O Captain! My Captain

[rigpiggy]

I think what BB is trying to communicate with this thread is that he prefers the Picard style of command over the Kirk style.

I Prefer the Klingon command structure

[Colonel Sanders]

John Wayne did it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnrTq9Y-uJY

[frozen solid]

I think I lean towards the "Millenium Falcon" CRM model. Han Solo is clearly the idea man in that team, but Chewbacca doesn't take any sh!t from anybody.

And how about the Falcon itself? A genuine "space Caribou" if I ever saw one. Obviously a DeHavilland product.

[AJV]

I love it how there are a few people on here that have balls of steel and would always do the right thing, not accept an unsafe situation and not accept less than ideal work conditions. Sitting at the computer it is easy to say we would say this or do that and tell employers to stuff it. I think (my opinion) that either these individuals are super heros or full of sheet and have either never actually gotten a real 2 crew flying job, have not been fos or have not been fos for so long they have no clue what it is like to be a young guy in the right seat with little experience and being unsure of what the repercussions may be if they do speak up. I have been there not so long ago and it takes a lot of courage to say something. I do agree that you should say something or do something to stay safe, but don't sit there and type away on your keyboard like it is as easy as pie to just speak up. I agree with BB that a gentle reminder or suggestion works great and we all make mistakes, that is why there are 2 of us so we can catch them and fix them before they become a problem. So, to all you Fos that are reading the comments here, be smart and safe, speak up in an intelligent manner, act as a part of the team, ask questions to clarify a situation (sometimes that is all it takes to bring the other crew member up to speed) and be aware that sometimes you will be met with resistance and other times you will be appreciated.

[loopa]

Strong Sop's are an integral part to safe operations. If speaking up is stressed and protected in the sops, it allows both crew members to do their jobs. As well it's an indirect communication from the company chief pilots/dfos/etc that they value input from both seats.

I often disagree with the comment that the final decision rests with the captain. If the fo doesnt like something, walk away from the plane and let a higher power deal with it. In which case the final decision was made by the fo.

All this chat about personal egos being the lead behind people feeling they are qualified to be in the left seat when they are fos and etc... Some companies dont care about how the work gets done... Only that it does. Often times putting orangutans in the left seat trying to strangle the yolk of a kitten as soon as you take them a few miles outside the control zone. (As referenced earlier in these boards)

With a good head and good attitude ones time will come.

[PositiveRate27]

I worked for a company that had captains tell me to my face that they thought my instructing time was "worthless" and I "may as well have 250 hours, and they'll treat me as such." They were also in the habit of .. running VFR below 1000' AGL at 250kts, pulling circuit breakers that should never be pulled, and holding in circuit breakers that correctly popped. They would shoot RNAV approaches without being certified to. I was called a pu$$y and a ch!cken sh!t straight to my face. When I consulted with the CP I found out that not only did he not care, he encouraged most of this as on time performance was the most important objective. I was told NOT to file SMS reports. Immediately after this conversation I applied for a different job and was given a job offer in less than a week. I explained my situation in my interview and it seemed to be received with respect and support. In my current company I haven't seen anything but positive two crew operations and communications with management.

Most of this bad CRM stuff comes from the top down. For the fresh guys out there looking for their first job as an FO do your research before you sign on the dotted line. The company I described above had an atrocious reputation, and I, being about as green as they come, ignored all that just for the chance to sit right seat on a turbine. It was a dumb choice that I'll never make again. Try and get in touch with current pilots (Capt's and FO's) and ask lots of questions about the culture at the company. When questionable things pop up in the cockpit don't be afraid to ask for clarification. Most captains I've flown with have never been insulted when you question something in the form of requesting clarification. Don't be afraid to walk away from something that doesn't work for you after it's been clarified!

PR

[Beefitarian]

That's brutal PR. Congratulations on escaping.

Brings to mind an old quote, "I'd rather be a live chicken than a dead turkey."

[sstaurus]

Sounds like certain Manitoba outfits... Good on you for getting out!

[Brown Bear]

Let's not name any outfits.
Point is. You will be the first to arrive at the scene of the accident. Left seat, or right. It's both your jobs to get it done SAFELY.
Blind adherence to an SOP can be as dangerous as ignoring them altogether.
Old German army saying. "Keep your ears stiff, and your nose to the wind, old fox"

[Beefitarian]

Let's not name any outfits.

If I were king we'd be shutting down that sort of thing, but I suppose naming names on here would quickly turn into conjecture.

[Colonel Sanders]

Conjecture isn't the problem. Thread deletion is.

[single_swine_herder]

Brown Bear ..... help me out here.

I sometimes see a reference to following an SOP as being dangerous, but have yet to be convinced of that based upon an example where "free-thinking" outside of the approved training program and SOPs would have saved the day. Not saying it doesn't exist, just that so far, I haven't seen it ..... and trust me, I haven't seen or heard everything.

Although you haven't advocated it, a culture of following well developed SOPs in a two crew environment with Line Checks and regular compliance oversight by Training Pilots is infinitely safer and greater operational control than a SPIFR operation with zero oversight after the annual X hours of (falsified) training followed by a PPC with the Chief Pilot and him not having any idea of what happens when Capt Bloggins flies 25 miles away carrying your company's reputation in his/her hands.

At my operation we are fortunate to have a very comprehensive zero-flight time sim program, well developed and mature aircraft model specific SOPs, there is no difference in expectation of systems or emergency procedure knowledge or hands-on proficiency between our Captains and F/Os, Line Checks, etc.

Never say never, but I fail to see any normal foreseeable operational situation where not following SOPs and trained reactions would be of benefit. Our SOPs clearly state they may be deviated from if required to enhance safety, and crews are allowed to do so with co-ordination between the Capt and F/O.

Where I have a problem is when there is no co-ordination and a crew member simply "goes rogue" as if temporarily possessed by aviation demons.

Our F/Os are also encouraged to speak up or question the Captain, fact check the reference and then take action if required. It is seen as being part of the maturation process of an F/O and making him/her ready for command of our aircraft and operate them to a high professionalism standard they way we want them flown.

[Colonel Sanders]

an example where "free-thinking" outside of the approved training program and SOPs would have saved the day. Not saying it doesn't exist, just that so far, I haven't seen it

You might have heard of an aircraft called a "Boeing".
Rare and exotic. You might have also heard of LHR -
another little-known airfield.

A couple years back, a guy flying a Boeing had both
engines quit on final at LHR, after flying in the cold for
a very long flight.

Against the QRH, he raised the flaps 10 degrees which
reduced the drag and allowed him to not hit stuff short
of the runway.

He was crucified, naturally - by people like you. But he
did the right thing. Turned out the fuel was cut off by
a faulty fuel heater, which plugged up with ice.

You probably haven't heard of the B737 and it's rudder
reversal problems, either. I'm sure all there was an SOP
to deal with that, which is why so many people died until
they figured it out.

You probably didn't hear about the DHL A300 that had
a bad day over Iraq, either.

And you probably have never heard of Al Haynes, either.

[Beefitarian]

Conjecture and small sample sizes are legitimate problems.

I was very unhappy with the last leg I flew as a passenger on Star Alliance. Air Canada was the name on my ticket. The only flight I ever took on Singapore Air was luxurious by my admittedly low standards. In my limited experience Air Canada has become a carrier I avoid.

I have read lots of things here defending Air Canada as if it is still as good as it was last century. There must be people having a satisfying experience with them.

I'm not suggesting the nameless company here is not legitimately bad. They might be better now.

I don't know how I worded it last time I wrote this but, "I have no problem with pilots wanting to do stupid things, such as, hold a breaker in until the plane they're flying bursts into flames. I just believe they should be flying cargo on a route avoiding populated areas." And "You have the right to refuse unsafe work." Even if that second one is just along the same lines as "Fine for littering." Sometimes a good law does not help and is never enforced.

[single_swine_herder]

Intrinsic sanctimony noted, you've come up with some interesting examples Colonel.

Those statistically super-rare circumstances are not situations where specific SOPs existed, were trained for, applicability of the procedure assessed as being damaging or inadequate and discounted, then purposefully not followed in favour of a spontaneously developed spur of the moment procedure thought up which miraculously turned out to be correct although it flies in the face of conventional aviation wisdom. It's likely that no SOP correction for the 737 rudder issue had been put in place or included in the Boeing training programs until the ultimate actual cause was discovered by the Boeing and FAA accident Investigators.

Although perhaps not clearly expressed in my post, (surely its noticed by all that I am a terrible communicator after all) .... I'm referring to what would be considered "normal" day in day out flight ops expanded to include "garden variety" emergencies like a power loss at rotation, or complete electrical failure and using the ESIS to get on the ground, etc.

I realize those mundane emergencies will pale by comparison to collecting a SAM up the tailpipe on approach to a war zone, but even the most paranoid would have to admit that event is pretty unlikely to happen in Canadian airspace. I'll warrant that dealing with a brightly illuminated red "Wing Departed" light would by necessity involve the on the spot development of an ad hoc procedure if one is to get onto the ground with a survivable sink rate.

Boeing? Yeah .... not only have I heard of one and seen 'em in pictures, I've actually been near one up close and was even allowed to touch one of the tires. One of them new-fangled propless babies landed here in "Podunk Hollow of aviation" where I live and work a few decades back loaded up with a hockey team charter when Transair still ran em.

Like many of us, at parties replete with non-aviation life forms, people still ask me " So, when are you going to get your Commercial and fly the big ones?"

[arctic_slim]

I love it how there are a few people on here that have balls of steel and would always do the right thing, not accept an unsafe situation and not accept less than ideal work conditions. Sitting at the computer it is easy to say we would say this or do that and tell employers to stuff it. I think (my opinion) that either these individuals are super heros or full of sheet and have either never actually gotten a real 2 crew flying job, have not been fos or have not been fos for so long they have no clue what it is like to be a young guy in the right seat with little experience and being unsure of what the repercussions may be if they do speak up. I have been there not so long ago and it takes a lot of courage to say something. I do agree that you should say something or do something to stay safe, but don't sit there and type away on your keyboard like it is as easy as pie to just speak up. I agree with BB that a gentle reminder or suggestion works great and we all make mistakes, that is why there are 2 of us so we can catch them and fix them before they become a problem. So, to all you Fos that are reading the comments here, be smart and safe, speak up in an intelligent manner, act as a part of the team, ask questions to clarify a situation (sometimes that is all it takes to bring the other crew member up to speed) and be aware that sometimes you will be met with resistance and other times you will be appreciated.

You have a good point there. Being a relatively new pilot myself I was proviledged enough to be FO on an aircraft that had a significant learning curve for a yound inexperienced pilot. Ever since flight school we heard the same thing, "if it looks wrong, speak up". Coming in for an approach one day I was PNF and monitoring the instruments I noticed something did not seem right. I could not put my finger on it at first but the HSI did not look as it should at this point in the approach. Instead of saying something, I sat there staring at it trying to figure out what is missing thinking that I'm new to this plane and I must just simply not be understanding something that I should be understanding. Took me about 30-45 seconds of just staring at it like an idiot and thinking "I should ask the captain, but maybe I'm just being dumb and not understanding what the HSI is saying to me". And I kept quiet and tried to figure it out in my head scanning the other instruments to see what the hell is going on" instead of just asking the very experienced captain what the hell is going on. I did not want to look like an idiot because I thought it was something simple that I just missed.
Within a minute or two all kinds of error messages came up and ATC started asking where the hell we were going because we were off course. I almost sheet a brick because I knew something was not right and the captain did not catch it but I was an idiot and didn't say anything until ATC said something. Thankfully at that point we broke out of cloud and we were able to reposition for the approach. Had we been in between mountains, it might have been a different story.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that yes it is easy to tell yourself and others "just speak up, don't be afraid to question something", but in reality it's not that easy. I am still kicking myself for that because I should have spoken up instead of tyrying to make sense of it in my head. It's not like the captain had a bad reputation or anything, he is a very approachable guy, we had great SOPs and CRM and all that but I was just being an idiot and did not speak up.

Learning deinitely occured and I am confident that I am more willing to speak up now should I find myself in a situation again.

[Brown Bear]

Single Swine, I know your experience level and background. I'm surprised you don't agree with the fact that "blind adherence" to pretty much anything is/can be a bad idea. SOPS are more often than not, the way to go. No argument here. But, one should never cross a busy street, even on a green light, without looking both ways first. Would you not agree?

[single_swine_herder]

Agreed Brown Bear, but a well developed set of SOPs, an appropriate training program, and monitoring of the useage of SOPs would not neglect "the procedure and call of" .... look left-right, confirm clear before stepping off the curb pushing the baby buggy containing The Royal Family's precious triplets.

The F/O would be expected to be the second set of eyes in this analogy by looking left-right, and if the Captain decided to step off the curb a millisecond after the "Walk" light comes on without looking either way because The Skipper decides with open disdain and contempt that SOPs in general are total BS designed by and for people who can't fly, and after all .... hardly anybody gets creamed by a semi sliding through a red light, even if they are The Royal Family triplets .... besides, those Royals have the best physicians that money can buy anyway.

The F/O is there to remind the commander who is intent on crossing the street regardless of conditions because the light is green, and damn it all .... I have the right of way. The "F/O Nanny" who also bears responsibility for the buggy full of triplets is expected to say " Captain ... we have ways we're supposed to do things" in an escalating fashion, and if required .... to grab the handle of the baby buggy to save "them young 'uns" from being wiped out by being strained through the grill of 100,000 lbs of moving metal and thus creating the need for an expensive huge Royal funeral and another hit song by Elton John.

My issue comes after such SOPs have been developed specifically for the operational role of the organization with considerable input from multiple highly professional sources and honed operationally by the line and training pilots with their input incorporated in the revised SOPs, a well presented training program where the SOPs have been learned, explained and functionally validated, the pilot has shown to be proficient in their use during a PPC and Line Indoc, and then for some reason all of a sudden decides that using them is too complicated or structured, or using SOPs stiffles their creativity as if flying an airplane has suddenly become a variation on body-painted nude interpretive dancing to the sounds of free form jazz music in a Greenwich Village beatnik club of the mid-60's.

Yes ..... there are times to depart from SOPs ..... for example on an icy runway reported to have better braking and snow clearing than really was the case .... braking is poor .... SOPS call to be out of reverse by 60 knots to prevent gravel ingestion. Doing so would have the AC going off the end like a curling stone. Right thing to do? Deviate from SOPs 'cause it makes sense to use all possible means to keep the AC on the runway.

I really fail to see what the conceptual problem is when owners or senior operational personnel of companies who bear the personal responsibility for over all safe operations want their very expensive equipment operated a certain way to protect their passengers and hard-won company reputation.

[frozen solid]

With a pseudonym like "Single Swine Herder" you're likely aware that some kinds of flying does require a certain amount of creativity, and than in certain types of flying there can't be a written procedure to cover every eventuality, even ones that are not considered particularly abnormal. I can't imagine writing an SOP that covers for instance: "when considering a landing on a patch of taiga that is generally flat, but has a shallow ditch across it after the slight bend in the middle about a third of a way across, the crew shall plan a touchdown in such a way that maximum reverse is applied after the main wheels are down but before the nosewheel touches, and no brakes are applied until after the nosewheel has crossed over the ditch and touched down on the far side of it. In no case shall reverse be applied after the aircraft has entered the loose gravel at the end of the strip and watch out for sik-sik holes."

I am, surprisingly, completely in agreement with the bulk of your sentiment in the preceding paragraph, and in fact am a greater proponent of S.O.P.s precisely because they remove a great deal of stress from day-to-day decision-making. Nevertheless, the farther into left field you go away from boring a straight hole from a great big runway to another great big runway, the less you can rely on them. In fact there are companies that look for pilots who don't need to rely on scripted procedure, yet have the wisdom to recognise a situation that IS covered by S.O.P. and who can show some general consistency and use it when appropriate. It's a tool, like any other tool, to be used or not as the captain sees fit. What you want to do is find some captains who can be counted on to know the difference, or get yourself into a racket where there are never going to be any surprises.

There is nothing wrong, in certain kinds of flying, with a co-pilot who hasn't yet figured out what is safe and what is not. One time I was in a (certain type of aircraft)on (a certain type of undercarriage), and we were hauling a load of (a certain type of dead animal) and (a certain ethnic group) out of a (certain type of alighting surface) that wasn't any too big. We had estimated the weight of the cargo as carefully as we could, and backtracked into the mud at the far end to maximize room available. I had even consulted the performance charts and figured we would be airborne well before the far (boundary). As we lined up I said to my co-pilot "Well Chip, do you think we have enough room here? He looked me straight in the eyes, squinted like Clint Eastwood and said "BILL,...HOW THE FU*K SHOULD I KNOW?" I thought under the circumstances it was a very intelligent thing to say and I appreciated his honesty. That guy turned out to be a great pilot and we had many adventures together, some of which were addressed by S.O.P. and some that were not, but all of which were approved of by the company!



*edited to protect the innocent

[Richard_K_Spyte]

Not all workplaces have the option of refusing to work, either implicitly or explicitly, you sometimes have little choice.

Actually, yes they do. Just walk back to your car, spark it up, and go home. It takes pills to say no, and make it through till tomorrow.

In Gannet's workplace it's called insubordination and it gets you thrown in jail.

[Richard_K_Spyte]

Brown Bear ..... help me out here.

I sometimes see a reference to following an SOP as being dangerous, but have yet to be convinced of that based upon an example where "free-thinking" outside of the approved training program and SOPs would have saved the day. Not saying it doesn't exist, just that so far, I haven't seen it ..... and trust me, I haven't seen or heard everything.

Google "CC130 fire key west"

[Gannet167]

Google "CC130 fire key west"

Perhaps one of the finest examples of a very appropriate and necessary deviation from the SOP. Very well handled by both the front and back ends individually, and the crew as a whole.

[single_swine_herder]

Frozen ..... yes, I herded the piston Single Swine for one season, and hated it. If you ever hear of me going back on one, you'll know something went terribly, terribly wrong with my life. Flying the Beaver was a delight. All the other types on floats were excellent times and (mostly) pleasant memories .... but that hated summer on "The Swine" actually did me a big favour and convinced me to get my ass in gear to get myself into the IFR world.

I moved on to IFR the next spring/summer, and that's where my brain has lived ever since.

[frozen solid]

Yeah, I read your dissertation on the subject on another thread, and though it was very funny, and completely accurate. I enjoyed my time on the Otter, 90% of it was turbine, thank god, but the next plane for me after that was the Twin Otter, and the ten years I had spent floundering around by myself really allowed me to focus on the relative benefits of having a co-pilot, and some SOPs, and some real functioning flight instruments. Some single-pilot guys don't like the transition to multi-crew but I embraced it wholeheartedly and it continues to be the most rewarding aspect of my career. I still get to use my imagination now and then though.

[single_swine_herder]

Frozen .....

I'll grant you that every now and then I see a turbine version take off with ease and think for a few nanoseconds that I might like to try one out compared to that oil leaking, wheezing, hearing damaging, vibrate your brain off its mounts, underpowered device of torture that was the Single Otter ..... then a muscle spasm cramp in my lower back reminds me of the slave-like existence I lived for that season of little more than "minimum legs" requiring 45 minutes of loading some outlandish piece of weird super-heavy equipment and fly it to a drill site about 7 miles over the hill, and then unload another 30 minutes in 3 foot waves onto a dock of green branches that was sinking if the camp dog stood on it..... all the while hoping to not hole the floats by losing control of the load, or the wave action on stones or exposed nails in "the dock."

Some people liked 'em though..... but as you can tell by my undisguised disgust for the lifestyle associated with the Single Swine, I don't fall into that category. I can say of the many types I have flown, or have flown in ..... its the only aviation job that I truly hated.

Wouldn't mind a summer on a Beaver at a fly-in fish camp for a season though. My fly rod could use a good workout on about 100 Grayling or Char a day with a Jack thrown in for the entertainment.