Pilot Flying
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
From: Altrincham
Pilot Flying
Was just watching a programme about Pilot Error and it said that due to the Staines accident only FOs handled takeoffs while the Captain watched for problems.
But when I read about Aviation and watch other programmes they say that takeoffs and landing duties are shared between the Captain and FO.
Which is the usual procedure?
Thanks lots in advance
But when I read about Aviation and watch other programmes they say that takeoffs and landing duties are shared between the Captain and FO.
Which is the usual procedure?
Thanks lots in advance
Joined: Oct 2007
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 121
From: Wherever I go, there I am
Hello donnlass,
Every airline has slightly different procedures but, in general, the pilots will "trade off" sectors. I can only speak for the airlines that I have flown for, but here are a couple of the limitations imposed on crew:
1. The captain will always do the first takeoff of the day, except where the crew flew the aircraft the day before and both pilots know its condition.
2. The captain will handle all landings onto ice.
3. The captain will handle all takeoffs and landings when low visibility operations are in effect.
3. Co-pilots are restricted to crosswind components of 10 knots until they have accumulated 25 hours on type. (Note: at this point the ban is lifted and it becomes captains discretion whether to allow the co-pilot to land in higher crosswinds).
There are others, but they all revolve around the same theme that if it's considered a higher risk, the captain will conduct the takeoff and/or landing.
Also, for long haul flights it is possible that the flying pilots will trade off during the flight. For example, the captain will do the takeoff, while the first officer will do the landing.
That's all from the airline world. From the bush world, where you are landing on floats or skis, the first officer may never get to takeoff or land until they have considerable time on the aircraft (1,000 hours or more) due to the inherent risks of landing on shallow rivers, the open arctic tundra, or similar locales.
I hope this answers your question!
Every airline has slightly different procedures but, in general, the pilots will "trade off" sectors. I can only speak for the airlines that I have flown for, but here are a couple of the limitations imposed on crew:
1. The captain will always do the first takeoff of the day, except where the crew flew the aircraft the day before and both pilots know its condition.
2. The captain will handle all landings onto ice.
3. The captain will handle all takeoffs and landings when low visibility operations are in effect.
3. Co-pilots are restricted to crosswind components of 10 knots until they have accumulated 25 hours on type. (Note: at this point the ban is lifted and it becomes captains discretion whether to allow the co-pilot to land in higher crosswinds).
There are others, but they all revolve around the same theme that if it's considered a higher risk, the captain will conduct the takeoff and/or landing.
Also, for long haul flights it is possible that the flying pilots will trade off during the flight. For example, the captain will do the takeoff, while the first officer will do the landing.
That's all from the airline world. From the bush world, where you are landing on floats or skis, the first officer may never get to takeoff or land until they have considerable time on the aircraft (1,000 hours or more) due to the inherent risks of landing on shallow rivers, the open arctic tundra, or similar locales.
I hope this answers your question!
Last edited by +TSRA; 24th March 2013 at 14:30. Reason: Spelling and grammar
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,428
Likes: 3
From: Not At Home
In my company we share the PF / PNF roles.
It is usually decided in the crew room based on the weather / notams / general preference.
A FO has a X wind limit of 15kts, a SFO 25kts.
If the RVR for take off is < 400m, or LVP for landing, or windshear reported, or contaminated runways, or runway width < 45m, or a technical problem affecting handling the Captain will be pilot flying.
Some airports also have restrictions such as a difficult circling procedure may be captains only.
Other than that, it is split quite fairly and on a typical 4 sector day you would be PF for 2 of the flights.
The FO will be starting the engines / taxiing on his sector and essentially the only bits he won't be doing is guarding the thrust levers on take off (skippers decision) and parking the plane on stand.
Hope that gives an insight.
It is usually decided in the crew room based on the weather / notams / general preference.
A FO has a X wind limit of 15kts, a SFO 25kts.
If the RVR for take off is < 400m, or LVP for landing, or windshear reported, or contaminated runways, or runway width < 45m, or a technical problem affecting handling the Captain will be pilot flying.
Some airports also have restrictions such as a difficult circling procedure may be captains only.
Other than that, it is split quite fairly and on a typical 4 sector day you would be PF for 2 of the flights.
The FO will be starting the engines / taxiing on his sector and essentially the only bits he won't be doing is guarding the thrust levers on take off (skippers decision) and parking the plane on stand.
Hope that gives an insight.
Last edited by EcamSurprise; 24th March 2013 at 14:46.
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
From: Altrincham
Thanks EcamSurprise yes it does.
I thought that was the case but why would a programme say it was only FO's handling takeoffs unless of course it was the case when the programme was made.
Here's the video it was on at 32:34.
I thought that was the case but why would a programme say it was only FO's handling takeoffs unless of course it was the case when the programme was made.
Here's the video it was on at 32:34.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
From: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
but why would a programme say it was only FO's handling takeoffs
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
From: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
I know this is the Spotters/Flight Simmers Forum and therefore likely to have a fair sprinkling of keen, but poorly informed contributors, but words fail me. Do you really believe everything you see or read? Are you honestly so gullible that you will believe any old rubbish? Have you ever flown any type of aircraft? If you have, you will know that nobody in their right mind would leave any aircraft, no matter how simple or advanced its technology, completely to its own devices. All commercial pilots are trained to fly specific aircraft and are subject to regular checks to ensure they are competent. In future please think before you write such ill advised drivel, it's not clever. 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
From: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
I wish! No, I'm just fed up with people Airbus-bashing, (and also those who Boeing-bash) no, I don't fly one. It's the perpetuation of the myth that they are somehow more dangerous than other aircraft which can frighten the more gullible. Granted I was extremely tired when I read the post and replied and maybe a pause before replying might have produced a somewhat toned down reply but the essence would have been much the same - don't Airbus or Boeing Bash unless you actually fly the aircraft you are bashing. There are perfectly safe aircraft which I, for very personal reasons, do not like but I would never run them down or imply that they were unsafe simply because I'm not fond of them.
Edited because posting late at night when I'm very tired can have a bad effect on my spellling.
No, I'm just fed up with people Airbus-bashing, (and also those who Boeing-bash) no, I don't fly one. It's the perpetuation of the myth that they are somehow more dangerous than other aircraft which can frighten the more gullible. Granted I was extremely tired when I read the post and replied and maybe a pause before replying might have produced a somewhat toned down reply but the essence would have been much the same - don't Airbus or Boeing Bash unless you actually fly the aircraft you are bashing. There are perfectly safe aircraft which I, for very personal reasons, do not like but I would never run them down or imply that they were unsafe simply because I'm not fond of them.Edited because posting late at night when I'm very tired can have a bad effect on my spellling.
Last edited by DX Wombat; 25th March 2013 at 11:44.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,738
Likes: 2,119
From: Reading, UK
due to the Staines accident only FOs handled takeoffs while the Captain watched for problems
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Down Sarf
Have to say DX I can only apologise for the cringeworthy ill informed comments made by my fellow spotters on here,please don't assume we all are as feeble minded.
Last edited by spottilludrop; 25th March 2013 at 09:59.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
From: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Hi Spottilludrop, don't worry, I know not everyone is guilty and I certainly don't think you are all feeble-minded, something I tried to convey in my first sentence. One of the best informed spotters I have ever met was a delightful but seriously handicapped young man whose knowledge was amazing and who was a pleasure to listen to. Some of our local spotters are a great gang, friendly, knowledgeable, keen and happy to share their enthusiasm with others. There are some great photographers amongst the ranks of spotters too.
