P2 Handling
 

I noticed on a recent A350 video (LH) the copilot was the handling pilot on the flight. He was only given control of the aircraft when lined up on the runway. The aircraft appeared to have steering at the P2 station. On takeoff the copilot did not have his hands on the thrust levers, Captain handled the thrust at all times. Presumably if a malfunction occurs before V1, with the Co-Pilot handling, he calls Stop but the NHP closes the thrust levers? Seems an odd way to operate.
In my UK airline (B744) when the copilot is operating the sector, after engine start, we had complete role reversal. Copilot taxying. Handles thrust levers on take off and calls stop if necessary, loss off control, blocked runway etc. etc.. Captain of course can countermand at any time.
Are copilots in some airlines not experienced, or fully trained, in all aspects of the operation?

Takeoff roll is a very critical phase of flight, where correct decision to stop or continue should be made promptly and there is no time for discussion about it. Generally the captain has the most experience on the flightdeck, so they are normally the most qualified person to make that decison. Plus, ultimately responsible for it as well. To me it makes sense that captain has hand on the thrust levers during takeoff once takeoff thrust has been set, even though I am a big fan of "PF handles aircraft from parking brake release to parking brake set" (where flight deck configuration allows).

Forgive the ignorance, but are your copilots not fully trained in talking with ground staff during pushback and starting the engines?

I think it varies from airline to airline. Most of our (Boeings) only have a tiller on the LHS, so the Captain drives it to the runway then hands over if the RHS is PF. On landing rollout the Captain will take over again and take it to the ramp.
In all cases, once thrust is set the Captain takes or keeps the thrust levers until V1 and initiates any RTO while the PF keeps it straight. Works pretty well.

It is Airbus philosophy that reject takeoff is done by CM1. All reject actions are seat oriented.

Airlines vary.

At my first, F/Os, even 2 stripers in BAe 146s, were allowed to talk to ground crew, start four (non FADEC) engines, taxi to the runway and take off. After landing, F/O kept control and taxiied in, and this included operations in LHR and CDG. They only handed to Captain if the stand guidance was set up for the LHS.

Next airline which flew medium and big Airbus FBW, F/Os were not allowed to taxi, despite the modern aircraft being configured for either side to taxi as standard. The pilot bosses clearly did not trust the F/Os, but they eventually gave in and allowed F/Os to taxi, but probably only because the manufacturer’s SOPs that were adopted specified this. But they still didn’t allow F/Os to taxi onto stand even if the guidance was valid for both sides.

Next airline, also medium and big Airbus FBW, allowed F/Os to do all, including turning onto stand and stopping in the right place.

However, always Captain’s hands on thrust levers after setting T/O thrust, which is fair enough, and as vilas states, SOPs are designed around this.

Flying Stone

Sorry my error. On a co pilot handling sector ,role reversal is from engine start. P2 starts engines, handles pushback etc. taxy ,(I checked for current SOP with a relative LHR based, P2 on A380)
A P2 on a two crew aircraft presumably must be fully experienced, trained, and Line cleared, for all aspects of the operation ie crew incapacitation.
I'm surprised that some airlines P2 not trusted with thrust lever handling/RTO. Quite a straight forward decision to call "Stop" for Loss control, Engine failure /fire warning. Blocked runway etc.
Agree, difficult to taxy with no tiller on your side!

Co-pilots can still be trained and checked (as they should be) on how to perform an RTO from RHS in case of captain incapacitation, but it doesn't mean it's good idea to do it every day.

At least for 737, I am happy to argue that the 3-step RTO maneuver (thrust levers idle, speedbrakes up, select full reverse) is much easier from LHS, as the speedbrake lever is on that side.

You must be very naïve if you think that is true the world over.

"Fully trained, and Line cleared" maybe, but certainly not fully experienced and unfortunately in many cases, not competent either.

"Strange" is an understatement. It has the potential to be downright dangerous.

Edited for brevity Extract from Boeing 737 FCTM:
Landing rollout on a slippery runway with crosswind..as the airplane starts to weathervane into the wind, the reverse thrust side force component adds to the crosswind component and drifts the airplane to the downwind side of the runway...also high braking forces reduce the capability of the tires to corner. To correct back to centreline, release the brakes and reduce reverse thrust to reverse idle.

Releasing the brakes increases the tire-cornering capability and contributes to maintaining or regaining control directional control. Setting reverse idle reduces the reverse thrust side force component without the requirement to go through the full reverser actuation cycle. When directional control using rudder pedal steering and differential braking is regained, apply maximum braking and symmetrical reverse thrust to stop the airplane.

With one pilot on the controls and the other on reverse thrust can you just imagine the confusion as both pilots try to coordinate their respective duties as the aircraft slides sideways. The obvious solution is that whoever is doing the landing does the reverse thrust handling as well.

Operated the F50 in JAA, as far as I can remember all handling (taxi, reject aso) was done by the PF, now on the short bus in FAA. LP taxi and hand on TL durin T/O roll, and takes control for reject and during roll-out. Maybe okay when FO is inexperienced, but I really didn't think it is the best way. I upgraded having almost no taxi experience, got less than 10 sectors of OE/line training, and on my first trip as a captain flew with an FO with less than 200 hours in the aircraft. Don't think he would have been ready if I had headed for the grass! (I wasn't worried because I had close to a decade in the left seat, but we were upgrading people with very little relevant PIC time). Learning how to do everything with a more experienced pilot in the left seat next to you makes more sense than trying to learn with a newbie on your right. The whole argument that you should be experienced in everything by the time you upgrade really doesn't apply if no-one lets FOs taxi or reject.....

Flying the small bus for a small european airline as an FO.
We get training for RTO on every sim but as per Airbus procedure in case of actual RTO, CM1 takes control.
However I get to taxi from block off till block on...

I'm probably at a similar airline to cessna.

When I got my ticket to sit in the LHS I'd been taxing the aircraft for many years - I leant the skill with able Skippers teaching me. So upon sitting in the LHS, it was just granted that I knew how to taxi.

Crosswind limits for F/O's are 2/3rds.

Years ago at Pan Am most of the FO's were type-rated and taxied on aircraft with tillers on both sides like the A310, 747 and even some 727's I think. When American ordered their A300-600's they were spec'ed with the right hand tiller removed since they didn't allow the FO's to taxi.

I feel your pain. When I upgraded I had already taxied from the right seat with two other airlines but was rusty. The IOE guy was big on shutting down an engine after cooldown to save gas on the ETOPS twin. I was not at all comfortable with swinging the plane around on a crowded ramp only to find that the gate was on the wrong side of the shut down motor. I've seen the Bob Hoover act where the captain shuts down the second engine on a twin rolling into the blocks only to get stopped short of the gate for a stray baggage cart.

CruiseMonkey. 2/3 Capt limit.

I was obviously lucky to have flown with such an enlightened employer. On reading, in my opinion, the various experience limiting restrictions on their F/Os operations.

Although we won’t mention the dreaded Monitored Approach SOP!!

Transferring control while on the runway has always struck me as the worst possible time to do so. Why not transfer control on the taxiway? We're not flying 737's. (Does the 737 even have an option for a tiller on the right?) As to transferring control for an RTO...:ugh:

That last one is Airbus SOP though. No clue why.

I think that was my second employer’s thinking, but I also think it is an excuse for not trusting F/Os. It would obviously be sensible to not allow brand new low hour cadets in their first airline RHS to taxi until they had, say 500 or 1000 hours of airline flying, and are familiar with the airport, but otherwise, why not?

F/Os are allowed to drive their cars to work at 70 mph (UK), in all weathers, only meters away from other motorway traffic, and park in a tight parking space. They are also allowed to fly a go-around in dark ****ty weather, but some are not trusted to taxi very slowly along a yellow line with the Captain closely watching and able to take over in an instant if required?

I think we can pretty much agree that all the different SOPs regarding taxi, applied by various airlines across the world, have had their fair share of thoughts put into it, and all have their pros and cons.
I like my company's SOP to let even the youngest FOs do almost everything (except RTO as per Airbus proc, and high velocity crosswinds) on the first day, obviously under supervision from LTC initially then regular captains.

I'd feel quite uncomfortable being upgraded as PIC and have to learn something "as basic" as taxying an airplane though.

^^^ what he said.

I do not get this. Everything in the flight-deck is done double-stitch style. One executes, the other watches. When released for the first solo, were we not allowed to taxi then, un-supervised? Would there be a test exercise after those 1000 hrs to evaluate their (never practiced) taxying skills? Hope many would agree that whenever taxi gets seriously demanding it's better that the responsible PIC has a chart at hand and is looking out, delegating physical steering to the other cockpit resource.

It is understandable that different airlines have different policies, the foundations of which may had been laid down eons ago. Different airframe configurations and trying to have a single shared concept across fleets must play a role. Having acknowledged that fact, as long as the installed controls allow, the work assignment should be completely symmetrical. It's 2020. Even with new colleagues with less than 250 hrs total time it's not a problem (assuming at least late 80's design of the A/C). Clearly, the responsibility and authority of PIC rest undivided. Hence the actions and maneuvers that require (unlike taxying) experience and immediate command judgment remain pegged to the LHS.
In my world that would be:
- fuelling decision
- aircraft technical acceptance
- loadsheet verification
- close the door authorization
- choice of deicing
- RTO stop/go call
- narrow or short runways
- BA medium or worse
- LVP

I believe the RTO = PIC is not a handling debate but a one of authority instead.

F.F: same I had in mind. The CPT has the final say and signs for it.

The reason RTO is not shared, I suppose, is that once executed by an F/O there is no final say left for the PIC. Would not have any issues with accepting an F/Os call or action, as long as they had been trained for it. The chances of screwing one badly are not that dissimilar.

I am very pro F/Os taxiing, see my second paragraph of #21.

I was thinking of the cadet who has only flown a Cessna SEP for 120 hours, then ‘the next day’ finds them self in the cockpit of an A320 as their first commercial type. Taxiing from day one, as well as flying would be a big ask, until the cadet has got used to the airport environment, signage and cues etc. As 2 stripers, we taxied BAe146s in a previous airline, but had all flown turboprops in the same company first, so were used to commercial airports and flying.

Yes, in the next company we had 6 or 10 sectors of taxi training, before being allowed to taxi an A320 !! And most of us had thousands of hours TT by then.

What is difficult about taxying an aircraft?? I'm amazed what strange variations there are in the airline world. Surely if you can't be trusted to taxi, you shouldn't be flying the thing! (obviously helps if you have a RHS tiller! All my companies fleet were so fitted)
A good Captain should delegate as much of the decision making/operation as possible, on their F/O handling sectors. You are of course, as Captain, the final arbiter.

Noted and agreed, there was squat nothing I could have added to the second one.

I've had only 1 or 2 sub-250 hrs, not a problem. At worst you point a finger where to go. Keeping the R/T coherent on a busy day in France is 10x the challenge - best mitigated making them PF :)

About a two dozen in the 500-1000 range, impossible to tell the experience level by the performance. With SETI yes, there'd be a difference.

From day 1 line training if it was “my” sector i taxied and even manipulated the flight controls until taxi at the other end.
how b@##£( difficult can it be. Ok I couldn’t reject a take off until I was released onto the line!
Maybe this would not have been a good idea without a tiller on the rhs but seriously what’s the big deal.
On day one of line training I could have manouvered an aircraft as 360 at 100ft without breaking sweat, 20 plus years later I am not so sure as the system has degraded my skills significantly. Yes I know part of that is my fault......