This guy gets it.

This thing blew up in a way I could not have envisioned! Each of you that criticized me for how I related with my F/O does not know what you are talking about! You weren't there, so you don't know. Our relationship was good going in and reamains so. We have many trips together and will again, as we are of similar relative seniority and enjoy each other's company, both on duty and on layovers. The paraphrased conversation that I might have included in any above posts was not word-for-word what would have been on the CVR; I was just trying to relate the circumstance, not infer a "tone" or demeanor. Let's just say everyone was happy in the end, and we went about our day.

My contrition tank is empty. I'm not apologizing to the APC world for sharing a thought that I probably should not have. I do appreciate the honest exchange of info and ideas. It's clear I did not think about the details of FAR 139 field maintenance requirements. There's probably more going on behind the scenes than I ever realized. The fact that FOD comes on my "radar" was based on a real world, in-your-face experience with a large object on the runway that threatened my flight. Maybe that was a unicorn, but it is etched in my brain. Would you expect my ongoing attitude about such things to be a shrug of the shoulders and "meeeeh?" Now I am armed with new insight that I will apply to future operations. That's all I can ask for, right?

I will say that I am glad this topic came up since I too learned a lot of helpful information about airport ops and FAR 139.

I agree the personal attacks were over the top but it's the internet so should have been expected.

Hyperbole…the point was not all dumb sh!t has to be addressed in the manuals.

I’m glad you brought it up. At least now you know that this technique is un-necessary and way outside the norms so in the future you won’t subject another FO to it.

How so? I found this thread useful unlike many other discussions. I enjoy real aviation threads. I thank the OP for bringing it up and being a good sport.

I was more referencing the discussion that ran into what is/isn't in our manuals and what we can or cannot do as a result. That sort of ran off the rails for a bit but things seem to be back on track.

That may be the case but definitely not how you represented his questioning you in the original post.- "The somewhat surprising cockpit dynamics with the F/O are a topic for another day. It was leg 2 of 2, and we seemed to have a good rapport - he was on the final lap before going to IQ for upgrade and seemed to be testing the authority waters early, so to speak. Plus, there was a commuter flight on his mind."-

You seemed annoyed that he was questioning you even going so far as to bringing into the discussion his motives. I get that you aren't happy with the response you received here but hopefully this was a good lesson for all parties involved. I would be curious about the FO's interpretation of how this went down. That being said this has definitely been a discussion worth having as Im sure a very small percentage of our pilots (myself included) know what is required of an airport to have scheduled service...

Good discussion, I agree. But also he says he'll have many other trips with the FO...but I thought he said it was the FOs last trip before upgrading. So how does that make sense?
​​​

I do a lot of flying now out of uncontrolled airports. I try very hard to minimize my time on the runway. There are aircraft without radios and aircraft that have them but don't use them. Not long ago getting ready to depart and did not hear any aircraft on the radio from startup to arriving at the hold short. Made call departing and checked for arriving traffic. As I pulled out saw a Pilatus on short final opposite direction that never said a word. Arriving back later they were departing and talking. Mentioned they made no calls on arrival. They said they were shooting the instrument approach and not required to make calls!