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

[s3jetman]

Have always had this question maybe I am missing something but consider the following.

20 in line for takeoff your on approach

you "tower airline xxxx going missed"

two seconds later

tower "airline yyyyy clear for takeoff"

now what happens just dont like the announcement of you performing something that you knowingly are not doing? just have the image of 2 747 colliding. I know it was something totally different but just makes me think!

 

[Papps]

now what happens just dont like the announcement of you performing something that you knowingly are not doing? just have the image of 2 747 colliding. I know it was something totally different but just makes me think!

Huh....?

 

[Axel]

Huh....?

All your base are belong to us.

I think he means that if the FO calls a missed approach, but the CA continues to descend for landing there is the potential for a collision on the runway. Then you would have no hope to survive, make your time.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

I love how this thread assumes all FOs are clueless thumb-suckers and all Capts are God's gift to aviation.

When you get beyond the scope of the mid-twenties Capt. and the fresh outa school FO, you might think something different.

How about an older Capt with a heart problem? How about you're finishing a red-eye and the Capt. is falling asleep?

I've seen some nice "I'm invincible" mentalities in some of these posts.

If you're the Capt., and you miss your calls, you screwed up. If the FO questions you, that is his job!

 

[FR8mastr]

I love how this thread assumes all FOs are clueless thumb-suckers and all Capts are God's gift to aviation.

When you get beyond the scope of the mid-twenties Capt. and the fresh outa school FO, you might think something different.

How about an older Capt with a heart problem? How about you're finishing a red-eye and the Capt. is falling asleep?

I've seen some nice "I'm invincible" mentalities in some of these posts.

If you're the Capt., and you miss your calls, you screwed up. If the FO questions you, that is his job!

I had the completely opposite take from this thread. It seems to me the FO's are the only ones preventing disaster at every step. Your own post illustrates this. Remember this thread started from the interview question of the Capt. going below mins. Many of the answers came back with all sorts of wrong answers about taking over the aircraft below mins. The original question could be either pilot flying below mins. the answer is the same, if the aircraft is on profile DO NOT fight for control.
By the way, I am a FO, again.

 

[NoahWerka]

There is no back and white answer to this. Too many variables.

In real life that is true. In an interview?


Actual answer from an interviewee in a 4 Captain Board interview. He got hired on that answer alone. They said it showed maturity. That is what they are looking for.

In real life that is true, in the interview:
1...Do nothing... Assume he Fuccked Up.
2...Say something about it...."Don't let it happen again, next time I say something, it will be to the CP".
3...Go to the Chief Pilot.

 

[NoahWerka]

Most everything previously said is a bulls answer.The question was about an interview question. Think about the interview, not real life.

 

[Spicepilots]

Captain's authority my butt... Apparently, a lot of people still don't get it... Not to make light of what happened last year, but try changing the scenario. You're lined up on the runway, cleared for takeoff, captain spools up the engines and starts rolling. You notice that you're departing the wrong runway. You speak up to that effect. Captain ignores you because he's already rolling past 80 knots and he wants to continue the takeoff. Since the captain has the authority to call and perform the abort, would you just let him continue instead of doing something about it??

Sure, tapdance around the issue all you want in an interview, but the idea that the captain is the final authority in the operation of the airplane doesn't extend into CFIT just because he's the captain and he wants to do things his way. Would you want the last thing heard on the CVR to be your voice saying "minimums... minimums, captain... okay, we'll just talk about this on the ground... uh, that ___ (tree, hill, building) looks really close..."

 

[j41driver]

...Help the captain find the runway and hope for the best.(This is the real life answer). The correct answer is the response that has the least amount of risk for the situation.

And you think the least risk is to try to "find the runway and hope for the best"??? Hope I'm never flying on your airplane.

 

[j41driver]

Fighting over control at all that low to the ground can be deadly.

...and continuing an approach below minimums isn't??

 

[QuasarZ]

both answers have some grey area. Continuing to find runway is dangerous, and fighting for controls is too...

 

[Papps]

...and continuing an approach below minimums isn't??

you will find the runway if you continue below mins. You may find all sorts of things if you have 2 retards trying to fly 1 airplane.

 

[siucavflight]

...and continuing an approach below minimums isn't??

At that point it becomes which is more dangerous?

 

[norskman2]

both answers have some grey area. Continuing to find runway is dangerous, and fighting for controls is too...

Geez, finally a reasonable answer.

This is a "Kobayashi Maru" question. There is no right answer. That's why they ask it in the interview -- to see if you can a) think on your feet b) exercise sound judgement

Anybody out there a senior Captain who sits on an interview panel? Do you ding someone who says "fight for the controls" or do you give them a thumbs up if they advocate for it in a reasonable and intelligent manner?

If someone says "suck up the gear" do you heave them out of the interview room?

 

[Starscream]

you will find the runway if you continue below mins. You may find all sorts of things if you have 2 retards trying to fly 1 airplane.

Then why do minimums exist?

I'm surprised no one mentioned this scenario especially for the ones who advocate not initiating a go around, cause he'll just safely fly the glideslope down to the flare..............

WHAT IF THIS IS ON A NON-PRECISION APPROACH?

FO: MDA
CA: Rog, leaving MDA -- it's down here somewhere...........
FO: MDA, MISSED APPROACH!
CA: It's down here somewhere.............hey that looks like a flashing white light............

Y'all just gonna sit by and hope he doesn't pull a CFIT?

If you firewall the throttles, you're not fighting for control, and there is virtually no way he'll be able to continue descending, since he'll be trimmed for Vapp.

 

[QuasarZ]

Then why do minimums exist?

I'm surprised no one mentioned this scenario especially for the ones who advocate not initiating a go around, cause he'll just safely fly the glideslope down to the flare..............

WHAT IF THIS IS ON A NON-PRECISION APPROACH?

FO: MDA
CA: Rog, leaving MDA -- it's down here somewhere...........
FO: MDA, MISSED APPROACH!
CA: It's down here somewhere.............hey that looks like a flashing white light............

Y'all just gonna sit by and hope he doesn't pull a CFIT?

If you firewall the throttles, you're not fighting for control, and there is virtually no way he'll be able to continue descending, since he'll be trimmed for Vapp.

True, never thought about non precision. So you say firewall it and it and cause it to climb for a go around?

 

[Starscream]

True, never thought about non precision. So you say firewall it and it and cause it to climb for a go around?

When in doubt climb. No one ever crashed into the sky.

 

[Papps]

Then why do minimums exist?

I'm surprised no one mentioned this scenario especially for the ones who advocate not initiating a go around, cause he'll just safely fly the glideslope down to the flare..............

WHAT IF THIS IS ON A NON-PRECISION APPROACH?

FO: MDA
CA: Rog, leaving MDA -- it's down here somewhere...........
FO: MDA, MISSED APPROACH!
CA: It's down here somewhere.............hey that looks like a flashing white light............

Y'all just gonna sit by and hope he doesn't pull a CFIT?

If you firewall the throttles, you're not fighting for control, and there is virtually no way he'll be able to continue descending, since he'll be trimmed for Vapp.

or what if its in an NDB approach, or what if its a non precision approach without the local altimeter, or what if its a non-precision in terrain with an engine on fire, and the flight attendant just told you that she's pregnant after your overnight with her last month.

You can beat this question into the ground with a billion different senerios. My point is to avoid battling for control of a plane at less than 200 agl.

If you have super pilot skills that you got from the FSDO the day you got your CFI last year, then karate chop the captain in the neck and assume command of the flight. Tell you the truth I don't care what you do as long as your not flying with me.

I agree with you a guy flying a cat C or D airplane that leaves MDA with nothing in site is retarded and suicidal. You may want to say "go around" and if he dosent respond say "my controls". Thats something they call experience.

 

[Papps]

I love how this thread assumes all FOs are clueless thumb-suckers and all Capts are God's gift to aviation.

When you get beyond the scope of the mid-twenties Capt. and the fresh outa school FO, you might think something different.

How about an older Capt with a heart problem? How about you're finishing a red-eye and the Capt. is falling asleep?

I've seen some nice "I'm invincible" mentalities in some of these posts.

If you're the Capt., and you miss your calls, you screwed up. If the FO questions you, that is his job!

Actually the tone of this thread seems to assume that the captain is dead, dying, asleep, deliberately breaking FAR's or blissfully unaware that he has passed the missed. None of those place the captain in the gods gift to aviation category.

 

[Rook]

When in doubt climb. No one ever crashed into the sky.

Sage advice.