take off is taken by captain alone and take off emergency briefing is informing the FO about exactly when and how he will execute it.
And I didn't talk about your airline but rather about other than your airline. It is a game not only between an airline and the manufacturer but passengers also come in when there is an accident. That is why most airlines don't want to go against manufacturer's recommendations. Good luck to your airline and happy take offs.
If the captain makes their "decision entirely alone",
And I didn't talk about your airline but rather about other than your airline. It is a game not only between an airline and the manufacturer but passengers also come in when there is an accident. That is why most airlines don't want to go against manufacturer's recommendations. Good luck to your airline and happy take offs.
4468:
So, you are the crew of a heavy 4 jet executing a field length critical max weight take-off.
As co -pilot, you are probably (but not necessarily) the lesser experienced member of the crew on type with possibly minimal time on type. The captain, of course, bears all responsibility for the consequences of any actions on the flight deck and he also knows the consequences of any mishaps during a high speed abort (think a blown tyre for instance) and your airline thinks it is a good sound policy to devolve the critical decision making to the one crewmember who does not bear the responsibility!!? In pure risk management terms do you really think this is the best possible practice?
So, you are the crew of a heavy 4 jet executing a field length critical max weight take-off.
As co -pilot, you are probably (but not necessarily) the lesser experienced member of the crew on type with possibly minimal time on type. The captain, of course, bears all responsibility for the consequences of any actions on the flight deck and he also knows the consequences of any mishaps during a high speed abort (think a blown tyre for instance) and your airline thinks it is a good sound policy to devolve the critical decision making to the one crewmember who does not bear the responsibility!!? In pure risk management terms do you really think this is the best possible practice?
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing only mandate in their sops that P1 only calls stop because they don't have copilots. They build test and deliver aircraft and have no interest in developing a first officers learning curve.
Some airlines follow manufacturers SOPS, some thankfully don't.
Some airlines follow manufacturers SOPS, some thankfully don't.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sit in the rhs of the heaviest 4 jet. I have 12000 hrs, with 1500 on type and 8000 on the next smallest 4 jet. Anywhere else Id have been a Capt for years.
My airline has always allowed FO initiated RTOs, insisted on tillers on both sides etc and they also have had 200hr cadets for 50 years. There has not been a single incident as a result.
My airline has always allowed FO initiated RTOs, insisted on tillers on both sides etc and they also have had 200hr cadets for 50 years. There has not been a single incident as a result.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meiklour and vilas
Calm down!
The issue of 'experience' is a total red herring here. We brief for utterly unambiguous criteria. It HAS to be that way, because there is NO thinking time available to use 'experience'! My mother following those directions, would make the correct decision as often as I would. No experience/interpretation required! But the fact is, the PM is often in a better position to make an accurate AND TIMELY call, than the PF. The captain isn't always the PM!
The captain can make excellent use of his 'superior' experience AFTER the stop!!
I currently fly with people exactly like Hotel Mode in my rhs. Top guys! However, not very long ago, I was flying Toulouse's finest, with 200 hour pilots. They aren't idiots! They will make the correct call, as reliably as the old git in the lhs! (Me!)
Anything not fitting the strict criteria, I will call 'stop' or 'continue'. Such is the privilege of rank!
Calm down!
The issue of 'experience' is a total red herring here. We brief for utterly unambiguous criteria. It HAS to be that way, because there is NO thinking time available to use 'experience'! My mother following those directions, would make the correct decision as often as I would. No experience/interpretation required! But the fact is, the PM is often in a better position to make an accurate AND TIMELY call, than the PF. The captain isn't always the PM!
The captain can make excellent use of his 'superior' experience AFTER the stop!!
I currently fly with people exactly like Hotel Mode in my rhs. Top guys! However, not very long ago, I was flying Toulouse's finest, with 200 hour pilots. They aren't idiots! They will make the correct call, as reliably as the old git in the lhs! (Me!)
Anything not fitting the strict criteria, I will call 'stop' or 'continue'. Such is the privilege of rank!
4468: Firstly - nobody is saying that there aren't experienced co-pilots around. Of course there are. The arguement is about risk mitigation. If you really feel that a system that POTENTIALLY puts the least experienced crewmember (and I know that this is not necessarily the case) in an executive position to command an action for which he is not responsible then that is your view. I suspect that a lawyer representing a passenger client might take a different view. If "experience" is a red herring then why not just have 200hr. captains? If you also believe that a pre-flight brief can cover all necessary situations then we have to differ.