:hmm:

Well there's a thing now.
Here's a little link to help you out.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Roneo

But its usage were more an evil play on a name than anything else.

:cool:

Tonker
 

Well, I've been there when it happened:

Cause 1: sloppy FO, (me) didn't do after landing checks properly

Cause 2: As the load came on APU failed

Cause 3: APU was U/S but crew forgot and just did after landing checks anyway.

It shouldn't happen 'regularly' and after it has happened once it is the duty of both/all crew members to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Please explain what you mean by regularly Tonkar, if it was a multi sector day and you monitored this happening more than once then it is you who has failed.

I don't deny CRM has improved safety, but it's a question of to what degree you alter the slope. maybe in the past it was too steep. I think now some virtual ppl+ holders are joining an integrated crew and thinking it's a level playing field! It most certainly isn't!
You bet he has to! He is going to work with a lot of people with different styles. If he once shows dislike or disdain, he won't know what hits him! He most certainly must completely hide it! This is where kids are coming out of school with no respect for authority or experience, having never really played competetive games. Do you really think a Naval Captain would take active dislike from his First Lieutenant? Or a lack of respect for his experience? It's not for him to judge! It's up to the Captain to be as arrogant as he likes- that copilot must find ways around to work effectively. But so many these days are little prima donnas who flounce off and sulk or become shrinking violets- the failure is them for not finding a way to get the work done effectively, which is their duty.

But either side losing respect for the other by largely untrue or embellished tales, like the title of this thread, does nothing for your much vaunted CRM. Don't you think it has an element of the industry washing its dirty laundry in public?

Respect comes with the rank and has to be maintained once earned.
It is easily lost!

Doesn't that work both ways? The new copilot starts off with no respect and has to earn it. The Captain has respect as he's shown he can do the job. Quite frankly, how far do you think he worries that the copilot 'does not respect him'? Not a lot. But if you're saying that if the Captain has lost respect for some reason from that copilot, well- how much does that worry the Captain? How are they going to get through the day/trip? Who has to bend to find a way to get the job done? Let's see...........I wonder who?

Recently read about a certain Naval Captain in the Falklands campaign who was as arrogant as that - the cock-ups and incompetence that resulted are amazing to read.
TP

me.....

I provide all the beer....

I provide all the women/men....

I provide all the food....

and all the F/O has to provide is........his/her presence

life is just too short for mucking around!!!

Old n bold Instructor said to me (young and foolish) "Don't ever tell a student you are a better pilot then they are. You are merely (a little) more experienced".

Rainboe,

"It's up to the Captain to be as arrogant as he likes- that copilot must find ways around to work effectively. But so many these days are little prima donnas who flounce off and sulk or become shrinking violets- the failure is them for not finding a way to get the work done effectively, which is their duty."

Do you actually bother to read what you post?

Are you actually saying that a Captain can act in any way he sees fit?

Are you further saying that an FO has to perform their duties no matter what the Captain does or says?

I assume that you are a Captain. If I am wrong then I hope you can see how I make that assumption.

Therefore let me say this. You are a pilot not GOD. If as a grown adult whose job is to ferry others around you show a staggering lack of social skills.

You are not omnipotent or all knowing. In fact you actually could do with realising just how little you do know. All good pilots know their limitations yet you feel you have none.

Cheers

BHR

Unfortunately, too many people feel the point of CRM skills is to share authority. It is not. The point of CRM teaching is to lessen the authority gradient, especially between older Captains and younger inexperienced crew members, so that safety is enhanced by 'juniors' feeling confident enough to speak up and voice their concerns. The law is quite clear that only one person - the aircraft Commander - has overall responsibility. Sharing the workload efficiently is one thing, but sharing authority is definitely not the purpose of CRM.
Often those who think that their CRM skills are very high, are those that require further education in inter-personal relationship.
I prefer the 'KISS' philosophy myself - 'Keep It Simple Sucker': it makes for an easier life and a safer one!

Skiesfull, you hit the nail on the head! CRM is not about sharing authority, it is about lessening the cockpit gradient so that the Captain doesnt find himself/herself in the position where the S$%T has hit the fan and they are working as a one man band!

Rainboe, you do have some valid points with regard to the level that CRM must be applied but just listen to yourself for one second and you may realise that the self styled "Toxic" attitude that you portray only serves to hinder your job as a Captain by fostering an atmosphere that will either beat fragile f/o's into a blubbering mess, incapable of helping in any situation or even worse.... make your f/o's who are actively hiding their dislike for you, actively want to see you mess up just to put you in your place.

Both of those outcomes are ones that ultimately bring us back to the days of pre CRM and we all know what happens then!

When I question my Captains decisions, or point out deviations from SOPs, I do it in a tactful and respectful way because I need to clarify that I am right, not that the captain is wong! I am happy to hold my hand up when I am wrong, make a mistake or dont know an answer but thats part of the learning curve so I sure as hell expect the reaction/answer to be a civilised one. Some of those LHS's out there must remember that they are still on that learning curve as well, albeit further along but on that curve none the less. If you think your time has come to stop learning (in either seat), its time to retire!!!

BHR- I'm a little surprised you don't seem to understand. A Captain is the boss. He can act how he pleases. BUT- being a little Hitler/excessively obnoxious, it will come to the attention of his seniors, and if it's bad enough, action will be taken. So, it's a self regulating system. But the important thing is, on the actual day, when you have to fly passengers to 4 or 5 places, it is very much up to the copilot to ensure he adapts to the Captain's style. He does not yet have the experience or (often) ability to be independant, and to show resentment or insult will create a worse environment than even if he was not there at all. The captain leads, the copilot must adapt.

Statements like this:
are a walking disaster!

Rainboe, maybe I should clarify that statement.

If your f/o has a dislike for the captain because they are a jumped up little 250 hour idiot then they are the ones who need to get sorted out by management. Having said that, if the only reason they dislike the captain is because they are put down, belittled or treated as just the "radio operator" then the company needs to look to the LHS.

I bet you wouldnt have these opinions if you were getting guys into the RHS who had some decent hours, who had scared themselves flying SP MEIR a few times and who generally had some life experience!!

A few thoughts ..

(a) this sort of thread is useful (provided we keep reasonably cool heads) for its ability to present a pretty wide range of observations .. the fact that some folks get a little more agitated than others merely is a reflection of the human condition

(b) it is unfortunate that some pilots possibly never have worked outside the flying game .. it's not much different anywhere .. the boss is the boss and the juniors have to toe the line to the extent necessary for the thing to work. If it doesn't work that way on the day then it doesn't work well.

(c) in some jobs (flying, surface vessels/submarines, surgery, hazardous chemicals are several that come to mind) there often is not time to schedule a committee meeting to discuss the pros and cons .. the system has to put its trust in its ability to end up with effective, functional and appropriately decisive leaders. Sure, it doesn't work all the time but we have to go with the percentages overall. In other jobs .. routine clerical work, for instance, the urgency for decision making and the consequences of bad decision making are such that perhaps those systems can tolerate a bit more PC than flying

(d) the main variation one sees (throughout the workforce) is that associated with the principle that there exists many ways for the boss to lead and command .. some better and more effective than others .. and this, too, varies according to circumstances. In my simplistic view of the world, I like to think that the main aim of CRM etc., is to grab all the best that there is out there and present it in a manner best suited to making it easier for the guys and gals to learn by the mistakes and successes of others .. there really just isn't enough time for all of us to make all the useful learning outcomes mistakes ourselves .. not to mention the cost associated with bad mistakes in modern aircraft. Where this approach becomes especially important is when the experience level goes down due to the normal longer term cyclical nature of the industry .. particularly when the new commander experience level is limited. In the military system, a very active flight by flight authorisation process seeks to take up the slack .. but this doesn't apply in the civil arena in general

Apart from the proactive approaches embodied in CRM etc .. I go with the old saying that one should observe one's colleagues, take note of what works well and what doesn't ... incorporate the former into one's own practices ... and discard the latter

The system is not perfect by any means .. but it bumbles along reasonably well most of the time ...

Fundamentally JT, in all those industries, the most effective ones are the ones where the Leader/Manager/Captain fosters development, openess and leadership practice while all the time delegating and maintaining the professionalism and expertise that is expected of them in their particular role. The LHS of a jet is no different.

In all those industries, the outcome relies solely on the individuals ability to lead a team. Just because you are the boss, doesnt mean you can lead a team effectively!!

If the team leader needs to make an urgent or critical decision then provided the team has been kept appropriately informed and consulted, that decision is going to be easier to make and more widely recieved!!

.. that's pretty much what I set out to say ... you just managed to do it far tidier than I ...

I agree. What could be shared are the leadership skills. Also as good leader the FO should display good followership skills.

I hope this makes sense.

To keep it simple. The captain has got the authority, but both pilots do have the same opportunities to make inputs that improve safety and efficiency. The FO should assist the CP as much as he can while making valuable obervations.

"Captain, what do you want me to want?" and if you feel that you are going to die tell him... but if you are very, very and absolutely sure you are going to die press the red button and don't forget to say I have control!!:}

Interesting. As a Captain I feel I have to adapt to the character and experience/skills of my FOs as much as I ever did with Captains when I was in the RHS.

Only one thing never changes, everyone is different. I don't think it matters which seat you sit in. You won't like everybody, and for extrovert, motivated technically competent pilots it is often hard to be the one not in charge, so Captains get a lot of stick.

Some of the arguments on here from those in RHS are lucid, logical and show that the authors have a real grasp of the fundamental issues of CRM and how it relates to flight safety. I bet, however, that when they are next in the LHS not every FO will have great things to say about them. Such is the sacrifice we make for all that extra money...;)

Many here may or may not "respect" Rainboe, but there is 1 undeniable fact. He is clever enough to introduce just enough thread creep into this whole discussion to prevent folks from answering the original question. Perhaps his true personality has been hidden and he has used shock and awe to get some folks off topic. Well done Rainboe. I too don't like to read about others silly or stange habits as it does serve to belittle our industry.

A few exceptions aside this tread has actually provided some argument from all points of view. Perhaps we should all meet in the middle.

7