NYT: Alaska Flying Above Industry Troubles
03-06-2013, 06:33 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 443
Originally Posted by serhito
I was told that in some cases the Captain landing only airport is due to insurance restrictions.
I just never understood why Alaska doesn't let the FOs fly out of SNA when they can do most of the Arctic flying.
03-06-2013, 06:49 AM
#15
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by shfo
In some instances that makes no sense. I have been on an MD-80 jumpseat where the FO had more MD-80 PIC time than the Captain had total time.
I just never understood why Alaska doesn't let the FOs fly out of SNA when they can do most of the Arctic flying.
I just never understood why Alaska doesn't let the FOs fly out of SNA when they can do most of the Arctic flying.
03-06-2013, 07:02 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: B737, CA
Posts: 176
Thinking weakens the team...
As a very senior F/O, (flown in and out of ADQ for 17 years), I flew with a new to ANC Capt who had never once in his life been to ADQ. His Arctic qual took him to OTZ and OME which also checks the box for ADQ. So it's raining and its windy and its going to be a RNP to rwy 36. New Capt flys it as required by our rules. It was the worst landing that I have ever seen. I was way to slow in hindsight as I was reaching for the throttles and calling for a go around just as we touched down, then it got sporty...
Stupid rules certainly reduced the level of safety on that airplane that day. I'm always in favor of letting the crew use all the tools in their tool box. Who should better decide who's leg it is? The butts on the sheep skin or the guy 1500 miles away behind a desk who has not flown the line in 10 years?
As a very senior F/O, (flown in and out of ADQ for 17 years), I flew with a new to ANC Capt who had never once in his life been to ADQ. His Arctic qual took him to OTZ and OME which also checks the box for ADQ. So it's raining and its windy and its going to be a RNP to rwy 36. New Capt flys it as required by our rules. It was the worst landing that I have ever seen. I was way to slow in hindsight as I was reaching for the throttles and calling for a go around just as we touched down, then it got sporty...
Stupid rules certainly reduced the level of safety on that airplane that day. I'm always in favor of letting the crew use all the tools in their tool box. Who should better decide who's leg it is? The butts on the sheep skin or the guy 1500 miles away behind a desk who has not flown the line in 10 years?
03-06-2013, 08:20 AM
#17
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 36N15
Posts: 323
Originally Posted by shfo
I just never understood why Alaska doesn't let the FOs fly out of SNA when they can do most of the Arctic flying.
Originally Posted by serhito
Yeah. I never meant it made sense.
With the acquisition of the 737-400s, AS proved to the airport that they could fly noise limited AA and E slots IF they used a "noise abatement" procedure. Remember, the Cat E slots are turboprop slots. So, to get them, AS had to run the SNA service through OAK to limit weight and the subsequent noise over the monitors.
Unfortunately, the procedure (at the time) required the Captain to do some fairly precise flying while the F/O was busy doing a lot of things with the Mode Control Panel.
Since the advent of LNAV/VNAV on the NG, the high workload has been reduced a lot.
There really is no reason F/Os can't fly the departure these days except, perhaps, consistency and standardization.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
