I learned about aviation from... TMAAT...

I'm still new to being a 121 Captain so it's definitely been a learning experience for me as well. Coming from the corporate and small 135 side, you flew with a much smaller number of people and pretty much knew everyone in both seats outside of the occasional new hire that you quickly became familiar with.

Sharing the flying stuff is mostly the same. I'm super nerdy by nature so I always like to offer the "why" behind my suggestion. Like the other day with a brand new FO right off OE we get slowed down by center going into Sarasota. She opens the speed window and dials it in, which is great. The schoolhouse is emphasizing "top down" flying recently asking to make the changes effective immediately in the MCP first. Most people will then go to the FMS, update the speed on the CRZ and DES page, and close the speed window back, but she didn't. I'm sometimes even too relaxed about letting people do their thing, after all seeing the problem it causes first hand is the best way to learn, and in this case it doesn't really change anything so I make a mental note of it and let it be. We are then given a crossing restriction. She dials it in the altitude window, puts it in the LEGS page, and we get a new Top of Descent. As we keep trucking along towards T/D and seeing no intention of doing anything, this is when I mention that I recommended we start down now because that T/D is assuming a much steeper descent angle from our original descent speed in the FMS that we never updated. She seems confused but starts down, sees the banana bar land beyond our restriction at idle, gets the boards out and we make that restriction comfortably without floating people in the back. On the way down we talk about how the VNAV logic uses the parameters in the DES page to calculate a top of descent and vertical profile, and how when we deviate from that we either need to update it or be aware of our new required path and do something manually. I don't like suggesting one particular technique, but rather prefer to explain the implications of things and suggest various ways to handle it, even though some might be more elegant than others. I see the lightbulb moment and everything went smoothly for the rest of the flight. Overall she was great, just a bit green on the airplane as expected.

That kind of stuff I already had experience with, but this new environment brings some unexpected situations. Another FO I flew with had been here for 1 year and was well prepared but cocky. My line is pretty far out there but it still exists. It started when the lead FA comes up 15 minutes prior to departure to tell us there's a catering issue and they didn't load any of the preorder meals. As soon as she finishes the FO starts telling her that he's comfortable with leaving as long as everything else is onboard. I just let him keep going, staring at him with this look, and I think he caught the drift because he finished with "but I don't want to speak for the Captain". To which I replied "right.....let's look at the Gate Hold list and see if this is something we need to delay for". It mentioned that as long as there were enough First Class meals for all passengers, preorder meals were not guaranteed and it was not something to hold the flight for. Of course I made sure the FAs were comfortable with that because they would have to deal with the potentially upset customers, and after they said they were, we left. Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words and I thought he got the message. Apparently not because on the next leg he jumps on the ACARS and messages crew tracking asking if they had any reroutes for him, hoping to make more money. He seemed genuinely surprised when I told him he shouldn't be doing that. So we had a talk about the importance of following the trip coverage sequence in the contract and how making side deals with the company not only hurts your fellow pilots who abide by the contract, but reduces our bargaining power collectively when it comes time for negotiations. He wasn't flying the line last summer when there was blatant abuse of skipping the trip coverage sequence by both scheduling and pilots making side deals, the issues that it caused, and the resolution to that which IMO was not in the pilots' favor. I also explained that it could get him in trouble with both ALPA, and his peers if he were to get caught. Hopefully he got the message this time. Both of those situations with him were unexpected to me because I've never had to provide mentoring on those items before in my previous Captain experience.

Hopefully I handled them properly and with a positive outcome, I'm still learning myself. The good thing is every trip I feel like I'm getting a little bit better and it's been an energizing feeling. It's making me want to go out and fly as many of my reserve days as possible and keep the improvement going. I'm sure I'll eventually get over it and go back to my old ways of trying to work as little as possible but for now I'm enjoying the journey.



Oh man. The whole VNAV thing.

My shop publishes a “Stan Notes” document which is unofficial, but best practices. And shockingly, it says handle all speed changes by opening the window. Problem with that is you alter VNAV behavior to be basically be level change except honor at (or above) hard altitude fixes. Otherwise it keeps coming down. With the window open, it’ll revert to path once flaps are selected to 1 or when on the extended final centerline with GP fixes. It leads to a lot of unnecessary speed brake usage because the box had 250 knots later with a decel point for that reduction. But you’re already at 250 kts now. I try and tell them to use the VSD and see where that line is intersecting the next fix. Some get it, others clueless.

Worse is when you see experienced FOs do it.
 
This problem also extends to the senior FO crowd who has skipped upgrade. I had one guy that was clearly high coming in. I asked him, want the gear? His answer was “not yet.” This, with us being 4,000 ft high.

He had to work his tail off to get down and barely made the stable gates.

At debrief, PF is supposed to ask the PM “how did that go?”

Instead, he initiates the debrief right off the bat and goes “yeah, I know, I was high and had to really work it.”

Um, yeah. Coulda been avoided right?

All of your stories are very apropos to exactly what I'm hoping to get out of this thread. I've flown with your FO's twin sibling.

Yes, this is (what we would call) "simple" energy management. But, we also have years and years of experience and were tempered with (well, in my case) 400 legs a day in and out of MKE and ORD.

The mistakes that we corrected in a week at the regionals with one CA tend to play out over months - on reserve. Flying transcons. This is good stuff.

I'm still new to being a 121 Captain so it's definitely been a learning experience for me as well. Coming from the corporate and small 135 side, you flew with a much smaller number of people and pretty much knew everyone in both seats outside of the occasional new hire that you quickly became familiar with.

I'm sometimes even too relaxed about letting people do their thing, after all seeing the problem it causes first hand is the best way to learn, and in this case it doesn't really change anything so I make a mental note of it and let it be. I see the lightbulb moment and everything went smoothly for the rest of the flight.

So we had a talk about the importance of following the trip coverage sequence in the contract and how making side deals with the company not only hurts your fellow pilots who abide by the contract, but reduces our bargaining power collectively when it comes time for negotiations. He wasn't flying the line last summer when there was blatant abuse of skipping the trip coverage sequence by both scheduling and pilots making side deals, the issues that it caused, and the resolution to that which IMO was not in the pilots' favor. I also explained that it could get him in trouble with both ALPA, and his peers if he were to get caught. Hopefully he got the message this time. Both of those situations with him were unexpected to me because I've never had to provide mentoring on those items before in my previous Captain experience.

Both of these are awesome! Two very common situations - same stuff happens at my shop. (the out of sequence thing) Or at least it did before a whole bunch of folks went "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" on open time.

I'm also of the school of 'hard knocks' and letting people have a bunch of rope in a controlled environment to learn. It's what we do as a whole - in my humble experience. It's a great learning tool.
 
My shop publishes a “Stan Notes” document which is unofficial, but best practices.

Oh, this is good too! "Local Tribal Knowledge" codified. Both official and unofficial sources.

Reminds me of something I used to do... for the wacka-doodle CAs that I used to fly with that were slightly on the spectrum vs. fully on the spectrum I would make little notes in my logbook about the old US Air procedures or whatever weird thing that was their thing. Just to make the day easier.

The funny thing was, the pilots that turned the amp up to 11, I didn't need any notes for. They were burned into my brain through - I guess you would call it - bad mentoring.
 
The intent of my post wasn't to highlight the few difficult FOs I've flown with. My intent was to point out that good mentorship requires a calm demeanor and patience. Also, to some extent you need to be respected in order for your mentorship to be heard. I'd like to clarify that 99% of the FOs I've flown with, really all of them except for one and not the one in my story, have been better than I. Just less experienced with the 737 and the operator I work for.

While much of Gen X suffered under poor leadership and had to show excellent qualities in order to progress their career under an often unfair system as FOs we now have to double down and be excellent leaders for those who may or may not appreciate the mentorship or their good timing. There is a bit of irony and just plain Alanis Morissette esq unfortunate here.

While it is not "fair" I view it as a chance to become a better person and pilot. *shrug*
 
The intent of my post wasn't to highlight the few difficult FOs I've flown with. My intent was to point out that good mentorship requires a calm demeanor and patience. Also, to some extent you need to be respected in order for your mentorship to be heard. I'd like to clarify that 99% of the FOs I've flown with, really all of them except for one and not the one in my story, have been better than I. Just less experienced with the 737 and the operator I work for.

While much of Gen X suffered under poor leadership and had to show excellent qualities in order to progress their career under an often unfair system as FOs we now have to double down and be excellent leaders for those who may or may not appreciate the mentorship or their good timing. There is a bit of irony and just plain Alanis Morissette esq unfortunate here.

While it is not "fair" I view it as a chance to become a better person and pilot. *shrug*

Wait until you CA longer - you'll be disappointed at some FO eventually. And the new generation (Z?) didn't really suffer as we did in the 9/11, Age 65, GFC era. They've actually had a really, really good ride.


And, since I can't comment directly on any real airline associated with a virtual airline, lets just say my horror FO stories so far have been from an airline called Verizon. You would think Verizon has an awesome history, well established telecom company in the PNW that is respected, but the 3 big oddballs I've flown with, all 3 were ex-Verizon. I don't know why that is.

The "best" ones seem to come from a regional called Skywest.
 
Wait until you CA longer - you'll be disappointed at some FO eventually. And the new generation (Z?) didn't really suffer as we did in the 9/11, Age 65, GFC era. They've actually had a really, really good ride.


And, since I can't comment directly on any real airline associated with a virtual airline, lets just say my horror FO stories so far have been from an airline called Verizon. You would think Verizon has an awesome history, well established telecom company in the PNW that is respected, but the 3 big oddballs I've flown with, all 3 were ex-Verizon. I don't know why that is.

The "best" ones seem to come from a regional called Skywest.

The one bad experience was a former LCA from Verizon. I called some captain friends and apparently, he has quite a reputation. All my other experiences have been good so far. It's been very easy to mentor and with good results so far.
 
The one bad experience was a former LCA from Verizon. I called some captain friends and apparently, he has quite a reputation. All my other experiences have been good so far. It's been very easy to mentor and with good results so far.


Mentoring works, if they’re willing to listen. We already attract a Type A personality to this job, so some characters just can’t accept that they were wrong. Or, can’t accept any criticism.
 
The intent of my post wasn't to highlight the few difficult FOs I've flown with. My intent was to point out that good mentorship requires a calm demeanor and patience. Also, to some extent you need to be respected in order for your mentorship to be heard.

While it is not "fair" I view it as a chance to become a better person and pilot. *shrug*

Well, yeah. That’s the whole point of this. And formalizing a program in 121 aviation.

Of course, as a matter of discussion, sometimes it will descend to ‘can you believe what that goofball FO/CA did’ and then turns into a complain-fest about the generic person in the other seat. Very old-man-yells-at-cloud.

There is stuff to be gleaned from those complaint sessions. Becoming a better person and such.

Awesome stuff.
 
The one bad experience was a former LCA from Verizon. I called some captain friends and apparently, he has quite a reputation. All my other experiences have been good so far. It's been very easy to mentor and with good results so far.
Initials ZM by chance?
 
I still hold the theory that if everyone you fly with sucks, you’re probably the one who is missing the mark.

Before I upgraded I’d have senior guys tell me how they have to take the controls all the time and to keep a watch out. Maybe I’m not paying close enough attention, but three years in the left seat and I can think of maybe three times that I’ve had to intervene because the successful outcome was in question.
 
I've got quite a few.

After reading what you posted this story comes to mind. It's a two part story. But the focus is on remaining patient and being calm to get through to those you mentor. It pays dividends in the long run. This is a bit long so sorry, not sorry.

Flying into BZN with a newer pilot on the 737. I am a brand new captain. Like within a couple of months at this point. The FO is new on the aircraft but his dad is a very senior "Artic Eagle" in Anchorage. It was my first time encountering a new 737 pilot with for lack of a better term "inflated ego".

There was a horizon jumpseater who lived in BZN and the FO was flying. I forget the name but at BZN there is an initial fix that sets you up too high going into BZN from the west. This is apparently getting fixed after biting what I assume is many of our crews as I am sure many other operators. I try to help mentor as much as possible without being overbearing but I wasn't getting through to this particular FO. I made a recommendation about programming a lower altitude at the fix in question than assigned by ATC and then slowing when leveled off. My recommendation was dismissed. I also added a 30 mile ring to cross at 10K but the FO didn't seem to want to use that method for determining energy management.

I kept trying to assist and made a recommendation that we were too fast and too high and should drop the landing gear as soon as possible to make things easier. This FO was having none of it. After what I considered to be my last recommendation to correct our energy state, before mostly focusing on the go around I glanced over to the Horizon jumpseater. He looked very concerned about our energy state but didn't say anything. When we turned final the FO finally realized how pear shaped things had become. I made the decision to let things continue and if we did not meet the stabilized approach criteria we would just go around. Which wouldn't be ideal but was also a non event. We had enough gas and despite the terrain and training issues at my place of employment, a go around is fairly easy.

At this point in the flight the FO became very open to my help and I had a last trick to help fix the energy state. We fixed it and we met the stabilized approach criteria. The landing wasn't great mostly due to all the excitement about being in a poor energy state. Thankfully by remaining patient, calm and having a plan B the FO didn't view me as an adversary. He debriefed the approach and was very critical of himself, while also viewing me as a resource to help. Learning had occurred. My first takeaway from this event is that you can't micromanage bad practices and also get through to certain pilots. You have to let them make mistakes.

I decided to invite the FO to join me for dinner. At dinner I noticed he had gotten a lot of feedback about how young and lucky he was to be in his position from other captains. Early 20s at a legacy a very enviable spot indeed. He seemed very resentful about having to hear about how lucky he was and felt like his struggles were not recognized. I realized this was another opportunity for mentorship.

I chose not to remind him about how my career has basically been a mess of lack of opportunity due to the state of the industry and bad timing. I asked him questions about his background and flying jobs before reaching his current position. Frankly he was extremely lucky and hadn't really paid his dues, which is fine and it isn't my place to be judgmental about it. I decided the best way to get through to this young and fairly brash pilot was to be empathetic. I listened to him. That is one of the most important aspects of mentorship that is also not recognized by most pilots.

I made the remark that we couldn't control when we were born and everyone has a unique path to where they wind up in their career. It wasn't my fault that I was born when I was and I lived through one of the worst times in history to be a pilot, if not the worst. It also wasn't his fault he had one of the best opportunities in the history of being a pilot. That's just how things were. The trick was having empathy for those around you. I reminded him that at some point he would be flying with someone who didn't have the same opportunities as him that eventually he would be a very senior captain at a very young age. He would need to be mindful about how lucky he was and it would be very important to have empathy for those less fortunate that he worked with. I seemed to get through to him much more effectively that berating him about all of my misfortunes and how I had to pay my dues. So that is my second takeaway in regards to mentorship: empathy and listening are extremely important. You can't just berate people who are less experienced than you and expect them to be receptive to what your recommendations are. Even if they are sound recommendations.

I'm a really new captain on the 737. I've never been a 121 captain before just a captain at 135s and 91 operations. With 20 years of observing mostly poor leadership qualities I've learned about what not to do for the most part and from the few above average CRM captains I've have the privilege of flying with I have learned what to do. My job of being a mentor is made more complex by the fact I will fly with someone who is 20 years senior to me one day and extremely junior the next. So I am "being a chameleon" at least as much as I had to as a first officer. My biggest takeaway from my own shop's mentorship program is that the mentors have to be willing to listen, remain calm and be empathetic. As a whole it is entirely missing from our program. This is a massive failure, not on the mentees but the mentors. Our training program is a perfect example of this failure. It remains overly complex and focused on near impossible to duplicate scenarios involving multiple failures when it should be focused on simple day to day events. I think this is largely due to ego becoming involved with a desire to transfer knowledge. Educators and mentors can not let the desire to appear knowledgeable to those they educate get in the way of learning.

This will never change as long as there is a financial and QOL incentive to getting involved with training and will be a major obstacle to chance in a training department and mentorship program. The wrong people will be placed in the training department and mentorship program and there will never be a measurable good outcome.
Tell me that you were a flight instructor, without telling me that you were a flight instructor.
 
I still hold the theory that if everyone you fly with sucks, you’re probably the one who is missing the mark.

Before I upgraded I’d have senior guys tell me how they have to take the controls all the time and to keep a watch out. Maybe I’m not paying close enough attention, but three years in the left seat and I can think of maybe three times that I’ve had to intervene because the successful outcome was in question.
Three times is a lot of times IMO.
 
Back
Top