He has, and he is.

Grenades NEED to be tossed at this place. The acquiescence and apathy among the Stepford pilots is sickening. Keep it up Rev!

Excellent discussion point.

Here's an example: #1 Pack MEL'd on a 757. Hot day.
Another: APU Gen inop/MEL'd on a 737/320. IFR or night trip.
Another: Lav 3 on a 757 MEL'd unusable. IAD-CUN turn. Full both ways.

So...if an FO is uncomfortable with the aircraft--and says so to the captain (the captain is fine with the aircraft), how does the conversation go?

And what if the FO thinks it's prudent to add more gas, but the captain does not? (both understanding the performance limitations, of course)

I used to keep track of these "crew refusals" (as UAL called them) or "crew precautionary" (as CAL called them) while working in the NOC. Other than the disparity in aircraft age, there were a hell of a lot more of these on the UAL side than the CAL side. More MEL's, too. Just don't think there's a direct correlation between the two groups.

What say you all?

SCR

This thread is just another example of how we have allowed our profession to be negatively driven by our tribal mentality. Furthermore why would our illustrious federal government certify different procedures for flying the same aircraft just because they have different paint colors? There is no reason for the FAA to have people assigned to each airline for the purpose of approving different procedures except to draw more money from each airline for the federal coffers and make-work jobs for civil servants. Can anyone truthfully say why someone at airline "A" should fly their 767 any different from someone flying the same 767 at airline "B", in the same airspace to the same airports? Have any of you ever stopped to think about how ridiculous our industry is? Maybe it is the way it is so pilots will continue to fight and argue over the minutia and ignore the more pressing issues.

I would stand up for the F/O if his concern were valid after a conservative discussion and it affected the safety of the flight, ie. multiple deferrals that compounded a situation based on variables and made a flight threat level excessive or borderline unsafe albeit legal. However, given that the OIL/MEL list is FAA/CO approved documented procedure, there had better be a very valid reason, defensible with data and logical reasoning (aside from an emotional "beef" with the company ie. not bending over arguments, contractual lamentation etc...).

The question being asked here seems to be a general one that would somehow seek to hold gravitas toward a methodology / 'ism' of a pilot group culture (sCAL) that would respond the same way regardless of situation, namely, the CA holding the FO in contempt or left to his own devices if concern should rise. I have never been privy to that situation in all my years when I was an FO. I was always made to feel as part of the crew (well lets be real - 97% of the time) and my concerns if any always carried weight and were considered.

Having said the above though, the Captain is the PIC. His/her name is on the release and thus, the one who is ultimately responsible for the aircraft. The FO is a crew member and a valid member of the think tank but in the end it is the Captain's decision.

Was given the tour of the TMOC (mx). Shift supervisor (former CAL) said there were two eye-openers when they merged. One, LUAL pilots refused as many aircraft in two weeks as LCAL pilots refused in a year. It was a major shock. They dug into it and saw philosophical differences in the way mx treated write ups. LUAL's was keep ‘em flyin'. IOW, defer, defer, defer to MEL to limit. LCAL‘s was fix it ASAP to keep 'em flyin'. Both were valid but the LUAL method meant the LUAL pilot might have multiple MELs and rightfully refuse aircraft, while the LCAL pilot rarely had any MELs to consider at all therefore few refusals. It wasn't a matter of "low T" it was a matter of zero vs multiple MELs.

Sidebar.......what's an ID?

I think it's what they call Pairing's...

It is. And the acronym dates so far back I doubt any current sUAL pilot could tell you what it even stands for.

Thanks, that makes much more sense than the whole "my dad can beat up your dad" crap.

One of the many reasons why the SVP of Tech Ops (Keenan - lual) was removed and replaced (Hart - lcal) recently.