Calling go-around from the jumpseat
 

Just curious, is there any etiquette or what would would you do....?

400' agl, engines still at idle, full dot high on GS, ultimately landed outside TDZ. First time I've been scared in the jumpseat.

This goes way beyond etiquette.....

You would NEVER say anything like "go around" from the Jumpseat!

It would definitely cause confusion-and you are very close to the ground.

Think about it..... it's fine to point stuff out, and contribute to a broader perspective if you see anything unsafe, but all commands and call outs should always be the domain of the pilots operating the plane.

Telling someone to "go around" from the Jumpseat makes about as much sense as calling "runway in sight," or "my aircraft." None of those things should ever be said by jumpseaters.

Id never even think about using any command from the Jumpseat.

Just curious, what did it look like at 1500, 1000'....

That's a difficult situation and I would say largely dependent on the Crew you are jumpseating with. I always brief my jumpseaters that if they see anything that looks unusual or unsafe then to please bring it to my attention. I have flown as an enlisted crew member in the Air Force and as a flight engineer and I understand how having a third pair of eyes overlooking the big picture can greatly increase safety. I would say if you feel the safety of the aircraft is in jeapordy then you are completely justified in calling a go around.

So if you're on the jumpseat of say UPS 1354, then just go ahead and die?

If it's bad enough, call the go around. Then on the ground you can discuss. And as long as it was a justified go around, what's the captain going to do, chew you out? Go to his jumpseat committee chairman? Worse case scenario when the event is done and landed safely is the CA chews you out. Anything the CA tries to take to the "higher up" will just open the door for drawing more attention to himself for the event that led to the go around in the first place.

Definitely speak up, I would. Maybe not call go around but mention something about looks unstable, high, hint at them the best you can. That's just a tough spot to be in.

You not knowing the distracting danger of a jumpseater calling a go-around at 400 ft worries me more than a dot high, high energy on a 12 or 16,000 foot runway.

Seriously, not even to save you own life? There's no etiquette, do the passengers in the back a favor and say something.

Can you name an airline culture where the jumpseater isn't considered to be part of the crew? After all, that's the premise for allowing the captain to extended the professional courtesy, right? If guys get close to the ground and are behind the aircraft, I agree that one should choose the phrasing carefully to avoid compounding any confusion. But if I'm sitting in the middle seat, below 200' and it's a total $*it show. Yep, I'm going to speak up.

I think the important filter is that I'd be speaking up to avoid a situation that hurts people, not alerting guys that they aren't flying an approach to check ride standards. FOQA will rat most everything out & if the crew isn't aware their out of parameters it may be time to pay attention to why.

I was on the jumpseat this morning and the Captain, an LCA, told me that if I saw something I didn't like to speak up and don't be afraid to be blunt. My take away is that guys don't start any phase of flight looking to get FUBAR, sometimes they do need some gentle (or not so gentle) nudging to convince them to try something different.

This is what I'd do.

Giving a hint is fine. Pointing something out is fine, but commands-Nope. Definitely not fine.

I know of a situation where a plane (737) landed so hard the nose gear axle broke....

One tire went bounding down the runway to get ingested by the left engine, the other got ingested by the right.... Fortunately, they just slid to a stop on or near the runway with some pretty extensive damage...... But that easily could have killed everyone onboard.

Why?

Because as the pilots broke out, one said "I got it."

The guy who said it meant "I have the runway in sight."

The other guy released controls because he thought the "I got it" meant the other pilot was taking control of the aircraft..... So the plane touched down with both pilots thinking the other guy had the controls.

Easy to see how bad things happen if the wrong thing is said at the wrong time. And "go around" from a jumpseater is always the wrong thing.

-Of course we can all imagine situations where the jumpseater would need to say something..... I would recommend "check your glideslope" or "you are unstable." Nothing wrong with speaking up, just don't use the exact phrase another pilot would use to trigger any maneuver.

So was the company u talking about called southwe$t

Just having some fun. I would mention something to the crew but i wouldnt call a go around from a jumpseat unless i was crapping in my paints

How long was the runway and what was the airport? Were they flying a visual off the papi's or flying the glideslope? I've seen the papi's and glideslope to be off half a dot at times that low. A short runway with obstacles at the end would be a different situation than a super long one with no obstacles. A lot of unknown variables to say I would speak up at 400' agl, possibly making an undesirable situation even more dangerous.

I would call it if I was...

1) Scared for life or limb and
2) Familiar enough with the airplane to be able to judge (I probably couldn't judge a 747 flare for example).

At least one legacy has a policy requiring a GA if a jumpseater calls it.

Meh, just a rough auto-land.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum in a long time!:eek:

Gee MR. Check airman or MR. FAA..... I did not know I was really suppose to go around when I was that far out of parameters when you call it.....especially since you were in the jumpseat!

You need to clarify the runway length for your war story. Also start with"there I was"

"I got it" is a non standard call out. "Go-around" in a clear stern voice on the approach phase means only one thing. Talk about it later.

You are in that jumpseat because you are a pilot.

If you see something that even remotely looks like a reason to go-around due to obvious aircraft state, you are OBLIGED to call the "Go-Around"!

ACM - Additional Crew Member, NOT "Passenger".

Our policy is a "No-Fault" go-around policy, no questions JUST DO IT!

Brief it up after you land, no harm, no foul and thanks for the extra set of eyes.

Anybody that has the opinion that they should not speak up, needs to remain in the aft cabin!

Any pilot on the jumpseat becomes part of the operating crew braniac....., they MUST be included on the briefing and participate on the decision making process.....!

I don't honestly think it matters if the runway was 1200' or 12,000'. An unstable approach is an unstable approach.

Being 20-25 feet high on a visual approach at 400 ft agl on a visual approach in flat country on a long runway is a much different situation than full blown IMC to mins on a short rwy in a mountainous area.

Would you call unstable approach on a visual approach if the crew was 10 feet high at 200 agl? That would be 3 white and red on the papi's.

Landing on 16R at DEN at the far end of the touchdown zone with 13,000 feet left is a lot different than landing 3,000 feet down the runway at SNA.

At some point....common sense needs to kick in.

I know that some of the guys that live in simulators would disagree.

As far as the original post, a jump seater should speak up if things get dangerous...but you better make sure you know what you're talking about! I'm not going to sit there and watch the plane crash (a la Asiana pilots in SFO).

Go ahead.


Start calling commands from a jumpseat. I bet you will hear about it.


If this sort of thing makes sense to you, don't ever ride on any airline jumpseat.


Come ride on mine and start with commands. We'll see how many jumpseats you ever get to ride on again.

As a jumpseater you should help look for traffic and say thanks for the ride. That's it and that's all.

I guess I'd better start checking the notams when I jumpseat.

Wait, so you're going to make me look for traffic but if something happens that is life threatening, I'm supposed to sit and grin?

Granted, it would take A LOT to get me to say something about anyone's approach especially on another airline's jumpseat but if I know for sure the aircraft is in a dangerous state, I'm going to say something. I don't care if it hurts your fragile ego.

I've coughed really loudly as we blew through 10,000ft at 320kts once.... they got the message, but no one said thank you.

Another time I watched a crew select speed mode for a climb without advancing the thrust levers in Class B airspace at 6,000ft... we started descending at 1,500fpm, and lost 500ft.

I've seen improper use of lights several times (no strobes, leaving beacon on, etc).

I've seen blown crossing restrictions.

And best of all... I've seen ALL of that on the same flight.

Don't take it so literally. Of course speak up for life-threatening or certificate-violating situations, but calling a go-around is overstepping. Even a third or fourth operating crew member in the observer seat calling for a go-around would get you a "what the hell are you doing?" unless certain death is imminent.

First of all, I took it literally because you emphasised your point with "that's it and that's all." That is the definition of, take this literally.

Second, I never said to just start calling "go around" because you're a little unstable. But I have said, "um, I'm pretty sure he said 12,000 not 14,000." As long as you are professional about it, most crews appreciate the help.

And just to be clear, I wouldn't have called GA in the scenario presented. I don't think a dot high at 400 feet is enough for me to get involved, especially on a long runway. Now, full scale, power idle on a short runway? I'd probably say something to the Captain.

No doubt.. good job.

Is this really that difficult?

Don't be a backseat driver or Jumpseat Lance Captain...but also don't swallow your tongue and allow the crew to get violated or do something that endangers the safety of the aircraft when a prompt may draw attention to the coming FUBAR.

Sometimes, a set of eyes a little further back can see things that the two sets of eyes closer to the windscreen cannot...

I agree with the above statements. A dot high at 400 feet is not the end of the world with the average runway. Using the visual slope indicators in visual conditions does make a difference as well. A dot deviation is still within stable tolerances, if correction is being applied. What was the deviation from Vapp or Vref? That was more likely to cause the long landing. Trends are also important in assessing stable vs. unstable. Maybe it just takes a lot more for me to "pucker up" idk :)

From Mr. Boeing's FCTM...

Any perameter outside the above would warrant at least the very minimum "Unstable" callout, especially with both thrust levers at idle. You failed to state if the crew in question was unstable from the onset of the approach. Speed, power settings, checklists, etc.

My previous carrier required stabilized no later than 1,000' AGL regardless of the weather conditions.

Agree.

The total picture is important here.
Type? VMC? IMC? Runway length?
It met be perfectly fine in one scenario and not the next.
A Saab 340 been told maximum speed till 5 miles final on a visual on a 10,000' runway I don't care about the touchdown zone perse as other things take priority especially with other traffic behind you.
A 737 in the rain in IMC at LGA, not a good idea.

Speaking of the subject. That incident with southwest in lga I believe thats where it was with the female captain. The FAA went after the American Airlines jumpseater for not calling a go around.

How would an AA pilot know the SOPs of a SWA pilot. Hell, their approach profiles are probably the same as a C-17 tactical landing.

Not sure. But the approach was all f''d. Transfer of flight controls happened low on the approach. Not sure what the results of that investigation was but i was surprised to hear that as well. I believe it was mentioned on this forum around the time of the incident.

"Went after"? Fact or second hand news?
What did the NTSB say? When should he have called for a g/a?