Question about the "Capt. wants to descend below mins" interview question

[Vne]

Do your job and fly the plane. If he checked out, you take over. That's what the calls are there for. That's what you are there for.

Thats what the company EXPECTS you to do......period every thing else is cowboy crap

 

[Papps]

Easiest way to force a go around without wrestling for the controls at 200 feet... lean over and suck up the gear.

I don't think i would do that.

 

[temcgrew]

Typical response from anyone who is gona go below minimums and land would be "Approach lights in sight" followed by "runway in sight" If you are gona shout "go-around" just to be on the CVR don't you think the captain is smart enough to counter you?

 

[CFI2766]

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....

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

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!

 

[FmrFreightDog]

Easiest way to force a go around without wrestling for the controls at 200 feet... lean over and suck up the gear.

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]

Just call Cheryl Cage and be done with it.

 

[siucavflight]

DO NOT REACH OVER AND BRING UP THE GEAR!!!
Although I am sure that J32 was joking.

 

[PCL_128]

If the Captain responds... and says he is intentionally going below minimums. Easiest way to force a go around without wrestling for the controls at 200 feet... lean over and suck up the gear.

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.

 

[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.

 

[Flyer1015]

You guys are all wrong!

I am TRULY shocked NO ONE got the correct answer:

The best answer is to bitch slap the captain if he goes below minimums, put on your Riddle baseball cap, and execute a missed, therefore saving the day like Tom Cruise in Top Gun. Oh, and make sure your gel spiked hair is well frosted before trying any of this.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

You guys are all wrong!

I am TRULY shocked NO ONE got the correct answer:

The best answer is to bitch slap the captain if he goes below minimums, put on your Riddle baseball cap, and execute a missed, therefore saving the day like Tom Cruise in Top Gun. Oh, and make sure your gel spiked hair is well frosted before trying any of this.

...left turn Clyde.

 

[JPAustin]

There really is no definitive "wrong" answer so long as your answer isn't off the wall stupid (i.e. grab the controls right away, do nothing and let him land because you know he'll make it anyway, etc.).

A question like this probably has two interviewers in the room and one will play good cop, the other bad cop. Either way you're wrong, so the best answer is to have the least wrong answer. Just make sure you throw the standards in there, i.e. two communication rule, look for incapacitation, strongly urge the captain if he responds to you to go around, yada yada... So long as they see as you get the idea of good CRM, you've passed. Also, it might not be a bad idea to add the caveat that a captain that would so blatantly go below minimums probably showed non-standard habits to begin with and you would have talked to him about it well before any of the go below minimums stuff happenned.

 

[Papps]

In both cases, it was not an arrival at mins on an approach, but rather on a visual approach, and one on a circling approach, in both cases being way out of stabilized approach criteria.

After multiple verbal warnings that we were unstablilized and not configured properly, recieving no response, I stated "My flight controls" very loudly and began a go around. In both cases, both pilots gave up the controls freely, I've never had to "wrestle" for the controls.

In one case, the other pilot was so frozen up that they didn't respond to me at all and let thier hands drop off the yoke into thier lap and looked down at the floor. I had to do the entire go-around off a circling approach in IMC by myself until they snapped out of it.

One of the most frightening moments of my career.

You're my hero.

 

[JPAustin]

You're my hero.

Ferris Bueller you're my hero...