LJDRVR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 1,134
I might not be. I have however, spent the last ten years plying my trade in two-person cockpits. Like you, I've made some observations along the way.
As is your right. Chances are your ops manual, like mine, includes a provision for just such a situation. Those come in two varieties though. First, instances where the Captain is required to fly the airplane on that leg. Operations such as monitored approaches below a certain visibility, special airports for low-mins FO's - that sort of thing. I'm sure NJ has some very specifically delineated instances spelled out and that's fine. I'm not suggesting the FO should fly on those legs.
However, you mention challenging situations - let's take your example of ASE. Several thoughts come to mind.
Without hands-on experience, your FO's airmanship will suffer. I could easily see a situation where Captain after Captain takes the "tricky" ASE leg. Come upgrade time the individual now has to step up and color, without the benefit of ever having done so before.
Is that safe?
Actually, the latest human factors research shows there is less chance of an incident or accident if the Captain is performing as the PM with the FO flying. Why? Because that way,you're not loaded up with attempting to manipulate the airplane in a challenging environment while being monitored by a less-experienced pilot. Try that sometimes - you'll find it a much lower workload situation to have the FO fly while you sit there and monitor.
So what you're saying is that as Captain, you have higher standards than what the company used to certify the crewperson? That you'll be the final arbitrator as to whether or not an FO is "polished" enough to manipulate the controls?
This brings me to the crux of my complaint. Never mind that safety is not enhanced by taking an FO's legs away from them, the most important issue is precisely that - you're taking away their flying. By doing so you demonstrate to them that you do not trust them, that you are not confident enough in your own skills, that all that drinking from the fire hose and jumping through the hoops of multiple checkrides they did in training wasn't enough. Now they've got too meet your standards, a capricious, moving set of non-defined parameters exercised inconsistently by every Captain they come into contact with?
Give me a break.
You might as well just show up for the trip and say:
"Screw you, I'm a better pilot and I'm not afraid to let you know about it."
The end effect on tone and communication is exactly the same.
Again, I'm not pointing fingers here. I used to do it myself, all under the guise of customer service and safety. I was wrong every time I did it. I didn't have enough confidence in myself and quite frankly didn't know any better, it was the environment I was brought up in.
Here's a question: who's more important to take care of, the person paying the bils in back or your flying partner?
Is the passenger going to save your behind with a critical piece of information that breaks the error chain and keeps you out of the CP's office? Will you someday be an employee of the passenger, happy that you treated him or her well in the past by not allowing that poor excuse for an FO to fly the airplane?
Of course not, but you'd better believe the two scenarios could take place with your FO, particularly the former.
You need to share legs. There is no valid argument for not allowing a qualified FO to handle the jet when it's their turn to do so. By insisting on flying it for them, you degrade safety, create a poor culture for any meaningful CRM and ignore your responsibility to help them develop their flying skills.
PS - thanks for the opportunity to debate this issue in a positive manner!:beer:
Last edited:
