You're the FO...

In the not too distant past.......

Just one leg across the country. You have flown with the guy before, competence established, no issues in terms of handflying the aircraft. Not multiple leg day, so no one is tired, no fatigue, easy flight. You briefed autothrust off into LAX. CA doesn't counter with anything. Weather is good, not busy ATC environment. You're on the Rivrr2 arrival for 25L which is basically a straightshot from 30 miles out. So at 12,000 feet when ATC tells you to slow to 250 knots, you command a thrust idle open descent, and then pull the thrust levers to idle and turn off AT. CA asks why is the autothrust off, and you say (nicely) that it was briefed that way. You see the uncomfortable squirm on his face. Then he says "put it on." Not wanting to create any CRM issues, you comply. Later in the approach once I turn the AP off and we are literally fully configured (gear , flaps down) maybe about 1,200 AGL he says ok you can turn AT off now if you want.

WWYD?

I complied with the request to put it back on at 12,000 ft. But understand the dynamics of this approach, this is literally straight in without any turns. Not only that, all fixes are at or above altitudes, and on top of that SoCal always has you slow up from 250 to 220, then to 180, then final approach speed. Point being, your thrust is going to be at idle anyway literally the whole way down. Hell, you'll have the boards out too. I put it on but inside I was just flabbergasted (is that the right word?). Unbelievable.

Anyway I then left the AT on entirely the whole way down and landed. If you're going to stop it from being off, then don't insult intelligence and then "allow" it to be off when you are literally fully configured and on speed just ~90 seconds from touchdown.

To me it says only two things: either incompetent or uncomfortable and neither are good qualities for a Captain. Crap like this is why Asiana happened.

On the A320, the AT can be deferred. Would like to see that MEL on a plane he has to sign. I literally think he'd refuse the plane.
 
Last edited:
I don't know much about AT. Maybe he was worried about a go around? Thinking ahead? IDK...

As long as flaps are at 1 or higher, going to TOGA will then arm autothrust automatically. If flaps are at 0, going to TOGA will give you Go around power, but then you manually control thrust (usually back to the climb detent). Still, not a big deal. And we got flaps 1 at about 11,000 ft because that's when they asked us to slow to 220 kts and we were already approx. on glideslope.
 
I've done that arrival myself with the Citation X and it was idle thrust the whole way. Just modulated the flaps and speed brakes to comply with the many speed restrictions.

Sounds like the guy has certain things he likes to see and it set in his ways. Usually I do what you did and just comply with it. I think that is the mark of a pro, no arguing just get it done and talk about it one the ground. Although I understand how you feel. I've done some serious head scratching after flying with a few people, wondering what all the fuss was about.
 
Well I'm too much a nice person to bring this kind of thing up for confronting on the ground. I just let it go and didn't say anything, and similarly he didn't say a peep about it either.
 
Why don't you ask? Maybe your flying partner had a reason?

Maybe there was something he noticed after the brief. We do operate in a dynamic environment.

I see this often on here. Someone disagrees, and immediately the other pilot is incompetent. Perhaps a quick "hmmm, did I miss something they caught?" would be just as effective.
 
Well I'm too much a nice person to bring this kind of thing up for confronting on the ground. I just let it go and didn't say anything, and similarly he didn't say a peep about it either.
You can be nice about it while discussing it. I had a new captain call out "Pitch!" on takeoff on a 767-300 once, while I was slowly rotating through 6 degrees on takeoff. Being that normal liftoff attitude is 7.5 degrees, he was definitely out of bounds with his callout (his technique was to rotate to 5 degrees and hold, which is contrary to the FCTM), and was unnecessarily scared of the tail.

I basically started the conversation with a "Hey, I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I just want to clarify what happened back there on takeoff." Good discussion ensued.

P.S.: I'm with @learhawkerbe400... My guess is he wasn't uncomfortable, just not thrilled with the fact that workload was going up unnecessarily into LAX.
 
In the not too distant past.......

Just one leg across the country. You have flown with the guy before, competence established, no issues in terms of handflying the aircraft. Not multiple leg day, so no one is tired, no fatigue, easy flight. You briefed autothrust off into LAX. CA doesn't counter with anything. Weather is good, not busy ATC environment. You're on the Rivrr2 arrival for 25L which is basically a straightshot from 30 miles out. So at 12,000 feet when ATC tells you to slow to 250 knots, you command a thrust idle open descent, and then pull the thrust levers to idle and turn off AT. CA asks why is the autothrust off, and you say (nicely) that it was briefed that way. You see the uncomfortable squirm on his face. Then he says "put it on." Not wanting to create any CRM issues, you comply. Later in the approach once I turn the AP off and we are literally fully configured (gear , flaps down) maybe about 1,200 AGL he says ok you can turn AT off now if you want.

WWYD?

I complied with the request to put it back on at 12,000 ft. But understand the dynamics of this approach, this is literally straight in without any turns. Not only that, all fixes are at or above altitudes, and on top of that SoCal always has you slow up from 250 to 220, then to 180, then final approach speed. Point being, your thrust is going to be at idle anyway literally the whole way down. Hell, you'll have the boards out too. I put it on but inside I was just flabbergasted (is that the right word?). Unbelievable.

Anyway I then left the AT on entirely the whole way down and landed. If you're going to stop it from being off, then don't insult intelligence and then "allow" it to be off when you are literally fully configured and on speed just ~90 seconds from touchdown.

To me it says only two things: either incompetent or uncomfortable and neither are good qualities for a Captain. Crap like this is why Asiana happened.

On the A320, the AT can be deferred. Would like to see that MEL on a plane he has to sign. I literally think he'd refuse the plane.

I figure if you want to fly with the autothrust off on arrival and approach, go right ahead.

If I have reservations with it, we'll discuss it at the point of the brief. But if I get uncomfortable because the flight conditions have changed, I'll verbalize it and we'll discuss upping the level of automation.

If my FO is uncomfortable, I don't have any choice but to respect it and my spidey sense must tingle because I don't want him out of the loop. If the captain is uncomfortable, at the end of the day, it's up to him to verbalize it.

Ultimately, @ATN_Pilot is correct, it's the captains airplane. But, in my opinion, good CRM doesn't involve an iron fist. Listen in the brief, talk about a "plan b" if the conditions change and responding with various levels of automation and communicate.

Looking at the RIIVR2 arrival, it's not really that constraint-heavy like the BASET3 or even the SEAVU2 so I'd probably just tell you to knock yourself out compared to heavy VNAV-oriented arrivals.

But, at the end of the day, it's all in the captain's leadership style.
 
As an outsider to the 121 world, I just have to ask...

Is this really something worthy of even contemplating? I'm really straining to see the issue here.

So the Captain wants you to use his technique, a technique that is different than yours but is squarely IAW both safety and company procedure; so what? His airplane, his decision. An indicator of some bigger root problem with the airmanship or judgment of the Captain? In the absence of any other evidence of that, I just don't see the point in even caring about it beyond making sure you are taking care of your responsibilities of being the "safety observer" and ensuring the safe operation of the flight.

Part of being a good crewmember is being able to be a chameleon and adapt your style to the person whose name is signed on the release. Once that name is the same one that's on your ID badge, then you can have an opinion about how to do things in the cockpit that differs from the other guy.

As someone who has spent the vast majority of his 20 years as a professional pilot flying without any automation, I'm the first one to scoff it when someone appears anxious of flying without the automation on. If I'm not the aircraft commander/Captain, however, that scoffing takes place deep within my brain and is not expressed externally. If I'm the one in charge, I will offer my opinion as part of a discussion with the other crewmember, and if I vehemently disagree with their technique we may have more than just an exchange of opinions about it.
 
CRM also does not mean that the cockpit is a democracy.

Oh lord no, I didn't intend to give that impression.

But there is a way to handle things because you're trying to train the FO to be a good captain and to participate in the decision-making than to be a tyrant when it's his turn.
 
The "I don't care, you're the captain, whatever you want to do"-type first officers fail realize violations happen to crews, not individuals.

For the most part. YMMV.
 
The "I don't care, you're the captain, whatever you want to do"-type first officers fail realize violations happen to crews, not individuals.

For the most part. YMMV.

Which is why I said that the SIC's big-picture duty is as the "don't do anything unsafe or illegal" monitor, regardless of the other things taking place during the flight.
 
All good points. But just to add, the face was visibly uncomfortable and squirming. But I get it, obviously his plane, and if he's not comfortable, then so be it and let's just play it safe.

I guess my point is that everyone (and especially a CA of an airliner) should be comfortable enough with it off on a literally straight in approach. And with how Murphys Law works, one day AT will fail and it will be on a "busy" arrival with numerous restrictions and altitudes. What then?

And I guess my other feeling was is one really that addicted to ATs that they would get uncomfortable with it off in a non-busy environment? There are planes out there like the CRJ200 that don't even have ATs. How did those guys ever make it?


As a career FO, now 8 years of flying only from the right seat, I've always had my bag of do's and dont's from learning by the guy in the left seat. I have picked up several neat tricks. But I will say, the bag of dont's is a bigger (as in, don't do this when you upgrade).
 
CRM also does not mean that the cockpit is a democracy.

A-frickin-men. Sadly, many people interpret CRM that way.

And with how Murphys Law works, one day AT will fail and it will be on a "busy" arrival with numerous restrictions and altitudes. What then?

I flew a McBoeing for 8 years. Never once had an autopilot or autothrottle deferred. Never even heard of an airplane in the fleet having them deferred. Never saw one break in flight, either. It's just not something to spend your time worrying about.
 
A-frickin-men. Sadly, many people interpret CRM that way.



I flew a McBoeing for 8 years. Never once had an autopilot or autothrottle deferred. Never even heard of an airplane in the fleet having them deferred. Never saw one break in flight, either. It's just not something to spend your time worrying about.

I fly 900+ hrs a year by choice. I've seen once where the AT chimed a failure with the associated thrust lock message and then it would not subsequently re-engage. The rest of the flight had to be AT off.
 
Back
Top