USAPA put USAirways in the paper for being unsafe. It wasn't the press doing any investigative work, thats for sure. The only airline that has ended up in the press recently for safety failures is Colgan.
Honestly, do you think your regional has the same safety culture as its mainline counterpart(s)? I have yet to see one. I agree with him. He isn't bashing the pilots, he's criticizing the difference in safety cultures that management has created.
Flight Operations Quality Assurance
He is probably referring to a "FOQA" program and a "Professional Standards" committee together. Under a FOQA program basically the aircraft flags all of the black box data whenever certain conditions are met, for example if you overspeed, trigger the shaker, have a high rate of descent, exceed a certain G threshold (not excessive just abnormal like 1.3) or other such things. Professional standards will then look at that event and the approach/landing,takeoff/departure data and if there are any irregularities they will call you in to do a carpet dance, and it can result in censure, retraining, or even further action. It is all taken care of within the pilot management and usually the company is kept out of the situation unless there is egregious lack of regard for safety.
The Professional Standards committee has software that can take all of the black box data and create a rendering that has the positions of flight controls, instrument indications, and a simulator style video from outside of the aircraft that they can use to study a pilot's actions. Pretty damaging if you are ever caught being cavalier with your company procedures.
And yes, we have this program.
__________________
--
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
[/QUOTE]
They would have accused the captain of not following his CRM training...which Sully did not. People don't seem to bring that up much, but he was the Pilot Monitoring, not the Pilot Flying, when the incident occurred. He then chose to take over the aircraft (sorta like you would expect a 1970's, pre-crm captain to do). This now makes the FO switch to a Pilot Monitoring roll, and start thinking in that roll, instead of the PF that he was moments ago. Luckily, it turned out ok...and thus Sully is a hero. If it did not turn out like it did, I'm sure there would be questioning into his thought process...which was counter to all you learn about CRM.
This was brought up to us by a check airman during a recent recurrent training, and it makes you think about it.[/QUOTE]
I wonder why that's not brought up more often..If I recall correctly, it was Skiles' first trip on the bus from the 737..but still, if he made it through this so-called über safe, mainline training program, surely Lord Sullenberger would've had faith his FO could manage the emergency.
And spare me the PIC babble..because if I also recall correctly, Skiles was a displaced captain.
They would have accused the captain of not following his CRM training...which Sully did not. People don't seem to bring that up much, but he was the Pilot Monitoring, not the Pilot Flying, when the incident occurred. He then chose to take over the aircraft (sorta like you would expect a 1970's, pre-crm captain to do). This now makes the FO switch to a Pilot Monitoring roll, and start thinking in that roll, instead of the PF that he was moments ago. Luckily, it turned out ok...and thus Sully is a hero. If it did not turn out like it did, I'm sure there would be questioning into his thought process...which was counter to all you learn about CRM.
This was brought up to us by a check airman during a recent recurrent training, and it makes you think about it.[/QUOTE]
I wonder why that's not brought up more often..If I recall correctly, it was Skiles' first trip on the bus from the 737..but still, if he made it through this so-called über safe, mainline training program, surely Lord Sullenberger would've had faith his FO could manage the emergency.
And spare me the PIC babble..because if I also recall correctly, Skiles was a displaced captain.[/QUOTE]
Sully was the captain. That PIC stuff isn't babble. He was the one ultimately responsible for that airplane and he made the decision to fly it. I would've done the same thing. You're in a situation where you know you're going to crash. If I'm the captain, I'm not going to sit back and watch my FO fly us into the ground, I'm going to do it myself. That is, unless I think my FO has a much better chance of doing it successfully than I do.
Plus, as far as the training goes, being brand new to the plane, fresh out of the box... you're going to be great at running abnormals. Probably not the best stick in that particular airplane yet. Let the guy with the experience do some of that seat of the pants pilot stuff and let the guy that just spent a month or two running abnormal procedures do some of them. It makes complete sense that they switched PF.
Sully was the captain. That PIC stuff isn't babble. He was the one ultimately responsible for that airplane and he made the decision to fly it. I would've done the same thing. You're in a situation where you know you're going to crash. If I'm the captain, I'm not going to sit back and watch my FO fly us into the ground, I'm going to do it myself. That is, unless I think my FO has a much better chance of doing it successfully than I do.
Plus, as far as the training goes, being brand new to the plane, fresh out of the box... you're going to be great at running abnormals. Probably not the best stick in that particular airplane yet. Let the guy with the experience do some of that seat of the pants pilot stuff and let the guy that just spent a month or two running abnormal procedures do some of them. It makes complete sense that they switched PF.
Bingo. Skiles was brand new to the plane. Sully made absolutely the right call in assuming control and having Skiles run the checklist. If I were in Skiles position, I would have wanted the more experienced guy to have the airplane as well.
Bingo. Skiles was brand new to the plane. Sully made absolutely the right call in assuming control and having Skiles run the checklist. If I were in Skiles position, I would have wanted the more experienced guy to have the airplane as well.
+1
I'm 100000% for the flying pilot being the flying pilot, including allowing FOs to call aborts and initiate aborts while they are PF.
That said, in the case of US1549, the guy who signed for the airplane was the guy with much more experience in the airplane and took command...not a knock on Skiles or his background, just a simple fact of that moment in time.
While there's definitely a white paper on CRM to be written based on this accident, can't say I find any fault in what Sully did in that cockpit.
__________________
"Fat pilots carry less payload." - R.M. Grundman
They would have accused the captain of not following his CRM training...which Sully did not. People don't seem to bring that up much, but he was the Pilot Monitoring, not the Pilot Flying, when the incident occurred. He then chose to take over the aircraft (sorta like you would expect a 1970's, pre-crm captain to do). This now makes the FO switch to a Pilot Monitoring roll, and start thinking in that roll, instead of the PF that he was moments ago. Luckily, it turned out ok...and thus Sully is a hero. If it did not turn out like it did, I'm sure there would be questioning into his thought process...which was counter to all you learn about CRM.
This was brought up to us by a check airman during a recent recurrent training, and it makes you think about it
Tell your checkairman that the FO only had about 34 hours in type, and it was one of his first trips off from Airbus OE. Sully did the absolute responsible thing and took over. There are other cases in which the CA let the FO continue flying the airplane, because the CA knew the FO was heavily experienced and it wouldn't serve any good a purpose to switch roles. Case in point, the British 777 loss of power on final to LHR. The FO was PF, and continued the whole way. But in this US Airways case, any reasonable captain would have taken over considering the FOs experience on that particular fleet type.
I remember when I had 30-40 some hours in the A320. All my briefings were that I still had less than 100 hrs in type, was new on it, and that all those operational restrictions apply (can't takeoff/land at special use airports, can't land with crosswinds greater than 15 knots, can't land on contaminated runways, etc etc... typical Part 121 requirements). So what makes anyone think that Sully would have allowed a FO with 35 hrs on the Bus to go ahead with a potential ditching? The proper CRM took place on that flight, and rightfully, the CA took over as PF.
Tell your checkairman that the FO only had about 34 hours in type, and it was one of his first trips off from Airbus OE. Sully did the absolute responsible thing and took over. There are other cases in which the CA let the FO continue flying the airplane, because the CA knew the FO was heavily experienced and it wouldn't serve any good a purpose to switch roles. Case in point, the British 777 loss of power on final to LHR. The FO was PF, and continued the whole way. But in this US Airways case, any reasonable captain would have taken over considering the FOs experience on that particular fleet type.
I remember when I had 30-40 some hours in the A320. All my briefings were that I still had less than 100 hrs in type, was new on it, and that all those operational restrictions apply (can't takeoff/land at special use airports, can't land with crosswinds greater than 15 knots, can't land on contaminated runways, etc etc... typical Part 121 requirements). So what makes anyone think that Sully would have allowed a FO with 35 hrs on the Bus to go ahead with a potential ditching? The proper CRM took place on that flight, and rightfully, the CA took over as PF.
OK, now defend Sully's violations of sterile cockpit that everyone ignores...GO
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
