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

The F/O's dilemma...

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
The first few captains I flew with were career "bad guys." One had knocked three copilots unconscious in the cockpit when he didn't like their actions. Another senior individual, with company ownership and a management title to boot, pulled me aside and told me if he didn't see me do exactly what he wanted, he'd put a shotgun in my mouth and pull the trigger. Another was an extreme egoist.

I quickly learned what I did and didn't want to become, and used every individual and opportunity as a learning experience. I determined exactly how I wanted others to see me, and how to deal (and not deal with others) in the air, in the industry, and on the ground.

The only advice I can give for dealing with tough characters in the cockpit is to deal with it, unless it represents a safety of flight issue. In such a case, only deal with it on the ground, as you can always find employment, but it's hard to do when dead, or when without a certificate because of enforcement action. Use it as a learning experience, but for the F/O trying to make good with a rough senior, do everything in your power to make your captain look good, and to keep him or her happy...and don't compromise yourself in the process. If you can do that, count on the opportunity to move on to a better flying mate, and you'll do well.

This too, shall pass.
 
What do you do when the guy in question doesn't give a hoot about the professional standards or what they say, and is a check airman?
 
Problem captains

Sounds like the classic interview question to me. Great discussion and great comments. Make sure you have documentation that supports your position. Don't forget the Professional Standards option at your union and sending in NASA reports. I read once that most NASA reports come from members of airline crews.

What I've always found hard to believe is these jerks you're mentioning got past the hiring gatekeepers. Absent connections from above, I always understood that personality plays a major role in airline hiring, that you're supposed to approach everyone at the interview with your hat in your hand and if you don't you can just walk out and go home. Oh, well, so much for that myth . . . . . :(
 
Last edited:
All good information. Hey, wasn't there a crash where an American Eagle captain who was known to hit his FO's, did something really stupid and killed some people? I think that was when Clinton signed the act that lets them share training records. I was told that this particular captain was previously fired from Comair. Keep those suggestions coming.

Draginass, no, we don't have a don't pair option, but I wish we did. Again, I could call in sick, but I dont' think that's fair to the poor reserve guy who may not be able to stick up for himself as well as I can. I have been dealing with captains for years, mostly as a dispacher. I would rather deal with them, than later find out that they killed some passengers when he was with a less attentive or assertive FO. Thanks guys.
 
Yep, here is a synopsis...(not sure when it was written)

from http://www.najaco.com/books/indestructible_pilot/book/law/law_3.htm

When a pilot is hired by a company, his former company must disclose any unfavorable qualities about the pilot.

(a) True

(b) False

This is not true yet, but it might soon be. This yet to be enforced rule was brought about by the following accident: A Jetstream was descending, aiming to join the localizer at the final approach fix for the ILS approach at Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) in North Carolina. The flight had been cleared to land, several miles behind a Boeing 727, when the captain called for an increase in prop speed. A moment later he said to the first officer, "Why’s that ignition light on? We just had a flameout?"
The following transcript, taken from Cockpit Area Microphone tapes, covers the final 51 seconds of the flight.

[CAP = Captain. FO = First officer. Times are Eastern Standard Time. Background sounds are in italics.]

TIME 1833:38

FO—I’m not sure what’s goin’ on with it.

CAP—We had a flameout.

Low-frequency beat of out-of-sync props begins and continues for eight seconds.

FO—’K you got it?

CAP—Yeah.

FO—We lose an engine?

CAP—OK yeah . . . OK, uh . . .

FO—I’m gonna turn that . . .

CAP—See if that, turn on the auto . . .

FO—I’m goin’ to turn on, both uh. . . ignitions, OK?

CAP—OK

FO—We lost that en . . . left one?

CAP—Yeah.

FO—Whatta you want me to do, you gonna continue?

CAP—OK, yeah, I’m gonna continue, just back me up.

FO—All right, I’m gonna . . .

TIME 1834:03

Sound of low-frequency beat begins and continues for three seconds.

CAP—Let’s go missed approach.

FO—All right.

Sound of stall warning horn for .7 second.

CAP—Set max power.

Sound of stall warning horn for .3 second.

FO—Lower the nose, lower the nose, lower the nose.

Sound of single stall warning horn starts, immediately followed by sound of dual stall warning horns.

FO—You got it?

CAP—Yeah.

FO—Lower the nose.

Unidentified rattling sound.

FO—It’s the wrong, wrong foot, wrong engine.

The stall warnings stop; the prop beat begins and continues for four seconds; the stall warnings resume; there is a sound of heavy breathing.

FO—Here.

The stall warnings stop, then resume, followed by the sound of impact.

The pilot stepped on the wrong rudder pedal, without having had an engine failure in the first place. Both crewmen and 13 passengers died in the crash; five passengers survived with serious injuries. When the first officer warned, "Lower the nose, lower the nose" and "wrong foot, wrong engine," the Jetstream’s indicated airspeed was dropping toward 100 knots and its heading had drifted 60 degrees to the left of the localizer course. In the final eight seconds, it lost 1,200 feet of altitude, its airspeed rose from 100 to 200 knots, and it experienced increasing G excursions, reaching almost three Gs just before impact. It had turned 140 degrees from the ILS course.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found that "the probable causes of this accident were: 1) the captain’s improper assumption that an engine had failed, and 2) the captain’s subsequent failure to follow approved procedures for engine failure, single-engine approach and go-around, and stall recovery."
In fact, the left engine had not failed at all; the brief illumination of an ignition light was the engine’s programmed response to a momentary negative torque condition that occurred when the first officer brought the prop speed control levers up to 100 percent while the power levers were at flight idle. The basic test would have been simply to advance the power lever and check for a response. This was not done. The next step was to feather the propeller, but this was not done either, nor was it even considered by the crew.
The captain’s decision to go-around, even though the plane was properly positioned and configured to land, suggests that the captain might have felt unable to immediately cope with the situation. This demonstrated a lack of judgment and training.
The NTSB found that when the captain had worked for Comair flying a SAAB 340, he failed his first second-in-command check in eight different areas, including judgment. One captain who flew with him found him "moody and unpredictable," and recommended that he be dismissed from the company. After the accident this captain stated to the NTSB, "[he had] below-average flying skills...was frequently ‘behind the airplane’ and often lost situational awareness...I was somewhat concerned that [he] may freeze up or get tunnel vision in an emergency situation."
The accident captain resigned from Comair on January 3, 1991, and went to work for American Eagle four days later. Because of a company policy, Comair did not provide to American Eagle any of its unfavorable assessments of the pilot.
The captain flew with American Eagle for almost four years, first in the Shorts SD3 60 and subsequently in the Jetstream 31. He received unsatisfactory marks for performance in initial training and during subsequent retraining for the Jetstream, and a failure on his first type rating check for the Jetstream. Rumors among first officers about the captain’s "flying deficiencies" started circulating. The Base Manager indirectly communicated to first officers that if they had concerns about the captain’s performance, they should inform him; but none came forward.
The night before the accident, the captain told his roommate that he was considering resigning from the airline, and that "the next day’s trip might be his last." They then prayed together.
The NTSB made several recommendations to the FAA as a result of this accident. The most significant of them was that an information storage and retrieval system be created that would allow airlines to obtain information about "skills, abilities, knowledge and judgment" of prospective hires from their previous employers.
 
The old interview question of what are you going to do if the Captain decides to desend below DH with nothing in sight.

The best answer I ever heard out of someones mouth was "After keying the mike, yelling to Go-Around, just put the gear up, I guarentee he will pull back on the stick".

Amazing!!! LOL
 
While that's humorous to some degree, a copilot who sucked up the gear on me below DH without a call to do so and a positive rate would quickly be nursing a broken arm.

DH is decision height, not a hard deck. An aircraft may descend well below DH during a missed approach; or after passing DH. One must consider all the circumstances, but certainly during a negative rate of ascent (a descent), one should not pull the gear close to the ground. You're better off touching something with it down than up.

Follow proceedure. Call it. Call it. Do it.
 
everyone's pretty stressed in the current environment and more often than not there are some big ego's involved. usually capt's and FO's take themselves too seriously.

Nobody can argue against safety; if you want to argue that all planes should be painted purple for better visibility, I can't argue with that.

my boss owns a jet commode (commander) and I know he resents that it requires a FO, unlike a Citation.
 
Skydivedriver,

What I have to offer might be a bit simplistic but it generally works for me. I approach and treat the aholes just like the pleasant and professional captains. I have come to the conclusion that a problem captain is that way....and in no way has anything to do with me. I do not take it personal.

As a new hire I can remember flying with one particular captain, a known problem captain, who had a habit of making the new folks feel very small about their performance. Letting him get into my head....and resenting him for just being there I could see the potential for a breakdown in communication that could be dangerous....at a critical time. At that point I just quit worrying about it. Its not worth compromising the safety of the operation. Just try to be professional.....despite the fact it may be unpleasant.

I actually feel sorry for the captains that insist on looking down their noses at the world. The best part of this occupation is the folks you get to share it with. I noticed that throughout the month this captain spent a lot of time alone on the overnights. I sure wanted nothing to do with him! It must be a miserable existance making everyone elses month hell!
 
CatIIIA full blown go around on a 737 or 727 and I know other aircraft the gear will touch the ground during the go. I agree with Avbug, I pitty the first officer that tries that on me, and the company would agree with me also, he wouldn't be around very long.
 
Below DH?

F/O: "minimums"
CPT: "gonna go look"
F/O :"minimums, MISSED APPROACH"
CPT: "runway in sight, landing"
Finish the operations already in progress, wait for the engine shut down checklist, complete that, reach over and push the "event" button on the CVR.
Wait for the CPT to ask "what's that about?" make sure the beacon is turned off and explain your position as it relates to "busting minimums". Refer to the CVR event and FDR data and being willing to have your chief pilot referee as to the correctness. He/She may be bent out of shape, you may not make any fans, but you will have set your limits. Control grabbing heroics are at best foolish near the ground, you better have a life or death reason to grab the controls from the PIC. The cockpit has to be one of the most potentially difficult workplace. Do not forget the chain of command the CPT. is your supervisor so all issues should start there, but the chain also goes further above them too.


now shhhh......I'm huntin' wabbits
:D
 
I guarentee that if you do decide to push the little majic button then get managment involved, your committing career suicide.
I can't speak for other carriers, but we would get hung out to dry if we brought that to our CP.

Keep it in house and private. Take it out back if neccesary, but never involve the company or Feds.
 
328,
This did happen to me, the sad part was he laughed at me, I readdressed thinking he thought I was joking. He laughed again. My chief pilot was very receptive and thanked me profusely for having the cohones, to step foreward
he had heard many 3rd hand stories but no one would fess up, fearing the "career suicide" issue. I have openly discussed the above event with senior Capt's whom have all agreed with my actions. Be advised, if your company doesn't want to hear this kind of serious operational deviation/flagrant disregard for FARs/safety issue,
I would think about finding another job with a responsable carrier.
I agree, this should be kept in house if at all possible, that was the original
tone of my post.
BUT DON"T EVER FORGET, YOU HAVE A MORAL RESPONSABILITY TO YOUR-SELF
TO REMAIN ALIVE.
If reg. violation is ok who decides which ones are ok and not ok?
S.O.P. ops specs, F.A.R.s are written in blood, to blindly disregard this fact is foolish.
P.S. I will have the opportunity to upgrade in the CRJ later this year!
:D
 
PBR,

You are quite correct. I would agree with other captains on that issue; you did the right thing and handled it well. I would also hope that after the second minimums call if you determined that an unsafe condition existed, you would tell me in strong terms to go around. The case you described didn't involve the assumption of captain incapacitation, as the captain was wilfully responding to your calls. However, he was doing it in ignorance of your position and responsibility in the cockpit. Therefore, taking the controls would not have been appropriate; you handled the event well; it's a good model for proper handling of such a situation.

To change it a bit, if the captain were spotting the runway or diving for it or any other unsafe condition existed, then mitigation of the moment would be in order. Sucking up the gear would certainly be out of line, but applying takeoff power and calling for a go around might not, depending on the circumstances.
 
skydiverdriver said:
Again, all good posts, but nobody is helping me with the jerk captains. I have to admit that the jerks I flew with in cargo were far worse than the pax guys, but they still exist. I still don't feel comfortable calling in sick, as it leaves some other poor reserve guy to fly with him. I also don't see how I can contact pro-standards about a guy who is terribly anal, or just a jerk to work with. Any suggestions?

The way that I have dealt with jerks is to do my job exactly according to SOP and doing a lot og butt kissing. Seriously, I start out the day with a big smile, and then attempt to let the jerk know how much I look forward to being in the presence of a master. Sometimes, this does work. The other times, I just keep on trying and look forward to the end of the month.
Now though, they are kissing my behind. :-)

regards
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom