OnCenterline

Perhaps a little history would help: years ago, USAirways was having a huge problem with altitude violations, and using data collected from the pilots, line-checks, etc. (and probably an early version of ASAP), the decision was made to involve both pilots in the process of setting the altitude pre-selector to reduce altitude busts.

The decision at the time was for one pilot to set the altitude, and to leave his/her finger pointing at the knob until both pilots verbalized the correct altitude. The new process worked wonders, and other carriers quickly copied it. Across the industry, altitude deviations dropped dramatically.

I used to work for Comair, and we had the PM set the altitude, even with the AP on, though if it was more expedient for the PF to do it (e.g., if he was already on the panel changing a heading), the PF could go ahead and do it.

The argument in favor of the PM is that it involves the PM in a process that has historically led to a lot of problems and separation issues that are pilot induced. I work for United now, and we use the same process here, and it works well.

lakehouse

Envoy and I bet also aa, is the odd way, even with ap on, pm sets alt

Yumyum

Because pinnacle did it backwards...

2StgTurbine

I understand that having the PM set the altitude is supposed to prevent altitude deviations. Although altitude deviations went down, I would argue that it had more to do with the fact that both pilots had to verbalize it rather than who manipulated the dials. I think as long as both pilots must look at the set altitude and verbalize it, there is no need to have the PM touch anything.

dynamic psi

at envoy the pm sets the alt preselect, for now, but I'm told we're going to be changing to the PF setting the alt preselect in the near future...

LaserRacer

This!

Horizon always has the PM set the altitude... I think it is far more cumbersome than letting the PF do it when the autopilot is on, especially when getting a heading assignment at the same time or while initiating a visual approach.

The Q400 is especially prone to altitude deviations due to having to press an extra button in order to tell the AP to actually capture a selected altitude.

CBreezy

"Your controls." Have fun flying the whole trip.

BoilerUP

PM sets altitude selector, regardless of AP on or off.

Yes, there can be a mess of hands when getting an altitude and heading change...but glareshield MCPs are far less cumbersome in that regard than pedestal-mounted MCPs, and my opinion is that PM always setting the altitude keeps him/her in the altitude loop in a way that simply looking & verbalizing cannot.

gojo

Interesting theory, but how would that keep the PM more in the loop than a challenge/response? By that logic the pilot flying will be outside the "altitude loop". Either way, in a two crew environment both parties are responsible to stay in the loop and verify the changes. In my opinion bumping hands is an avoidable distraction

BoilerUP

Because the PM would have to 1. hear the altitude from ATC, 2. acknowledge the altitude from ATC, 3. set the altitude from ATC in the window and 4. receive confirmation from the PF that what was set corresponded with #1 & 2, as well as matched what the PF heard.

While I agree that both pilots are responsible for being aware of what is going on and listening to the radio, it further reduces the errors and confirmation bias that occurs in every two-crew cockpit (regardless of how sharp crewmembers are, or how standard procedures are), especially when task loading/workload is high...with a reduction in altitude deviations showing that the process is effective.

"Bumping hands" is the lesser of the two evils, don't you think?

That being said, I don't think "your way" is "wrong"...but it is different than the two 91 operations and two 121 operations I have worked at.