|
Should the FOs experience, knowledge and thoughts be ignored as is suggested in many posts here (the FO is gear flap operator but only when instructed, wear buttons done up and shave). Should the FO let the captain dig his own holes only to bail him out later? What should the FO do when there really is a good reason to take extra fuel but the captain insists minimum fuel? Should he refuse to operate? Are you going to smack the FOs hand when he can see the approach is becoming massively unstable as he suggests gear? Ignore his calls to go around when you’ve landed too deep on a contaminated wet runway?] I think you're missing the point. No one is saying suggestions from a FO should be ignored. No one is saying ignore the FOs input on taking extra fuel. Ignore those post, they are trying to throw petrol in the fire on this thread. All that is being said is have a reason. If a FO told me he/she thought we should take extra fuel and gave me a good reason, I'll take as much fuel as needed. If he just wants extra fuel, just to have extra fuel, my CRM comes into play to try and convince him it's not really needed. This is sometimes the biggest task of the day to convince them without making them feel I don't care. I am paid to be responsible to the company and if anyone thinks it's ok to take extra fuel just for the sake taking it, then maybe there're not as professional as they think. Even though I am a Line Trainer, part of my brief to the FO, safety pilot or trainee is that I can also make mistakes and don't be afraid to speak up and ask what am I doing. The FO is there to make sure I don't make an error and it works both ways. If I mess up, he/she has messed up by not preventing me. Works both ways. I also seek feedback from all colleagues who have been somewhere I have not yet been. I am always learning. I don't know everything. My FO/safety pilot is part of the team. I try to treat them with the respect they deserve and I let them fly as they wish as long as safety is not compromised, a go around is not needed and the company image is not brought into disrepute. I try my best to say nothing and let them fly the sector. I remember very well the number of times I flew when I was a FO and the Captain would keep chirping in "I think you're high" "You need to get down now" As a FO for 8 years, only had one go around because of wind shear and never been unstable, most times a nice CDA onto the G/S. I know what it's like to have a Captain who is nervous and keeps telling you how to fly. It's a pain and is something I try my best to refrain from doing now I am LHS. As mentioned earlier, you may think once you have changed seats from R to L it's easier, it's not. You also have to deal with all sorts in the RHS. Having to keep them on side (making sure I/we don't mess up) means sometimes you have to bite your lip and say nothing. Great thread. |
Wise words Black Pudding :ok: |
Surprised at the "no hovering over lever" comments, seems like loss of pride more than anything. Often it's a helpful reminder. Also don't agree that the only reason there are 2 pilots is in case one dies, errors happen a lot more than death/incap. If that was intended as a joke I missed it.
I'd rather people spoke up than watched me dig a hole too deep! And in return I try to do the same. |
No FO should assume command, but be willing to intervene when absolutely necessary due to ensure critical safety and be confident enough to advocate their point of view. My duty is to hear all inputs from the team, keep an open mind and praise where praise is due.
Peeps need to get away from "My Command, Your command"and "My leg, your leg" ,mentality. On my flightdeck - its OUR leg/task, but ultimately, as skipper, legal responsibility of my crew, pax, freight, aircraft and those I fly over is mine. Before I ever intervene in the LHS, first question, is this flight safety critical, or is it rapidly deteriorating into a flight safety critical issue? Second, is it economic? Will try and elicit info rather than "tell" the other seat, as no-one likes having their thought train pulled apart. This is where in depth knowledge of the operation is essential. Case in point, recent departure from mid-west airfield, transatlantic, squalls and plagues of frogs. I had been keeping a close eye on FR24 as well as the online departure board and it was obvious we would not get a clean breakaway with 30+ holding aircraft and about 20 delays stacked. FO wanted to take PLOG. Rather than telling them what to take, I carefully posed the scenario and let him come up with the answer. If done in the right way, the FO will appreciate your honesty and tutelage. He certainly did and asked for further D+G into other scenarios he was interested in. The bottom line for LH, PLOG is not necessarily cost efficient if you run the risk of diverting and dont have the duty to get into destination within a reasonable time frame of connections. Ive operated with Co-captains before,I usually leave it to the first leg debrief, give them some humble pie but then firmly re-enforce my responsibilities, and theirs and respectfully request that in the name of professionalism, we need to ensure there is no doubt over the correct cockpit gradient. These people can rapidly turn a bad situation into a dangerous one, particularly when their egos out cash their ability and respect of the commander. |
NO one here has suggested that the F/O's lot in life is only to jerk the gear.
One of the problems I see in my current role in simulator work is a tendency for weaker pilots (some are Captains, others F/Os) to become overly-reliant on their support pilot to scrape through their checks. Hence my comments about pre-emptive behaviour. It's nothing to do with ego - it's all about getting the person in the hot seat to step up to the plate. PM's role should be to stick to SOP, make standard callouts and do whatever non-handling duties the FCOM or Company designates. Obvious errors and omissions need to be brought to the attention of the other pilot. But when it becomes a pattern, something is amiss. Interesting that some Captains would not allow their F/O to load more than computer fuel because presumably the computer is always right, or defy the FMS and start the descent a little early in order to feel more comfortable with the path, yet would turn a blind eye to breaches of Company uniform and grooming protocols (every company still has such a thing, do they not?) |
if you did not manage to work your way up to Captaincy with that level of experience something is wrong with your outfit or you should perhaps question yourself why you are still on the RHS ? |
Originally Posted by Mach E Avelli
(Post 10216803)
Interesting that some Captains would not allow their F/O to load more than computer fuel because presumably the computer is always right, or defy the FMS and start the descent a little early in order to feel more comfortable with the path, yet would turn a blind eye to breaches of Company uniform and grooming protocols (every company still has such a thing, do they not?)
If the FO is uncomfortable unless he descends 10 miles early then he shouldn’t be in the seat. If the FO wans extra fuel he can have it...if he can justify carrying it. He can’t have it just because. |
I bought a new watch last week, it cost $800, if anyone wants I can upload some photos. |
Originally Posted by Chesty Morgan
(Post 10217021)
Oh come on is that really how we fly? To ensure the FO feels comfortable? Or with efficiency, discipline and accuracy? If the FO is uncomfortable unless he descends 10 miles early then he shouldn’t be in the seat. If the FO wans extra fuel he can have it...if he can justify carrying it. He can’t have it just because. Your points are valid, yet you seem like the worst kind of captain to pull out of the hat... You should maybe think a little about that. There are several ways to tell a guy the go to hell, but an elegant captain will make his FO look forward to the trip. You Sir, are not one of those... |
10 miles is about 75 seconds in time. If a FO needs a little time to keep up or get ahead of the game, a good Captain will allow that. As the FO gains confidence, a good Captain will encourage a decrease in such allowance, all in the name of efficiency. Later a good Captain will demonstrate that even 10 miles after top of descent can be salvaged. TOD is rarely a hard limit. ATC will often change it anyway. A good Captain will never put his faith totally in the FMS and hopefully will encourage FOs to keep their mental arithmetic going (schools do still teach that, I hope...). Similarly with fuel. A good Captain will encourage the FO to have a ballpark figure in mind even before looking at the dispatch papers. Ditto take-off weight - Emirates should by now know the value of this. |
A good captain will encourage his first officer to question what the box is telling him by cross referencing the navaids.Unfortunately modern societies use of technology has led to a generation who trusts technology implicitly. I grew up in an analogue age and still use multiple sources to validate what the box is telling me. Recently one of my FOs was caught out because of the way he had sequenced the box and hadn’t validated it against the ILS-DME or the VOR on the far end of the runway.The difference in track miles was twelve and it left us a bit high. An orbit sorted it out. |
I would expect a new captain to maintain SOPs and not start creating his own 'better' ones now that he/she is in the left seat ie. "I know its not SOP but this is far more efficient / this is the way XYZ do it".
Also I hope that they understand the difference between being a line captain and a training captain. I have seen new captains who seem to blur the difference and end up trying to fly the airplane through the FO just because the FO is not doing it the same way they would. This often leads to things going tits up because you end up either not knowing who's in control or you have a flight path that is a mixture between the captains and FOs, which normally means its not the correct one given other parameters. |
Originally Posted by Life on top
(Post 10217502)
Your points are valid, yet you seem like the worst kind of captain to pull out of the hat... You should maybe think a little about that. There are several ways to tell a guy the go to hell, but an elegant captain will make his FO look forward to the trip. You Sir, are not one of those... Perhaps YOUR points would be valid if we communicated on the flight deck via PPRuNe. Now, back in your box. |
Originally Posted by Mach E Avelli
(Post 10217622)
10 miles is about 75 seconds in time. If a FO needs a little time to keep up or get ahead of the game, a good Captain will allow that. As the FO gains confidence, a good Captain will encourage a decrease in such allowance, all in the name of efficiency. Later a good Captain will demonstrate that even 10 miles after top of descent can be salvaged. TOD is rarely a hard limit. ATC will often change it anyway. A good Captain will never put his faith totally in the FMS and hopefully will encourage FOs to keep their mental arithmetic going (schools do still teach that, I hope...). Similarly with fuel. A good Captain will encourage the FO to have a ballpark figure in mind even before looking at the dispatch papers. Ditto take-off weight - Emirates should by now know the value of this. |
Let’s talk about my watch |
Can’t you just post a picture of it? |
Chesty
It is a FO watch, it runs 15 min fast!
|
I believe the vernacular is ‘LOL’. :ok: |
Do I need another reason? |
It goes like this:
" Son , we are taking extra fuel , how much and why?" Most are happy, if not all. I take plog fuel ca 20% of the time. I am not a glider pilot. I have never diverted due to fuel and never will. Some dingbat here will shortly call me , old , inefficient , but not bold. I committed once in to Gatwick and landed with 1900kg. no drama, but a divert to STN would certainly have been. SOP , policy and statistics are fine and dandy but Murphy has a tendency to book a seat when he see a chance to stack some Swiss Chees. I did take plog fuel the day I got a Spit Flap on approach a few years ago. Stuck at 0.4 and 0.8, with 24 minutes of QRH and a rather odd attitude on approach. Had fuel for another try, if needed and to alternate. Nailed it on the first try! We do LIDO and it is fantastically accurate ,but there is little margin for unforeseen delay runway change etc. Pilotbrief was way off the mark at times, mostly fuel rich. So if a FO wants plog fuel he better get it right, every time. Regards Cpt B |
Perfect example today out of LHR. FO Very experienced (8000hrs I reckon) said maybe we should take more fuel for the TS delays on departure. He suggests 1T.
I said good Idea, but I though about 0.5 T might be better. After several tech delays and the weather we get off. But while we were waiting I told him that I wished I taken his 1T idea |
Conan
I rest my case. I do a LOT of Dead Head at first class, and I have seen delay up to 55 minutes were crew had to get more fuel for different reasons. ( Remote de-ice. Slott change after startup. Updated flightplan with new winds or reroute with 200kg more fuel required.) This summer with minimum Plog fuel is a good plan for a diversion. Or pushing my luck, and I do not rely on luck. As the SAS Purser said to the new Fueler in CPH when asked": Cpt, how much fuel do You want , Sir?" " Well ; Son ,topp Her up" The Cpt and Fo showed up ca 30 min later and was told by the Cabin Capt they were all good to go. 2 hrs later they pushed after some DE- fueling to max landing weight on the 2 hr sector. Turns out the 737 takes ca 24 000kg of jet A1. Off setting some crab pots! You All Have a Good Day. Cpt B |
Well this thread has been a bit of an eye opener.
I don't class myself as the most experienced skipper out there, but with some of you I would question your airline hiring policies/HR and training department if they are managing to hire characters to the RHS that don't fit the company culture (and yes I'm aware that there are substantial variations in the role of FO even within UK companies never mind the rump EU). When I am on long haul duty I don't allow the mostly experienced FO's to act as 'co-captain' on their sector. I bleedin well expect it!! These are supposed to be, and invariably are, my easy day out. I've found most of our cadets to be top notch and very keen. Selfies, Instagram, Facetwit and that rot? Prepare for a lot of ribbing and mickey taking from yours truly in the cruise and downroute :E |
Seeing as it's mentioned a lot in this thread, I often wonder if PLOG fuel obsessives are aware that if you take extra fuel and end up not needing it, the majority of it is still in the tank at the end of the flight.
Taking an extra tonne on my flight today would've added 78kg to the trip fuel. It's summer, it's busy, there are thunderstorms, it's hot and the APU is needed for longer, BA insist on blocking the runway at Gatwick every other day, the alternates are busy, the level on the flight plan may not be available. If an extra tonne costs the company £53 (per today's prices on today's flight), but almost certainly gets the aircraft to where its meant to go, how much does a diversion cost? Not accounting for the reduced stress of not finding yourself in a low fuel state. A bad captain for me is one that insists on flight plan fuel unless there's an exceptionalreason to take more, just to tow the company line or for their own personal pride. "Summer" should be a reason to take enough to be comfortable. Thread creep over. |
I don’t think anyone has advocated only taking flight plan fuel... |
Originally Posted by Vokes55
(Post 10221139)
Seeing as it's mentioned a lot in this thread, I often wonder if PLOG fuel obsessives are aware that if you take extra fuel and end up not needing it, the majority of it is still in the tank at the end of the flight.
Taking an extra tonne on my flight today would've added 78kg to the trip fuel. It's summer, it's busy, there are thunderstorms, it's hot and the APU is needed for longer, BA insist on blocking the runway at Gatwick every other day, the alternates are busy, the level on the flight plan may not be available. If an extra tonne costs the company £53 (per today's prices on today's flight), but almost certainly gets the aircraft to where its meant to go, how much does a diversion cost? Not accounting for the reduced stress of not finding yourself in a low fuel state. A bad captain for me is one that insists on flight plan fuel unless there's an exceptionalreason to take more, just to tow the company line or for their own personal pride. "Summer" should be a reason to take enough to be comfortable. Thread creep over. |
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
I don’t claim to know and will never know it all, but I consider myself a fairly experienced SFO and if my skipper is not looking to take an extra half to one tonne on an average summer’s day heading westbound then I’d be piping up and suggesting otherwise, that’s my job. The skipper has overall responsibility for the flight however, whether it’s my sector or not, and If they still don’t want to take more than min fuel then I’d be happy that I’ve done my bit (unless there’s a mandatory safety reason to take more). Yes, we mighn’t need it, but even on a good day, in my experience, we usually end up needing it and I’d be watching that fuel like a hawk. Any diversion required for a splash and dash is then on their head. Luckily this scenario rarely happens in our airline - we’re all pretty experienced, respect one another as equally important parts of a professional team and we’re singing from the same hymn sheet from the get-go. Good recruitment, good training, good CRM, mutual respect, some experience of the routes being flown and a sense of humour and you’ve got the perfect recipe for a good trip/day out, whichever seat you’re sat in, whether the guy’s into watches, cars or plane spotting! |
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
|
Originally Posted by Windshearescape
(Post 10221325)
I could have taken plog fuel on every single flight I've ever done and not come unstuck once. Fuel is a decision based on mathematics not emotion .
Fuel is based on experience and common sense, not 'emotion'. PLOG fuel is a guide, not a target, and I'd be more interested to hear somebody justify why we should take PLOG fuel, than why we shouldn't. |
One answer to that, from a previous company was that they would far rather everyone take plog fuel (assuming no glaringly obvious reason to take more) on every flight, and suffer the occasional divert because things didn't work out, than have everyone taking extra just in case, which statistically isn't needed and have the extra burn.
Now I'm not suggesting that you just blindly follow what the company says, but at the end of the day, in theory, it's their rules and their choice how to play the game. If they would rather increase the risk of diverting that is up to them as long as it doesn't incur safety issues. It's a bit like the argument of speeding up when running late to try to 'fix' the schedule. If the company would rather suffer poor time keeping and dissatisfied pax then that is their call. Understand that I am not saying we take plog fuel when the destination is on limits and all alternates are iffy and likely to fill up with other diverts. That would be silly. |
I think the divert talk is just a misnomer, let's face it, if you're taking plog fuel the chances are the weather is fine. How many captains here would divert if you reached your alternate fuel rather than commit to the destination intended? Probably not that many. I've taken plog fuel for the last 18 months on the ejet (in good weather) and have never even come close to eating into my alternate fuel and that includes flying into most of the major airports in Europe, flying lower and includes 2 or more times round the hold. There's no need for extra if you know the first fuel check is going to throw up an extra 4-500kg, it's all about trust in what's presented and that's where experience play's it's part. Horses for courses but if that makes me a "bad captain" in Vokes55's eyes then cest la vie.
|
It’s probably the contingency fuel. |
Originally Posted by Deano777
(Post 10222039)
I think the divert talk is just a misnomer, let's face it, if you're taking plog fuel the chances are the weather is fine. How many captains here would divert if you reached your alternate fuel rather than commit to the destination intended? Probably not that many. I've taken plog fuel for the last 18 months on the ejet (in good weather) and have never even come close to eating into my alternate fuel and that includes flying into most of the major airports in Europe, flying lower and includes 2 or more times round the hold. There's no need for extra if you know the first fuel check is going to throw up an extra 4-500kg, it's all about trust in what's presented and that's where experience play's it's part. Horses for courses but if that makes me a "bad captain" in Vokes55's eyes then cest la vie.
|
Yep it must be a base variable. Took off this morning with plog fuel, first check was +390, entered a hold the other end and that check indicated +440. Anyway we digress.
|
How many minutes worth of fuel are people landing with typically? At LHR, it can be 40-45 mins worth frequently. |
Nope, that is using LGW as an alternate with statistical contingency fuel that is burnt after engine start for whatever reason. Sometimes it is necessary to commit to destination (LHR) in the hold. I wouldn’t say frequently, but it isn’t a rare occasion on the 777. I frequently see remaining fuel figures of 4.0 in the tech log (on the 777) and have landed with similar on more than one occasion last year. The point I’m trying to make is that different airlines have different fuel policies...comparing Taking PLOG fuel with Saudia is different to taking PLOG fuel with BA, for example. It would be more accurate to compare how many mins of fuel are remaining at shutdown. |
I plan to land with 1 hr 20 mins in tanks on a nice day in the 737-800. A normal missed approach with vectors sees me doing the second shot with one hours fuel onboard. ( it uses 20 mins of fuel but takes 12 minutes). A flap non-normal would see me doing the high speed approach with low fuel lights on and approx 50 mins of fuel onboard. |
Just as a matter of interest, for the next sector it will cost 572 kg to carry the extra 1000 kg of fuel. So it DOES matter whether you carry extra fuel because you feel like it. It is also why companies would rather get 1 diversion from 100 sectors with min op fuel, than no diversions with 100 flights carrying extra fuel. |
That is very interesting. I’ve never flown heavy jets so I didn’t realise how different it is. On the narrow bodies it’s more like 57kg than 570. In addition to the small cost we get more bang for our buck, a tonne gives us nearly half an hour, what would you get? Ten minutes? |
Originally Posted by Yournamehere
(Post 10223916)
I've seen less drift flying through a winter jet steam.
Thread title - "FOs expectations of a new Captain." Actual discussion - "I'm a Captain and this is how I decide what my fuel order is going to be." |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:02. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.