Who sets the altitude pre-selector?

Subscribe
1  2  3  4  5 
Page 2 of 5
Go to
So at some companies the PF sets the heading while the PM sets the altitude? This seems inefficient IMHO.
Reply
At US Airways PF sets it with autopilot on. PM with auto pilot off. Skywest was the same way.
Reply
Quote: Because the heading bug controls actual flight characteristics whereas, in most situations, the ALTO knob does not. Again, why not set your own flaps or lower your own gear?
Because unlike the flaps, the altitude pre-selector does control the flight path of the aircraft. I just had a loss of separation because as the altitude captured, I looked at the approach plate and the PM got an airspeed assignment confused with a new altitude and caused the aircraft to dip below the assigned altitude. At the same time, a new controller climbed an aircraft too soon so we got an RA because we ended up going 100 feet below our altitude.
Reply
Never seen it different either in the US or abroad.

PF works the knobs on the MCP.

PF manually flying... PM works the knobs on the MCP.

Works good... lasts a long time.
Reply
Pinnacle was the only odd-ball one I can remember that had the PM always set the altitude. The more I asked, the more it seemed to be a desk justification. Whoever controls the flight guidance panel should control the whole panel.
Reply
Quote: Because unlike the flaps, the altitude pre-selector does control the flight path of the aircraft. I just had a loss of separation because as the altitude captured, I looked at the approach plate and the PM got an airspeed assignment confused with a new altitude and caused the aircraft to dip below the assigned altitude. At the same time, a new controller climbed an aircraft too soon so we got an RA because we ended up going 100 feet below our altitude.
I'm sorry that happened but that sounds more like ineffective CRM than bad company policy. The PM shouldn't set the altitude until instructed by the PF or ATC or at the very least verified by the PF. If the PM had been flying and set his own bugs, the result would have theoretically been the same.
Reply
Quote: If the PM had been flying and set his own bugs, the result would have theoretically been the same.
I guess that is true.

It ended up being an ATC error from allowing the other guy to climb and they didn't even know we dipped below our altitude, but it got me thinking about the complications of sharing the FGCP.
Reply
Quote: I guess that is true.

It ended up being an ATC error from allowing the other guy to climb and they didn't even know we dipped below our altitude, but it got me thinking about the complications of sharing the FGCP.
I will agree that it can be cumbersome at times. I rationalize it by telling myself that there is no hurry when changing altitudes and by stopping and verifying what he's doing may slow me down and might someday prevent a careless mistake.
Reply
They do PM because it's less likely for there to be a confusion or a mistake when both pilots are involved in the altitude setting. If you just verbally verify as PM, you might just go through the motion vs actually checking.
Reply
Quote: The argument I would make is, if the autopilot is engaged and you feel that the PF should make all changes regarding flight, shouldn't you also be lobbying to set flaps and gear?
The PF is setting flaps and gear, he is just commanding the PM to do it, but he is still making the decision to change the configuration of the AC.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Reply
1  2  3  4  5 
Page 2 of 5
Go to