80 kt call out

[svcta]

Nice condescending attitude in your post.
Where did I ever say our reject items are a moving target?
Our procedure is that anyone can call abort prior to V1 (this was relatively new). We are both typed and very experienced and always fly together.
However the point of the post was that runway available was more than 50% longer than the calculated BFL and the event happened well below V1.

Everything we do in aviation is conditional which is why we ALWAYS brief for the situation. What are you going to do when presented with a situation that is not covered by your "cold, hard rote memory" reject items?
Do you always brief for a runway incursion after 80kts? It's happened.
Is your night IFR contaminated runway brief the same as day VFR dry runway brief?

You might want to experience one of those unique and unusual events in the sim before you go passing judgement.

I knew I would get my comeuppance for that post. I was in a hurry, so please forgive the tone....if there can be such a thing in a typed sentence. I wasn't trying to be snotty.

A runway incursion? Really? Do you brief for that? To use that as an example is just being silly, who in their right mind would elect to continue in that case, unless the only hope was to nurse the airplane in to the air to avoid the incurrrrrerrerr? Again, off we go in to the wild hypothetical yonder. Yes, if all of a sudden there were a fire truck in front of us, I'm sure our collective instantaneous decision would be to abort.

Why is your night IFR contaminated runway brief fundamentally different from any other? The only things I can think of off the top of my head that change may be how we actually perform the reject maneuver. What do we do with the TRs, what kind of braking to expect? Or maybe what to do with the landing gear after we're in the air. Other than that the only real difference in that situation is mainly a taxi brief. Do we leave the flaps up? When do we turn the anti-ice on, etc. I mean, we already have a our takeoff data calculated and it looks identical to a regular takeoff when you look at everything except the numbers may physically shift a bit. Our manufacturers don't give us shiftable data to use depending on how we think things are going. "Adjust distance reuired by -100 feet for every bit you are less concerned about braking action" is not a line we're likely to ever see in an AFM. The fact is that they present these numbers to us in a standard way, reflecting the worst-case contamination data from testing. It eliminates us having to interpret things on the fly.

But the lousier the weather, the worse the runway conditions, the more important it is to have a standard set of operating rules to revert to when things start to go wrong, in my opinion. It allows us to have a place to go when we're thinking too hard and things are going wrong. Thinking on the fly and making snap decisions about things may sound exciting, but this stuff should not be exciting. None of us will win any awards for being the fastest thinker at the airport when you reject a takeoff for a popped CRT at night on a contaminated runway that you (not you, Rice, the royal you...all of us) thought was long enough to get stopped on. This is the point. Its not just my point, though.

Read the advisory circular from the FAA, I'm not just making this stuff up.

 

[BoilerUP]

From my experience(only 121/mil), this is NOT the norm. Every company I've worked for has made it clear that there is only one PIC when it comes to a reject. It's his call...... period. The F/O can call out any condition that he feels might warrant the Captain's attention, but the Captain is going to make the reject call.

There is way too much variation in experience in the right seat of a 121 bird to give the F/O the option to just grab a handful of throttles and reject anytime he feels the need.

Calling an abort is not the same as actually initiating an abort.

At my previous airline (a regional that had newhire FOs with <1000hrs), either CA or FO could call an abort, and whoever was PF (CA or FO) could initiate an abort.

What does it say for the culture AND training of a 121 operation if it believes First Officers cannot be trusted to properly execute a RTO? Especially at an airline such as FedEx, where its not exactly like FOs are newbie ab-initio pilots?

 

[svcta]

That's a bad attitude to have if you're flying a jet. Just sayin'.

Why do you say that?

To me , flying a jet is the most scientific form of flying there is aside from maybe trying to go so space in an airplane.

If I'm flying a Mustang my ears, eyes, feet, hands, and butt are all in tune with the airplane and constantly interpreting things, and I agree that in that environment there is far less room for "robotic" flying. "Hmm...the Merlin just gave me a kick. It's okay that was a normal one. If it does it too me again in less than 30 seconds or so maybe I'll clip off a half an inch. Or add 25 RPM. Or both. We'll see." There are a lot of things going on that require a mechanical knowledge and an instinct about that airplane that I am only beginning to develop. That is an art and a challenge that gives me a rubbery one.

Modern jets are not designed to give us that level of feedback. They present to us condensed information that was interpreted by a computer. There is precious little room for artistic interpretation with this information when the Le crap frappe le fan in a takeoff roll. Up in the air flying around, dancing with the clouds, and all that may be different. Mainly because we have time to really get in to solving most problems.

A great aviator once said "Up there you don't have time to think. If you think, you're dead." (Not germane, just plain hilarious)

Edit: As someone said earlier, we're discussing things that seem to be fundamental to most of our personal identities. I, for one, am not trying to whiz in anyone's Cherios. This has been a great discussion so far and I have certainly enjoyed it.

 

[rettofly]

Pilots tend to play the "What if" game into the nth degree. I mean “What if” 8 goats crossed the runway and were sucked into both engines after 80 kts, would it be OK to continue the take off?

My limit is six goats.

 

[Airboss]

Available data indicates that over 75% of all RTOs are initiated at speeds of 80 knots or less. These RTOs almost never result in an accident.
Inherently, low speed RTOs are safer and less demanding than high speed RTOs. At the other extreme, about 2% of the RTOs are initiated at speeds above 120 knots. Overrun accidents and incidents that occur principally stem from these high speed events.

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/training/media/takeoff_safety.pdf

No direct answer here, but some decent info.

 

[gern_blanston]

Why do you say that?

Because it's true.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

From my experience(only 121/mil), this is NOT the norm. Every company I've worked for has made it clear that there is only one PIC when it comes to a reject. It's his call...... period. The F/O can call out any condition that he feels might warrant the Captain's attention, but the Captain is going to make the reject call.

There is way too much variation in experience in the right seat of a 121 bird to give the F/O the option to just grab a handful of throttles and reject anytime he feels the need.

Maybe your perspective is the result of flying in a small corporate setting with highly experienced pilots that fly together all the time and swap seats every leg. Maybe the "anyone can reject" option works there but it really wouldn't be an option at most airlines.

Shows you and your company's opinion of FO's. Do you make them carry your bags and get you coffee?

 

[Hugh Johnson]

My limit is six goats.

Billy goat or mountain goat?

 

[svcta]

Because it's true.

Oh. I disagree.

 

[svcta]

There is way too much variation in experience in the right seat of a 121 bird to give the F/O the option to just grab a handful of throttles and reject anytime he feels the need.

Maybe your perspective is the result of flying in a small corporate setting with highly experienced pilots that fly together all the time and swap seats every leg. Maybe the "anyone can reject" option works there but it really wouldn't be an option at most airlines.

Actually, it was this way at the only airline I ever worked for. Nobody ever said that the FO was going to reach up and gab a handfull of anybody's anything. Those belong to the PF. Which brings up another question.....does the FO ever get a takeoff where you work? Can he call his own reject if he feels the airplane heading for a ditch or does he have to wait for the captain to call it? And if the captain has sole authority to call an RTO, it seems like a lot of work to lay on any one crewmember. Wouldn't if be safest to in your scenario for the CA to monitor all takeoffs while the FO performed the commanded tasks? This would ensure that PF and PNF duties were balanced and that the guy making the tough choices could focus solely on that task.

Of course, since the CA is such a VIP an RTO called by the FO, even if he were the PF, could wind up in a call to the CP and the NTSB. No good to be the HMFIC when the CRM got tossed behind os on the RW during the TO.

Isn't it cool to be a pilot? I mean, none of my friends ever get to even say 'roger'. Sad lot, them.