Holy Backstabbing, Batman!!!!

[A Squared]

SO much for brotherhood and all that....

I was reading some NTSB orders and came across this: NTSB Decision

It happened on a FED EX flight somewhere over the Pacific between Tokyo and Anchorage. Crew was a Capt, FO, and a relief FO. FO was resting, off the flight deck, Captain got up to take a whiz, and as I understand from the docket, instead of taking a seat like he was supposed to, the RFO stood outside the cockpit with his arms folded, then turned the captain into the FAA for leaving the flight deck unattended. Unattended because he (the RFO) didn't take a seat at the controls as the Capt assumed he would. The captain lost his certificates, revoked, not just suspended, and lost his job.

From the Docket:

"While the record suggests that the RFO was unhappy with his seat assignment on this flight, it does not disclose the origin of, or reasons for, his pre-existing dislike of respondent. In any event, although the fate of the RFO is not clear from this record, he appears to have succeeded, by deliberately refraining from entering the cockpit after the respondent left, in having respondent fired from his employment with Federal Express after a 25-year violation-free career."


I dunno, maybe the captain was a D1ckhead and was to blame for the hard feelings, but even so, you gotta be some kind of low to destroy a man over a personal greivence. How does this guy sleep at night? I guess its a bad idea to give the RFO a seat he doesn't like.

Wow!

 

[T-Gates]

What a douchebag! That guy must have had some beef with the captain....

 

[TonyC]

Not so fast, A Squared...

SO much for brotherhood and all that....

I was reading some NTSB orders and came across this: NTSB Decision

It happened on a FED EX flight somewhere over the Pacific between Tokyo and Anchorage. Crew was a Capt, FO, and a relief FO. FO was resting, off the flight deck, Captain got up to take a whiz, and as I understand from the docket, instead of taking a seat like he was supposed to, the RFO stood outside the cockpit with his arms folded, then turned the captain into the FAA for leaving the flight deck unattended. Unattended because he (the RFO) didn't take a seat at the controls as the Capt assumed he would. The captain lost his certificates, revoked, not just suspended, and lost his job.

From the Docket:

"While the record suggests that the RFO was unhappy with his seat assignment on this flight, it does not disclose the origin of, or reasons for, his pre-existing dislike of respondent. In any event, although the fate of the RFO is not clear from this record, he appears to have succeeded, by deliberately refraining from entering the cockpit after the respondent left, in having respondent fired from his employment with Federal Express after a 25-year violation-free career."


I dunno, maybe the captain was a D1ckhead and was to blame for the hard feelings, but even so, you gotta be some kind of low to destroy a man over a personal greivence. How does this guy sleep at night? I guess its a bad idea to give the RFO a seat he doesn't like.

Wow!

The flight was Hong Kong to Anchorage, but that's not very important.

The RFO was not in the cockpit. The Captain then allowed the FO to leave the cockpit, leaving himself as the only pilot crewmember in the cockpit. He did not instruct the RFO to assume the FO's duty station. He did not call the FO back in. While the FO was still out of the cockpit, the Captain left his "assigned duty station ... without insuring that an assigned relief pilot or second-in-command was at their assigned duty station. As a result, no pilot crewmember was in the cockpit until ... some time later." Even leaving the airplane pilotless for 30 seconds is inexcusable.

It's not like the RFO was standing in the cockpit and saw the Captain get up. The first time the RFO saw the Captain in this case was when he opened the door to leave the cockpit, at which point the airplane was already pilotless! I didn't find the part in there where the RFO, as you described, folded his arms. Even if the RFO had assumed the duty station as the Captain claimed he assumed he would, the airplane would have still been left pilotless, even if briefly, because of the Captain's actions, not the RFO's. I repeat, it wasn't pilotless because of the RFO, it was pilotless because of the Captain.

I also did not read that the RFO "turned him in." Notice there was also a mechanic jumpseating on the flight. Don't be so hasty to accuse. (You might be right, but it doesn't follow from the docket you reference.)

Finally, you might recall there was no "Brotherhood" at Federal Express in February of '92 save the Purple koolaid drinking plantation workers that worshipped Massah Smith. (Different color koolaid, different decade, VERY similar story.)

 

[A Squared]

>>>>The flight was Hong Kong to Anchorage

I suppose that I could argue that the majority of a HongKong - Anchorage flight would also between Tokyo an Anchorage geographically speaking, so my statement was probably correct but that would be stretching it a little You're right, I didn't read carefully.

Like you said, that's not too important.

"It's not like the RFO was standing in the cockpit and saw the Captain get up. The first time the RFO saw the Captain in this case was when he opened the door to leave the cockpit,"

It appears from my reading that the door was alreay open, and the RFO was standing right outside the cockpit door. If I recall from the last time I was on a FEDEX MD11, it would be pretty tough for the RFO to not see the captain leave his seat. You are right, what the captain *should* have done, was instruct the RFO to sit in the FO's duty station *before* getting up himself. So, yes, he was in violation of the regs. Tell me though, can you honestly say that no FED EX MD-11 ever had less than one ass in a duty station at all times while over the Pacific on a long night? Not even for the time it takes for a quick whiz?

Anyway, The docket makes it pretty clear that the board believes it was an intentional act on the RFOs part to not take a duty station when it was obvious that he was supposed to.

The part about he folded arms; you won't find that in the order, I added that, it's a literary device, it was intended to paint a picture of the RFO petulantly standing there, refusing to do what he knew he was supposed to be doing. I didn't think that it would be taken quite so literally. I apologize for using a metaphor that went over your head.

As for who turned the captain in, notice I said "as I understand it" That was intended to convey that I was drawing conclusions, perhaps I should have made that point more clearly. So, which of the 4 persons on the aircraft do you think ratted the captain out? The F/O, who wasn't on the flight deck, and likely was asleep? Possibly, but not likely. The captain himself? Somewhat less likely. The mechainc? Perhaps, but as a suspect, I would rate him a long way behind the RFO who obviously had an axe to grind, and who placed his vendetta against the captain ahead of doing his duty.

 

[WrightAvia]

And people keep telling me "pilotless airliners" are sci-fiction.

 

[Huck]

Don't have time to read the Docket just now, but wasn't somebody supposed to be on oxygen?

 

[TonyC]

Pilotless MD-11 ? ? ?

It appears from my reading that the door was alreay open, and the RFO was standing right outside the cockpit door. If I recall from the last time I was on a FEDEX MD11, it would be pretty tough for the RFO to not see the captain leave his seat. You are right, what the captain *should* have done, was instruct the RFO to sit in the FO's duty station *before* getting up himself.

IF the Captain was plainly visible to the RFO, then the reverse must also have been true. Clearly, the CAPT should have directed the RFO to occupy a seat before the CAPT got up.

So, yes, he was in violation of the regs.

HE admitted as much. The only thing he disputed is when the airplane first became pilotless (30 minutes after the FO left, or 1 hr -- as if that matters), and who was to blame, after the intitial 30 seconds or so, for it remaining pilotless.

Tell me though, can you honestly say that no FED EX MD-11 ever had less than one ass in a duty station at all times while over the Pacific on a long night? Not even for the time it takes for a quick whiz?

To my knowledge, it's only happened once, and we're talking about that instance right here. I'd sooner climb over the back seat of a 172 fishing for a dropped pencil, leaving the 172 pilotless and grossly out of trim, than leave a MD-11 pilotless. Yes, I can honestly say that.

Anyway, The docket makes it pretty clear that the board believes it was an intentional act on the RFOs part to not take a duty station when it was obvious that he was supposed to.

I beleive the RFO used poor judgment in recognizing an unsafe situation and electing to do nothing to immediately remedy it. In my opinion, he should have immediately walked into the cockpit and sat down in the Captain's seat. He could have at the same time called on the FO to occupy the FO seat. If he subsequently felt it in the best interest of aviation safety to report the actions of the Captain, he most certainly would have been within his rights to do so, and the outcome for the Captain would have likely been the same. OR, it could have resulted in a knock-down, drag-out at FL330 over the North Pacific, who knows.

The part about he folded arms; you won't find that in the order, I added that, it's a literary device, it was intended to paint a picture of the RFO petulantly standing there, refusing to do what he knew he was supposed to be doing. I didn't think that it would be taken quite so literally. I apologize for using a metaphor that went over your head.

You meant over my head figuratively, right? Not an allusion to my stature? (By the way, I made up FL330 -- I have no facts to support what altitude they were cruising at. )

As for who turned the captain in, ...

So, which of the 4 persons on the aircraft do you think ratted the captain out? The F/O, who wasn't on the flight deck, and likely was asleep? Possibly, but not likely. The captain himself? Somewhat less likely. The mechainc? Perhaps, but as a suspect, I would rate him a long way behind the RFO who obviously had an axe to grind, and who placed his vendetta against the captain ahead of doing his duty.

Since we've established that conjecture is OK...

The FO was probably at the galley preparing or eating his meal, and likely awake for the entire event -- just not as close to the door as the RFO.

The RFO, I'm guessing, was only near the door because he was standing and talking with the RFO.

And the mechanic, I'm guessing, was sitting in one of the rear-facing jumpseats behind the cockpit wall, perhaps participating in the same discussion.

I'm also guessing (educated this time -- after all, their names are on the docket) that the FO and RFO were former Flying Tigers pilots, and the mechanic (since he was jumpseating from Asia) was also likely a former Flying Tigers employee.

It's unclear what the background of the Captain was, but given the tenure alluded to in the docket, I'd suggest that he was an original Federal Express employee.

Given that, and the unease in the company at that time, I might put even money on all three. Add in the history of comapny jumpseaters at the company, though, and I'd bet on the Jumpseater. We have numerous examples of pilots walking the carpet because of jumpseaters complaining about how we do our jobs, even though they, for the most part (clerks, handlers, couriers, sales reps, customer service agents) haven't a CLUE about how we do our jobs. Management has traditionally been more prone to stand a pilot tall to answer a ludicrous charge, than to assume the jumpseater didn't know what they were talking about.

Anyway... the bottom line, in my opinion, is the RFO was remiss in not immediately occupying a seat when he observed them both empty.

The Captain was irresponsible, grossly negligent, and demonstrated total lack of judgment, certainly lack of ATP caliber judgment, by leaving the MD-11 pilotless, even if only briefly.

All three witnesses, holders of FAA-issued certificates, had a responsibility to report the actions of the Captain, and would have been remiss in not doing so.

And yes, Huck, the Captain should have been on oxygen while he was in the cockpit alone. He was also charged with violating that rule, and admitted guilt. I don't think he lost his certificate for that infraction, I think it was the reckless aspect of leaving the airplane pilotless that sealed his fate.

I believe the RFO and FO are still employed by FedEx -- perhaps I can bend their ears one day to gain more insight than the docket provides.

 

[A Squared]

>>>>>IF the Captain was plainly visible to the RFO, then the reverse must also have been true. Clearly, the CAPT should have directed the RFO to occupy a seat before the CAPT got up.

Umm, yes, I though I said that, I'm not sure what your point is. Yeah, the captain is guilty of the infractions. I've never stated otherwise. The RFO's actions don't mitigate the captain's lapses, but they did make the situation worse.

Here's my point, 3 possible scenarios:

1) The captain directs the RFO to sit in FO's seat, and when the RFO is seated, the captain gets up and leaves the flight deck.

2) The captain gets up out of his seat, and the RFO sits down in at one of the duty stations while the captain is off the flight deck. The airplane is pilotless for a brief period

3) The captain gets up out of his seat and the RFO remains out of the cockpit. The aircraft is pilotless for the entire time the captain is off the flight deck.

Now we all agree that #1 is what should have happened... but it didn't. That's the captain's fault. So we're left with eithe 2 or 3. Obviously, situation #3 is much less safe than #2, and it was the RFOs deliberate actions which made #3 the actual Scenario insted of #2.

>>>>>"If he subsequently felt it in the best interest of aviation safety to report the actions of the Captain, he most certainly would have been within his rights to do so, and the outcome for the Captain would have likely been the same."

Ok, if the intent was sincerely to ensure safety, wouldn't it have been just as good, perhaps better to tell the captian directly that leaving the airplane without a pilot was unacceptable, then if that didn't work, going to Professional Standards and letting them handle it?

What was the real motive here? To ensure safety or to fu#k the captain?

>>>>I believe the RFO and FO are still employed by FedEx


I would hope the RFO isn't. His deliberate actions prolonged the existence of an unsafe condition. I would say that his actions are every bit as indefensible as the Captains, the difference is the Captain had the overall responsiblility for what was going on.

 

[bigD]

I'd sooner climb over the back seat of a 172 fishing for a dropped pencil, leaving the 172 pilotless and grossly out of trim, than leave a MD-11 pilotless. Yes, I can honestly say that.

I'm not disagreeing with you here, seeing as I know nothing about flying the MD-11 - but why is this?

 

[LimoDriver]

Backstabbing??

From what I've read, it seems to me the Captain is absolutely irresponsible and needs to be turned in. Had I been on that flight deck and seen this happen, I would turn his sorry a$$ in!!!

I don't think that is backstabbing - removing a captain who shows such poor judgement. Ive never heard of such a thing - leaving the flight deck totally unattended like that!!

 

[Broke in CVG]

Hey, at lease the FO and RFO moved up in seniority.... upgrade just a little sooner

 

[TonyC]

And now to add rumor...

OK, first let me caveat the following with this disclaimer. This is rumor, information passed down through several "hands." It's not first hand, or even second hand. Who knows how many hands it's passed through. My previous comments were based solely on my reading of the docket and my knowledge of the airline and the airplane. This addition is based on nothing more substantial than hearsay.

How would your opinion differ if the Captain had, during the initial climbout from Hong Kong, directed the RFO to leave the cockpit, telling him "I don't want you in my cockpit - - GET out !" ??? According to word around town, that's what the Captain did, and that's why the RFO didn't jump to enter the cockpit when he observed the unoccupied seats.

Like I said before, perhaps I'll have the oppportunity to get first-hand information at some point, but until then, chew on that.

 

[A Squared]

Tony C,

Yeah, that would make me less sympathetic to the Captain. I'm not surprised that there was something else going on, if you'll recall I allluded to that possibility in my first post.

The thing is, though; Two wrongs never make a right.

The entire crew has a collective and individual responsibility to see that the airplane is operated safely and legally. I think we all agree that the captain failed in that responsibility. I would say that the RFO failed in his responsibility too.

 

[TonyC]

Tony C,

Yeah, that would make me less sympathetic to the Captain. I'm not surprised that there was something else going on, if you'll recall I allluded to that possibility in my first post.

The thing is, though; Two wrongs never make a right.

The entire crew has a collective and individual responsibility to see that the airplane is operated safely and legally. I think we all agree that the captain failed in that responsibility. I would say that the RFO failed in his responsibility too.

I concur. I can imagine myself sitting in the judge's seat just dying for someone to accuse the RFO, because I'd gladly drop the gavel on him, too, but nobody realizes that it needs to be done. I'd speculate that they were too wrapped up trying to defend the Captain to realize the RFO should have been charged, as well.

Still, though, we're speculating.

 

[Huck]

A wise old captain once told me this: you can be a much better pilot if you will purposefully remove your emotions from the cockpit. No matter what anyone says, just keep doing your job the best you can. Hard, but a true virtue....

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

At first I found it hard to imagine how a fellow aviator could be so hostile towards another aviator but then I think about some of the self serving/promoting guys I've had for bosses and can kind of understand Having the discipline to control your emotions is a great thing but it's also frustrating!