Friction in the cockpit

moxiepilot

moxiepilot

Well-Known Member
So the short scenario is that you have a weak Captain and a strong IRO. is due to upgrade in the next month and is coaching the CA on things that he does outside company procedure and normal ops to attempt to bring him into conformity.

CA has a difficult time accepting criticism and it comes to a head in flight. As PF FO, I tell them to cut it out and discuss on the ground. IRO gets shut down and CA is stewing.

Receive descent clearance and comply with 2000'+FPM restriction. Amended clearance to xxxx by yyyy. Remove speed brakes and MCP goes into shallow descent. CA states we need 1000FPM or greater. I disagree. CA declares 1000FPM or greater. I comply because it will not violate us or bend metal.

Need Autoland. Not receiving appropriate indications for LAND3/LAND2 just prior to 1500' where we may get appropriate indications in a few feet more. I state I will be disconnecting AP for manual landing. CA states continue with Autoland. WWYD?
 
I assume when you say you "need autoland", you mean for operational check purposes, not because you actually NEED AUTOLAND. If so, that does not seem like a potential bending metal situation to me, so I would defer to the CA for the posited "few feet more". It's already a bad atmosphere, and IMHO that's one of the most dangerous situations in aviation we don't spend much time talking about. BTW, I don't think that the answer is obvious, either response has pros and cons, imho, etc etc.
 
Do your manuals say you must have these appropriate indications at 1,500 above TDZE? If yes, stick to your guns. You can back up your thought process with cold, hard, SOP.

If the captain wants to micro-manage your descent, that's probably a battle that's not worth fighting if his method will also comply with the restriction.
 
Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

Some captains don’t know when to listen, some copilots don’t know when to shut up, other guys are left to deal with and work through the resultant molten lava of eroded CRM.

I’m come off “break“ into a situation like that where everyone is triggered and sadly, you just have to be the adult in the cockpit, figure out what a acceptable level of performance and decorum is and maintain that until landing where, hopefully, a little “Beer Diplomacy” can take place.

You can talk to Professional Standards about the ordeal, but be ready to leave the encounter without a feeling of resolution.
 
Last edited:
moxiepilot said:
Sorry, operational check of Autoland. Weather CAVU.
Click to expand...

I’ve been FOing for a couple years now. It seems to me as the guy who is not in command, you have to be sort of a chameleon. 90% of the folks I fly with have a “do what you want, just don’t break or violate” attitude.

On the very rare occasion that’s not the case....

There are usually several legal and safe ways to accomplish anything. Having said that, as the FO, as long as it’s safe and legal, I’ll do it the Capt’s way. Because of this, I’ll likely do the same thing 3 different ways in a month.

With the CAVU autoland, we don’t have that capability, but in those conditions, I think I’d continue. You can see so it’d easy to see if you needed to intervene. No?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FWIW, both interview preps I did discussed this scenario in depth. One of the 2 majors I interviewed with brought up the same scenario. It's narrative checks a lot of boxes in terms of CRM, SOP's, and overall judgement in the cockpit.
 
moxiepilot said:
So the short scenario is that you have a weak Captain and a strong IRO. is due to upgrade in the next month and is coaching the CA on things that he does outside company procedure and normal ops to attempt to bring him into conformity.

CA has a difficult time accepting criticism and it comes to a head in flight. As PF FO, I tell them to cut it out and discuss on the ground. IRO gets shut down and CA is stewing.

Receive descent clearance and comply with 2000'+FPM restriction. Amended clearance to xxxx by yyyy. Remove speed brakes and MCP goes into shallow descent. CA states we need 1000FPM or greater. I disagree. CA declares 1000FPM or greater. I comply because it will not violate us or bend metal.

Need Autoland. Not receiving appropriate indications for LAND3/LAND2 just prior to 1500' where we may get appropriate indications in a few feet more. I state I will be disconnecting AP for manual landing. CA states continue with Autoland. WWYD?
Click to expand...

Why would you disagree with a 1,000 fpm? Just do it.

As for the Autoland, don’t know your plane or its indications. I know we have a stable gate at 1,000 ft so I’d let it go to that to see if we have indications. I don’t know how your shop does it. Regardless, I’d hate to be in an argument below 2000 ft AGL.

It’s amazing now in the left seat, I’ve seen some crap that I wouldn’t have dreamed to have done to a CA during my 11 yrs right seat. But those are for another time over a Coke Zero at Sbarros.
 
dustoff17 said:
???
I'm not a 121 pilot so I'm requesting clarity:

Does "KY" mean:
A) KY the front of his seat so he gets his uniform messy.
B) Don't say anything. Then later at the hotel, bend him over the couch and KY him until he concedes that you're in charge.
C) Have a civilized discussion during your next trip to Kentucky.
D) None of the above.
Click to expand...

Or is it for “kill yourself”? Used to be what millennials said before “ok boomer” when you said something they didn’t like.
 
dustoff17 said:
Guess I could correct to the following:
D) Kill Yourself.
E) None of the Above.
Click to expand...
For the record though, I hope he didn’t mean that. I was as puzzled when I read it too like... KY? What? Your brainstorming just got me brainstorming too ha ha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MikeD
Caught Between the Weather and a Hard Place
Replies
13
Views
4K
MikeD
MikeD
MikeD
Flight of the Unintentional UAV
Replies
12
Views
6K
frog_flyer
frog_flyer
Back
Top