PIC authority

[ETOPS]

Can overriding PIC authority be justified?

Consider yourself in any number of hypothetical scenarios where immediate action would need to be taken in order to prevent a catastrophic outcome. The PIC is in control and clearly veering away from the proper course of action. There is no time to properly communicate the situation. A split second control input is required! What would you do?

[ditar]

Can overriding PIC authority be justified?

Consider yourself in any number of hypothetical scenarios where immediate action would need to be taken in order to prevent a catastrophic outcome. The PIC is in control and clearly veering away from the proper course of action. There is no time to properly communicate the situation. A split second control input is required! What would you do?

Can allowing yourself and your passengers to die through your inaction be justified? Do what you need to do to survive. Argue with the captain on the ground later. Hopefully through good CRM you'd never find yourself in this situation, but if you do, it's your job as copilot take over. There are many accidents where just this sort of situation played an integral role.

[thecaptain]

Can overriding PIC authority be justified?

Consider yourself in any number of hypothetical scenarios where immediate action would need to be taken in order to prevent a catastrophic outcome. The PIC is in control and clearly veering away from the proper course of action. There is no time to properly communicate the situation. A split second control input is required! What would you do?

I would hope anyone would take the corrective action and be able to back it up after with some solid facts. That's like asking someone if they would let someone else kill them. I would hope no one would let that happen. Again, you need to be able to justify your actions after, and should expect to do just that.

Captains can make mistakes too and as an F/O one has to be prepared for that situation where the fate of the passengers and crew rest solely with them. Not a fun thing to think about but needs to be considered. Two crew... You're not just a seat warmer like some captains would like you to think. It's just as much F/O responsibility to ensure a safe flight as it is the captains. That should be the attitude in the cockpit anyway.

[ETOPS]

Just to be clear, catastrophic doesn't have to be synonymous with certain death. But if that's the scenario you are considering...fair enough.

[thecaptain]

Just to be clear, catastrophic doesn't have to be synonymous with certain death.

Death or not, if things are going southbound and the captain isn't fixing the problem, the F/O needs too by way of addressing it or in this "case" with no time to do so, take over and discuss it on the ground after.

[ditar]

Just to be clear, catastrophic doesn't have to be synonymous with certain death. But if that's the scenario you are considering...fair enough.

Please give us some examples of situations you're referring to. If the captain is not about to auger it into the ground, chances are there is still some time to communicate. Your initial example deals with the captain veering away from a proper course of action, so it sounds like you've already had some time to communicate with him/her as this was occurring. You shouldn't be letting it deteriorate to the point where you have to take control to prevent a catastrophic outcome. If you observe things going south, explain it clearly, focusing on what is right and not who is right. If all else fails, then take action.

[Invertago]

and if the Capt. strongly opposes the FO taking over... arm wrestle? At what point does one of them yield if they both disagree and feel their lives are at stake...

I like students, they just let go when something goes wrong...

[xsbank]

"Check speed/altitude/bank/glideslope/power/whatever." "Correcting"
If no response, say it again. If still no response, "I have control" and take it and correct it. Somebody ALWAYS is flying the airplane. Unless he's a total prick, he will thank you later.

[flying4dollars]

Can overriding PIC authority be justified?

Consider yourself in any number of hypothetical scenarios where immediate action would need to be taken in order to prevent a catastrophic outcome. The PIC is in control and clearly veering away from the proper course of action. There is no time to properly communicate the situation. A split second control input is required! What would you do?

Can allowing yourself and your passengers to die through your inaction be justified? Do what you need to do to survive. Argue with the captain on the ground later. Hopefully through good CRM you'd never find yourself in this situation, but if you do, it's your job as copilot take over. There are many accidents where just this sort of situation played an integral role.

Well said. Really depends on the scenario too. The one given by the OP might be kind of vague. If it was a case of the plane about to smash into something then yes, freakin grab the controls and do what you need to do (if there is no time to communicate and act).

Remember, it's YOUR life on the line out there too in SOMEONE ELSES hands.

[niss]

Kind of like this?

Hunter: Captain Ramsey, under operating procedures governing the release of nuclear weapons we cannot launch our missiles unless both you, and I agree.
Capt. Ramsey: [shouting over Hunter] COB, what're you waiting for?
Hunter: This is not a formality sir, this is *expressly* why your command must be repeated. It requires my assent, I *do not* give it and further more, you continue upon this course, and insist upon this launch without confirming this message first...
Capt. Ramsey: [shouting over Hunter] Son of a bitch. As commanding officer of the U.S.S Alabama I order you to place the X-O under arrest under charges of mutiny.
Hunter: I will act, backed by the rules of precedence...
Capt. Ramsey: [shouting at COB, over Hunter] I say again, as commanding officer of the U.S.S Alabama, I *order you*...
Hunter: -authority in command, regulations number 815, to relieve, you, of, command, captain.
Capt. Ramsey: -to place the X-O under arrest, under charges of mutiny!
[Silence all round]
Capt. Ramsey: COB!
Chief of the Boat: Captain, please, the X-O is right. We can't launch unless he concurs.
Capt. Ramsey: [reads EAM] "To the U.S.S. Alabama: Rebel-controlled missiles being fueled. Launch codes compromised, dissidents threaten to launch at continental United States, set defcon 2. Immediately launch ten Trident missile sorties." They're FUELLING THEIR MISSILES! We don't have time to @#$! around!
Hunter: Sir, I think you need time to think this over.
Capt. Ramsey: *I* DON'T HAVE TO THINK THIS OVER!
Hunter: [stares at Ramsey, nodding] Captain, I relieve you of your command of this ship. COB, escort the Captain to his state room, I'm assuming command.
Capt. Ramsey: You're not assuming anything!
Hunter: CHIEF OF THE BOAT, Captain Ramsey is under arrest, lock him in his state room!
Chief of the Boat: Captain, please...
Hunter: NOW, COB!

[AMM]

If I was right seat on Flight 3407 I would have taken over (around 2:15). I would have simultaneously been verbalizing my intentions though.

But what if the seats were reversed? What if my lowering the nose at low altitude (once stalled) would have scared the FO into overriding my authority - pulling up and trying to pick up a dropping wing with ailerons? What if what you believe to be the only clear course of action is actually the wrong one? Then I guess it becomes an arm wrestle as previously mentioned.

...better hit the gym!

[200hr Wonder]

Lets back up a wee moment.

I have always operated under CRM such that if either pilot does not like what is happening, call for a Missed approach/other escape maneuver climb to a safe altitude, get the plane the situation settled down and re-asses.

Either pilot can do this at any time and it is the responsibility of the PF to execute this.

If you do not have this level of understanding there is a problem in the cockpit that needs to be fixed before you go flying next. Then it is not even an issue. You call over shoot for any reason you want climb to a safe altitude and get it sorted out.

[square]

I read a report one time about an FO who tried to wrestle the aircraft away from the captain and pull the throttles on takeoff after V1 in a wide-bodied jet (or some similar foolish manoeuvre) because he was just getting scared about being in challenging conditions that his training hadn't prepared him for. I think it was in Malaysia or somewhere in Asia anyway, the FO had gone through one of those cadet programs. So the captain one-punched him and safely continued the takeoff.

There is a way to address these issues and it's by communicating during a non-critical phase of flight, not by fighting in the cockpit. If you let it deteriorate to the point where you have to do something that rash, you've already failed to do your job, which is to monitor the situation and make your calls ("Check heading" etc).

What makes you guys so sure that your point of view would be correct and the Captain is wrong?

[Snagmaster E]

I think it would be rare to get to a point where things are that bad, as you would have definite precursors to a dangerous act. There are always steps to try and resolve conflict. The confirmation, reference SOP's, "I feel.." statements, etc. all try and resolve this. I've had captains do things that kinda made me go "WTF?" and sometimes had to say, "I don't agree", but if something was that imminent.... Shoot it's hard to say without being in that sit. I have control, and then explain the actions, or call for a go around, and hopefully the training will kick in without question.

Or do what an instructor told me to do with my own students if one of them ever froze and would not let go of the controls:

"Carry a very sharp pencil. That will always get their attention."

[kimchi1]

Hey Guys,

I think that good SOP's, stable approach restrictions, CRM and all that good stuff should prevent this type of situation in most cases. The situation will only get more dangerous and critical the longer you deviate from these procedures and your training. It goes back to the chain. In my flying experience, (which is definately not as vast or long as some) one thing I have learned is that you can identify potential problems very early. You have to know how to use the tools that you have gained from training and your experience to deal with this before you get into a position of losing complete control.

1. Stable Approach Criteria: I believe most airlines have some form of this in there SOP's. If you're airline doesn't do this, I suggest you talk to someone in standards and have it implemented. My airline is a strong advocate of this. Our data has shown since implementing this that our unstabilized approaches, major approach deviations, hard landings, long landings etc.. have decreased by 87%. We also use the FOQA system (Flight Operations Quality Assurance systems) which monitors FDR flight path and digital CVR for any deviations from SOP's. The company uses this data for sim training and deals with pilots that have continous infractions and UNSAFE flying practices. We are required to be Stable, in landing config, on speed, in trim on lat/vert flight path, stable on ILS GP, VASIS,PAPI or VNAV path with no more that 1000FPM VS by 1000' AAE.So, it very easy to identify a threat and deal with quickly. Not stable by 1000, no questions, both pilots know its a GA. Now, if you should be unstable at 200' for example for whatever reason, you make the appropriate callouts. If after 2 correction comands by pilot monitoring with no response, you should assume possible a/c malfunction, loss of pilot situational awarness or pilot incapacitaion. Call G/A.. if no immediate action, it is your responsiblity to take control. lives are now in danger and it doesn't matter if it's the PIC or not.

[Justjohn]

All of these thoughts, of course, are spot on. Dont' drive .. or let someone else drive .. a perfectly good airplane into the ground.

But,...


Be Mindful of the fact that the person in the left seat ... Earned It. I hate the image of the crusty old captain who will crash a flight thru sheer disregard of other's opinions. Nobody goes to work hoping for an accident. PPL who have made it in aviation to command Anything are passionate experienced professionals (with very few exceptions). Chief Pilots are not in the habit of upgrading idiots.

If an F/O finds things moving outside their comfort level, Speak up. A good Captain will have briefed what is going to happen long before it does. If they can't explain what they are doing within the context of the SOP's, it's a problem. In the end you will both be better pilots for it.

But again, be mindful that the left seater didn't just win a lottery.

Cheers