Classic Interview Question

[fly26]

Guys,

What is your opinion on how to answer the age-old interview question --- "What are you going to do if your Capt proceeds below the DH with nothing insight?"

I'm assuming there is no fire, no extremely low fuel situation, the Capt is alert and responsive, or any other reason for dong so. I think I would alert the Capt that he is below DH and then tell the tower that were going missed. If we got to 100' and still nothing insight and no action by the Capt after my 100' callout then I'd take the controls and proceed with the missed approach.

What do you guys think?

 

[Cornelius]

I was asked that question at an Eagle interview and all I said was "Eagle Flight 1242, missed approach, rwy not in sight." Thats all the interviewer wanted to hear.

A series of events will happen in the captains head at that time, if he/she has commons sense, he/she would go missed. At the same time the landing clearance is cancelled, the flight is expected to execute the missed, everybody on the radio is listening like company aircraft, and its on the CVR for review.

 

[AZaviator]

Cornelius is right. I answered that kind of interview the same way at Mesa and Eagle and seemed to please the interviewers. No follow up questions were asked and we moved on.

 

[Wiggums]

What happens if you tell the captian "DH, go missed", and just as you key the mike to tell tower you break out and the captain lands it. The captian is pissed, how are you going to deal with that situation?

 

[yipstick]

Take over

If the captain decides to go below mins with nothing in sight, take over the aicrcraft and get the hell out of there! Not only is this the correct answer on for any self-respecting airline's interview, it's the only thing you, as a self-respecting individual, should do. How dare anyone place you, and/or the pax, in danger! What gives him the right to perform anything for which he was not trained and is assuredly deemed unsafe by the FAA?

If there are any repercussions or ramifications persuant to your decision to stay alive and physically intact following such an event, then quit your job and go somewhere else, either in aviation or outside thereof. No one or thing in civilian aviation is worth risking your life for............especially for simply quelling your fears of reprisals or future career detriments! If during any subsequent interviews you are questioned about your aforementioned decision, leave that interview and go somewhere else as well!

The government has spent untold billions of dollars trying to find out why airplanes crash and how to prevent their future occurences. The cockpit voice recorder is one of the devices spawned from their quest and it is not intended to defend you following a cockpit confrontation. It is there to allow the dead to speak with a very loud voice and appologize for not speaking up sooner. The primary contributing factors in most aircraft accidents have been determined to be "lack of crew communication, coordination and assertion"................in other words,"CRM." Which, by the way does not stand for, "Captain runs the Machine."

Bruised egos and timid subordinate crew members have long been the reasons why so many unnecessary and easily-preventable accidents (on purposes?) have occured. It's time for this nonsense to stop!

Modern aircraft don't have two pilots just so one of them can "run the radios." All of my F/Os are explicitly directed to call my attention to anything that they may feel is amiss. If I'm wrong, I say to them, "Thank you." If they're wrong, I say, "Thank you for questioning me and not being afraid to speak up." There should never be any embarrassment or hesitation when it comes to questioning the "other guy."

I'd much rather be challenged by an F/O (even when I'm right) than be buried because he was trying not to hurt my feelings or his career.

Careers are replaceable, lives are not!

Oh, by the way, Wiggums, if your captain gets pissed because you "called the tower" right at the MAP, his actions are probably justified since he didn't tell you to do so (Did he?).

If he did tell you to call the tower, he's an idiot for geting pissed and an even bigger one for being in such a hurry to have you "call the tower" at such a task-oriented time. Shouldn't he be worried about aviating rather than communicating?

Don't ever die "with a mike in your hand!"

 

[bobbysamd]

Decent below mins

I stumbled here just for fun and am enjoying this classic discussion.

I agree with the above. I certainly would take a miss. Rules are rules and safety is safety. At least in my experience, when your shooting an ILS to mins the runway environment comes on gradually, in shades of gray and not black and white, i.e. you can't see anything and all of a sudden it's severe clear. For the interview, though, it is important to come right to the point because if you don't you will antagonize the interviewers.

Good luck with your interview.

 

[beytzim]

you guys are making a easy solution quite complicated.

it's simple, below DH tell ATC you're going missed.

Then the interviewer says, "what happens if he continues nevertheless"

Don't fight over the controls unless its a life-death situation. Simply raise the gear!. There is not enough time to recycle, and now the Captain has to go missed - hating your guts, but who cares.


beytzim

 

[bigsky]

I personally didnt like that last idea too much.. Even if Captain gives it max effort it is pretty common to touch mains down on a go around started that low.. and what if he didnt see your unexpected maneuver and continues approach?

 

[frenchy]

Do not ever raise the landing gear when you are a 100 ft above the runway , you do not want to add that kind of confusing element in a stress condition.
I can guarantee you that if you tell the interviewer that you will raise the gear you 'll never hear from him again.

 

[AWACoff]

I like to go by the "3 strikes" rule. Who knows, the captain may be having a seizure, dead, etc. Give them 3 chances to respond. If they are unresponsive (ie. telling you to F off, singing "I'm a little teacup), it is your duty to assume command. Obviously in those 3 chances, you as an FO are going to want to do your darndest to establish communications with the Captain. I know I'll take a lot of heat for daring to talk about taking the controls from a captain but so be it. Airplanes have crashed and people have died due to FOs being too afraid to take control. When I was asked that question in my interview, that is essentially the answer I gave (a bit more concise however).

 

[EAP]

When I was finally hired by a major airline in '98 I had to go through this rite of passage question too. I said I'd clearly follow SOP and state missed approach, then when no response, I'd say the captain's name and tell him to go missed, then I'd tap his arm (tactile communication) and tell him again, while using the "3 strikes your out" idea that he may be incapacitated. While transmitting over the radio I was going missed approach, I'd advance the throttles in a controlled way and hit TOGA, raising the nose for the missed also.

They seemed to like the answer, all in the room nodded their heads and one guy asked what I'd do when the Capt. went ape doodo and said "you're screwed buddy, you'll never fly another trip!" Then it's time to diffuse the situation, get him involved with planning the rest of the missed approach to a safe landing. Then when opn the ground, explain your situation and be ready to back it up. I then mentioned I'd have absolutely no problem defending my position in a hearing, and that the passenger's lives are all counting on the right thing to be done. If my career was going to be jeopardized, I could live with that in the short term knowing if the right thing was done, lives would be saved, and the airline would be kept out of ruin. In the long run I knew I'd be the one retiring at age 60 when the truth came out. They all liked that too, and I guess when I made it into the next groundschool I figured I'd answered it right!