So you agree to the philosophy to wrestle for the controls 100-200ft above the runway? Do you think this is safer than the capt flying the glideslope down? There are so many people saying to take controls and so many saying not to... what is it?
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Question about the "Capt. wants to descend below mins" interview question
- Thread starter QuasarZ
- Start date
- Watchers 36
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
So you agree to the philosophy to wrestle for the controls 100-200ft above the runway? Do you think this is safer than the capt flying the glideslope down? There are so many people saying to take controls and so many saying not to... what is it?
IdRtherBsailing
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Posts
- 407
No one wants to hear someone is going to fight over the controls at 200ft or less. Most FOM's, GOM's clearly state the FO will Offer his advice if he feels the A/C is being handled improperly. The capt may disregard as that is his command authority. Call the chief when you land. Chances are you will break out and land. I guess if you feel your going to die, go with your gut, but a power struggle is far more dangerous than landing below mins.
S
Snapshot
I'm with Crunk. I can't imagine an interviewer that wants to hear that you've identified a situation where the Captain may be incapacitated 15 seconds from turning the plane into a crater and you say you'd do nothing about it.
Every place I've ever worked, they trained this exact situation in the sim. If I had let the PF "land" it would've been a pink slip.
The answer to most any interview question: What is the safest course of action?
Good luck!
Every place I've ever worked, they trained this exact situation in the sim. If I had let the PF "land" it would've been a pink slip.
The answer to most any interview question: What is the safest course of action?
Good luck!
So the safest course of action is you take control? I am stuck between both answers becasue there are a lot of people that say either one. I hope the interviewer won't take it this far, and will leave it when I say called missed.
S
Snapshot
Like I said, I've seen a lot of training programs and every single one trained to take the controls and go around.
If they are not responding to callouts, you have to assume they are incapacitated. Non responsive is the definition of incapacitation.
There is a reason there are two pilots instead of one.
Always go with what is the safest course of action. What you do if your family was in the back?
If you take the plane and go around, everybody lives, every time. If you allow the plane to hit the ground with nobody driving, everybody dies.
If they are not responding to callouts, you have to assume they are incapacitated. Non responsive is the definition of incapacitation.
There is a reason there are two pilots instead of one.
Always go with what is the safest course of action. What you do if your family was in the back?
If you take the plane and go around, everybody lives, every time. If you allow the plane to hit the ground with nobody driving, everybody dies.
Don't fight a captain for the controls. If he is slumped over and dead then assume control of the aircraft. If you say something to him and he is unresponsive then you can assume he's dead or sleeping. If you call minimums and he gives you a roger and ducks below mins don't get in a yoke wrestling match with him. You will be pulling and he will be pushing and one of you will eventually let go.
I had a brand new F/O with less then a thousand hours try and grab the controls on me, because he had never seen anyone kick out alot of crab in a big crosswind just before touching down.
In his last plane (c-172) you drop one wing 15 miles out on final to correct for a crosswind. But i didn't feel like dragging a wing across the runway.
He very nearly caused us some big problems about 10 feet from the ground. Don't wrestle for controls.
I had a brand new F/O with less then a thousand hours try and grab the controls on me, because he had never seen anyone kick out alot of crab in a big crosswind just before touching down.
In his last plane (c-172) you drop one wing 15 miles out on final to correct for a crosswind. But i didn't feel like dragging a wing across the runway.
He very nearly caused us some big problems about 10 feet from the ground. Don't wrestle for controls.
NEDude
yada yada yada
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2001
- Posts
- 1,611
There is no back and white answer to this. Too many variables.
If I am landing in a place like Kansas, where there are no mountains nearby, the captain has the GS and LCO pegged, and he responds that he is continuing when you call minimums, my response will be a lot different than if I am landing in a place surrounded my mountains, the GS and LOC are at 3/4 deflection and there is no response from the captain at the minimums call.
If I am landing in a place like Kansas, where there are no mountains nearby, the captain has the GS and LCO pegged, and he responds that he is continuing when you call minimums, my response will be a lot different than if I am landing in a place surrounded my mountains, the GS and LOC are at 3/4 deflection and there is no response from the captain at the minimums call.
8HourPilot
Stormtracker Accucast!!!
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
- Posts
- 753
I don't think i would do that.
CFI2766
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2005
- Posts
- 1,293
I can't find the specific wording at the moment, but I recall that there is verbiage in my company's FOM that states the FO is to follow the command of the Captain, even if the FO believes the command is contrary to a company procedure or FAA reg. Then, after the fact, the FO is to report to the Chief Pilot. On nearly every aspect of operating that particular flight, I will defer to the judgment of El Guapo.
However, there is also much more directive wording in the FOM that directs the FO to assume command if the captain is unavailable or unable to do so. Frankly, FVCK this bit about two different answers, one for the interview and one for line flying. If my captain is not responding to my calls to go around, I will assume that he/she is incapacitated and I will take the controls, especially if it is the last landing of a four day, twenty-two leg trip. I will not watch him create a smoking hole 1000' feet down the runway where my remains will be found.
Honestly, there's just as much chance of me doing something unintentionally stoopid and dangerous as there is of a captain doing something intentionally dangerous. At the moment, 99% of the captains I fly with on the ATR wouldn't put me in this situation. There is one guy, however....
However, there is also much more directive wording in the FOM that directs the FO to assume command if the captain is unavailable or unable to do so. Frankly, FVCK this bit about two different answers, one for the interview and one for line flying. If my captain is not responding to my calls to go around, I will assume that he/she is incapacitated and I will take the controls, especially if it is the last landing of a four day, twenty-two leg trip. I will not watch him create a smoking hole 1000' feet down the runway where my remains will be found.
Honestly, there's just as much chance of me doing something unintentionally stoopid and dangerous as there is of a captain doing something intentionally dangerous. At the moment, 99% of the captains I fly with on the ATR wouldn't put me in this situation. There is one guy, however....
ImbracableCrunk
Unregistered Un-User
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2003
- Posts
- 1,481
Quasar,
I think there are two typical interview questions that we are combining/confusing.
Scenario 1:
During the approach brief: It's 2sm 100 ovc, the Capt. plans on ducking down below the DA(H) to see if you can break out. What do you do?
Scenario 2:
You're on approach and at minimums, the Capt. doesn't respond to your calls. What do you do?
In both cases, don't do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnrTq9Y-uJY
During a brief, the Capt. is not incapacitated. Tell him that goes against regs and policies and that he should not continue past the MAP.
At the MAP, if the Capt is incacitated, you take over.
And if the pilot says, "Go around is not an option!" then you do like John Wayne in the video!
I think there are two typical interview questions that we are combining/confusing.
Scenario 1:
During the approach brief: It's 2sm 100 ovc, the Capt. plans on ducking down below the DA(H) to see if you can break out. What do you do?
Scenario 2:
You're on approach and at minimums, the Capt. doesn't respond to your calls. What do you do?
In both cases, don't do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnrTq9Y-uJY
During a brief, the Capt. is not incapacitated. Tell him that goes against regs and policies and that he should not continue past the MAP.
At the MAP, if the Capt is incacitated, you take over.
And if the pilot says, "Go around is not an option!" then you do like John Wayne in the video!
FmrFreightDog
Py-lote
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Posts
- 1,238
Sounds like a good way to force a gear up landing to me. As a matter of fact, I dare say that's one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard.
IdRtherBsailing
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Posts
- 407
siucavflight
Back from the forsaken
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2003
- Posts
- 3,512
Worst. Advice. Ever.
The problem here is that guys are assuming one extreme or the other: let him go and he flies it into the ground, or argue and fight to the death for control of the airplane. We all know that that's not what would happen here. If you call "my controls" and start to execute a go-around, the Captain isn't going to "fight" you for the controls. He may be extremely pissed and start screaming at you, but he's not going to try to wrestle you for the controls at 200 ft. I can't imagine an interviewer giving you a hypothetical that would go that far anyway. If you tell the interviewer that you would assume the Captain is incapacitated and execute a go-around, then that will be the end of the question. The interviewer isn't going to push it over and over again with more "but what if _____ happens next" questions. They just want to hear that you'd do the safe thing and go around.
S
Snapshot
If the Captain is not incapacitated and is willingly descending below DH, still the same answer. I wouldn't tell the interviewer that I'm going to sit there and let someone operate their airplane illegally and unsafely. Letting a Captain bully you into doing something you know is illegal and unsafe makes you a punk. That Video above illustrates it perfectly.
This question comes in several forms: The captain wants to drink inside the 8 hours, the captain wants to take off with the Nav light broken, the captain wants to fly into severe icing....... The list goes on. They will paint a scenario involving all sorts of variables, what-ifs, pressure, time constraints, and factors to try and influence your decision. They will paint a picture that makes the situation seem like a complicated grey area. The question they are really asking in all of these scenarios is:"Are you going to knowingly break an FAR (or allow one to be broken) in a non emergency situation?" When you peel away all the B.S. it is a very black and white question.
This question comes in several forms: The captain wants to drink inside the 8 hours, the captain wants to take off with the Nav light broken, the captain wants to fly into severe icing....... The list goes on. They will paint a scenario involving all sorts of variables, what-ifs, pressure, time constraints, and factors to try and influence your decision. They will paint a picture that makes the situation seem like a complicated grey area. The question they are really asking in all of these scenarios is:"Are you going to knowingly break an FAR (or allow one to be broken) in a non emergency situation?" When you peel away all the B.S. it is a very black and white question.
Last edited:
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
