A320: (PNF) Foot on Rudder Pedals (during Taxi, T/O and LDG)
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoa boys!
- I think you missed the missing smiley?
JC - you certainly do appear to have had/are having a 'difficult time'! Any progress with your 'problem'?
Diverting from topic:
- a meaningless statement without a definition of 'good'. I would suggest that a capable F/O JUST out of training would probably be as 'good' if not better at a s/e NDB than me, as probably would a high hour on type F/O with a new Captain on type. Becoming a 'Captain' has zilch to do with being 'good'. Handling abilities are taken as given, and most of the 'ability' is in management skills, normally acquired through TIME. Rarely will a 'good' F/O become a Captain without the dreaded 'time in the seat' no matter how 'good' he/she might be.
Now back to waggling bits that are not yours to waggle......................
Originally Posted by 320
The most unprofessional behaviour I've heard yet.
JC - you certainly do appear to have had/are having a 'difficult time'! Any progress with your 'problem'?
Diverting from topic:
Originally Posted by chopchop
After all if FOs were as good as Captains, they would be Captains.
Now back to waggling bits that are not yours to waggle......................
Only the captain should his feet lightly on the rudder pedals at all times
Of course some captains are very nervous regardless how good the F/O at his job and these captains are known to hover nervously over the controls when the other pilot is flying. It is then the captain that needs further training to improve his personal confidence.
PPRuNe supporter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing to do with nervous Centaurus, I work in the land of "danger crosswind" (by ATC) when the component is less than 5 knots, you may not believe me but it's true.
It's more about responsibility, one of the worst landings that I have witnessed was accomplished by another captain that was sitting in the right seat that day when he lowered the wrong wing in a crosswind and managed to get the aircraft in a wheel barrow mode.
My hands and feet are always in a position to take over when near the ground.
Cheers, D.L.
It's more about responsibility, one of the worst landings that I have witnessed was accomplished by another captain that was sitting in the right seat that day when he lowered the wrong wing in a crosswind and managed to get the aircraft in a wheel barrow mode.
My hands and feet are always in a position to take over when near the ground.
Cheers, D.L.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the answer to do whatever it says in your ops manual. In mine it says only one is in control, so my feet are on the floor. I know other airlines ops manuals say different.
What I do know is, if you are following through then you have to remember that you now have equal responsibility to the HP. I say that having had to have two goes at applying rudder on a 40kt crosswind landing. The first go I had I realised his size 12's were in the way, a shout later and I could apply rudder. Now as I always used to lead with aileron then you can probably guess that the roll axis became slightly unstable for a moment.
But, having said that, read your ops manual!
What I do know is, if you are following through then you have to remember that you now have equal responsibility to the HP. I say that having had to have two goes at applying rudder on a 40kt crosswind landing. The first go I had I realised his size 12's were in the way, a shout later and I could apply rudder. Now as I always used to lead with aileron then you can probably guess that the roll axis became slightly unstable for a moment.
But, having said that, read your ops manual!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the edge of reason
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon, this is not rocket science!!
If you are flying the aircraft, you have the controls, if you are not flying the aircraft, you should not have the controls, certainly not have feet on rudder pedals. That is a recipe for a smoking hole!
It is only common sense, FFS!!
If you are flying the aircraft, you have the controls, if you are not flying the aircraft, you should not have the controls, certainly not have feet on rudder pedals. That is a recipe for a smoking hole!
It is only common sense, FFS!!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: paradise
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Commander is ultimately responsible for safe conduct of the flight regardless whether he/she is PF or PNF thus the commander must be ready to take over any time if he/she deems necessary. Having said that PNF MUST be ready to take over in case of incapacitation, consequently F/O must be on controls, if PNF, specially during critical stages of the flight without obstructing the PF. I've had similar situations where a simple exchange of words resolved the issue. On the other hand hard rudder might be mistaken for interference. Why not speak up? The OM A states unambiguously both pilots are on controls below 1500 ft. Insurance companies love this sentence, remember famous BA 777 where FO landed the aircraft. 
PPRuNe supporter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 cents worth
Bengerman, not sure what type a/c you operate, but I fly on a regular basis (line flying, not training) with pilots with less than 1000 hours in an airplane, so IMHO, having my feet on the floor during landing as PNF is simply not safe, so you are correct, it's not rocket science.
This all in accordance with our SOP and as mentioned by 9.g, is my Full responsibility.
Cheers, D.L.
This all in accordance with our SOP and as mentioned by 9.g, is my Full responsibility.
Cheers, D.L.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Australasia
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus and BOAC have hit the nail on the head...
If the handling pilot has the aircraft in such a condition that the split second between moving one's feet from the vicinity of, to actually acting on the pedals would mean the difference between life and death, then either:
a) The PNF should've taken over much earlier
or
b) the PF is so inept, he/she shouldn't be anywhere near the controls of a jet aircraft
Seriously... there is nothing worse than commencing a takeoff roll and for a split second thinking there could be some sort of nosewheel steering / heavy rudder issue, only to realise the clown sitting next to you is half asleep and resting his/her feet (not following) on the pedals.
or... trying to bring the aircraft to a smooth halt on stand, only to realise when you start relaxing pressure on the pedals that the other pilot unconsciously holds that pressure and you come to a premature stop
Or... even worse; the colossal muppet who takes over on landing well above taxi speed on a wet runway without announcing it and disengages the autobrake, causing all sorts of 'threat rich' confusion. Maybe if his/her feet weren't resting on the pedals, they would first announce and then take over, as per SOP, thereby mitigating any potential for high speed ambiguity in the cockpit.
Does it really matter how the PNF guards the controls? IMHO, not particularly, provided the actions taken satisfy the following tests;
1) The requirement is to GUARD (watch over/protect) the controls
2) Manipulations made by the PF should never be inhibited as part of this process
3) Only one pilot should be flying the aircraft at any point in time. If inputs are required to maintain the integrity of the operation the PNF should TAKE OVER
(obviously training and flying with very low experienced pilots is a whole different scenario, but please give an experienced and competent f/o a break!)
Dream Land do you fly in the same tropical haven that offers "Caution headwind 7 knots...?"
If the handling pilot has the aircraft in such a condition that the split second between moving one's feet from the vicinity of, to actually acting on the pedals would mean the difference between life and death, then either:
a) The PNF should've taken over much earlier
or
b) the PF is so inept, he/she shouldn't be anywhere near the controls of a jet aircraft
Seriously... there is nothing worse than commencing a takeoff roll and for a split second thinking there could be some sort of nosewheel steering / heavy rudder issue, only to realise the clown sitting next to you is half asleep and resting his/her feet (not following) on the pedals.
or... trying to bring the aircraft to a smooth halt on stand, only to realise when you start relaxing pressure on the pedals that the other pilot unconsciously holds that pressure and you come to a premature stop
Or... even worse; the colossal muppet who takes over on landing well above taxi speed on a wet runway without announcing it and disengages the autobrake, causing all sorts of 'threat rich' confusion. Maybe if his/her feet weren't resting on the pedals, they would first announce and then take over, as per SOP, thereby mitigating any potential for high speed ambiguity in the cockpit.
Does it really matter how the PNF guards the controls? IMHO, not particularly, provided the actions taken satisfy the following tests;
1) The requirement is to GUARD (watch over/protect) the controls
2) Manipulations made by the PF should never be inhibited as part of this process
3) Only one pilot should be flying the aircraft at any point in time. If inputs are required to maintain the integrity of the operation the PNF should TAKE OVER
(obviously training and flying with very low experienced pilots is a whole different scenario, but please give an experienced and competent f/o a break!
) Dream Land do you fly in the same tropical haven that offers "Caution headwind 7 knots...?"
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... but please give an experienced and competent f/o a break! )
If said F/O paints themselves into a corner, it is up to them to find a way out.
Otherwise...they learn very little in the process.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: paradise
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cough, I wouldn't be so sure. Regardless which rules you follow EU OPS, FAA or ICAO each and every operator must ensure compliance with a basic principle
along with the salvatorius clause stating that in case something is missing ICAO rules, procedures etc apply. What is safer both pilots on controls or only one, is not the same question of who's flying the aircraft? As much as could this accident have been prevented if both pilots were on controls? In answering this question a lawyer or a judge will apply a principal of normal capacity. It's only logical to conclude that if someone isn't on controls he/she isn't following mentally the take off or landing and the readiness to take over isn't warranted. In the legal jungle there's always something written somewhere making you liable anyways. No matter how many rules will be written it always boils down to a good will and acting in good faith. Each and every one must must answer those questions for himself and the operator must tackle this issue.
No pilot may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger life or property.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its probably one of the most annoying habits in the flightdeck.
Its usually the annoying over assertive type of f/o that do it.
" Take you feet off the rudder pedals please " usually sorts it for me
Its usually the annoying over assertive type of f/o that do it.
" Take you feet off the rudder pedals please " usually sorts it for me
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only said that it annoys me as well when the PNF limits my movement of rudder by applying a lot of force on it.
Not when his feet are on the rudder without any interference. (Like I do without ever having complaints about it, except from some captains on an internet forum.)
There's a very big difference between the two.
Takeoff.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bonair
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Cpt I never had to take the controls out of any FO.
As FO I had to take the controls out of a CPT who was training to be a farmer...
I'm no better than any one of us dear friends, but my point is that I was a FO, so I know what an FO thinks... I remember my fears and limitations... that's the only difference between CPT and FO. We have been on the right seat.
Regarding Flight Controls, of course PF hands, feet and brain on the controls.
PNF talks on te radio with a nice and sexy voice, professionaly do the wonderful paper work that without it the airplane doesn't fly and with the corner of his/her eyes keeps on monitoring the beautiful job PF is doing.
If you fell the rudder is a bit hard, just say "easy on the rudder tiger".
Aren't we all the best Pilots on the world??? Of course we are... so just enjoy and fly.
Don't fight amoung each other... Save your energies to flight against Company Administrations that try to makes us comun office employes.
We are the Aviation Industry.
Regards
Overheat...
As FO I had to take the controls out of a CPT who was training to be a farmer...
I'm no better than any one of us dear friends, but my point is that I was a FO, so I know what an FO thinks... I remember my fears and limitations... that's the only difference between CPT and FO. We have been on the right seat.
Regarding Flight Controls, of course PF hands, feet and brain on the controls.
PNF talks on te radio with a nice and sexy voice, professionaly do the wonderful paper work that without it the airplane doesn't fly and with the corner of his/her eyes keeps on monitoring the beautiful job PF is doing.
If you fell the rudder is a bit hard, just say "easy on the rudder tiger".
Aren't we all the best Pilots on the world??? Of course we are... so just enjoy and fly.
Don't fight amoung each other... Save your energies to flight against Company Administrations that try to makes us comun office employes.
We are the Aviation Industry.
Regards
Overheat...
In another life I was flying an F27 (as captain) left seat with a check captain occupying the right seat. We were short of F/O's which is why two captains were crewed.
Over the week or so I had been crewed with this chap, it became evident he was a nervous nellie who couldn't help himself but to ride the controls while I was doing the take off or landing. In particular I noticed that the control forces when I rotated were always seemingly significantly greater when this bloke was in the RH seat. Moreover, when I watched him fly from the LH seat on his leg, it was noticeable he would ignore the support call of "VR" and instead rotate some 10 knots later.
Then one day I discovered what the cunning bugger was up to. He thought rotating 10 knots faster than the VR book figure was safer in case of engine failure. But that wasn't the point. So on one of my take off rolls I glanced across the cockpit and was astounded to see him surreptitiously moving one leg to behind the control column and when I went to rotate at the book VR he jammed his knee behind the control column to impede its movement. The bastard, I thought. This is taking twitchiness too far.
Nearing VR on my next take off, I saw him move his knee move behind the control column and at VR I jerked the stick back hard against his knee causing a shout of pain. Even so, we had gone well past VR. I called out " I have a control column jamming - handing over control"
He leapt on to the wheel and rotated 10 knots fast as expected. After the gear and flaps were up I asked him if he had felt any restriction on the aft movement of the control column.
He didn't answer the first time, so I again asked him. His reply was that I rotated too early and that it was always better to rotate 10 knots or more past VR. And now listen to this beauty. I asked him why this was so and he replied that the Rolls Royce Dart engines operated more efficiently at higher speeds and the longer the aircraft stayed on the runway the more efficient the Dart would be if there was an engine failure. And that guy was a check captain! Twitchy pilots always have an excuse for their actions and if they cannot answer with logic they will invent a reason...
If nothing else I was pleased to see him limp for a few days until his knee recovered.
Over the week or so I had been crewed with this chap, it became evident he was a nervous nellie who couldn't help himself but to ride the controls while I was doing the take off or landing. In particular I noticed that the control forces when I rotated were always seemingly significantly greater when this bloke was in the RH seat. Moreover, when I watched him fly from the LH seat on his leg, it was noticeable he would ignore the support call of "VR" and instead rotate some 10 knots later.
Then one day I discovered what the cunning bugger was up to. He thought rotating 10 knots faster than the VR book figure was safer in case of engine failure. But that wasn't the point. So on one of my take off rolls I glanced across the cockpit and was astounded to see him surreptitiously moving one leg to behind the control column and when I went to rotate at the book VR he jammed his knee behind the control column to impede its movement. The bastard, I thought. This is taking twitchiness too far.
Nearing VR on my next take off, I saw him move his knee move behind the control column and at VR I jerked the stick back hard against his knee causing a shout of pain. Even so, we had gone well past VR. I called out " I have a control column jamming - handing over control"
He leapt on to the wheel and rotated 10 knots fast as expected. After the gear and flaps were up I asked him if he had felt any restriction on the aft movement of the control column.
He didn't answer the first time, so I again asked him. His reply was that I rotated too early and that it was always better to rotate 10 knots or more past VR. And now listen to this beauty. I asked him why this was so and he replied that the Rolls Royce Dart engines operated more efficiently at higher speeds and the longer the aircraft stayed on the runway the more efficient the Dart would be if there was an engine failure. And that guy was a check captain! Twitchy pilots always have an excuse for their actions and if they cannot answer with logic they will invent a reason...
If nothing else I was pleased to see him limp for a few days until his knee recovered
.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and he replied that the Rolls Royce Dart engines operated more efficiently at higher speeds and the longer the aircraft stayed on the runway the more efficient the Dart would be if there was an engine failure.
OTOH, with the FAA, there was no specific Vr with either the F.27 (Fokker) or the F-27/FH227 (Fairchild)...only V1 and V2.
And rotation was at V2, not before, just as on four engine piston transports certificaed under CAR4b...and the F.27 (etc) was a -4b airplane.