Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Teamwork in A Cockpit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Teamwork in A Cockpit

    Watching a program pertaining to air safety, I came across what I'd call a teamwork question. I worked for 50 years, and a lot of them were in jobs involving groups of people with skill sets. What I know from that is that if you know the flow of work and the timing of difficult dcisions, then you know you don't go out for breaks randomly. Anyone who is out on a break misses an event or call with their expertise involved. The boss COULD come and grab you, and sometime might. But often action is more urgent than that. So what a rational arrangement does is put either all parties o r the most experienced parties on deck when something critical happens. Surprises happen, but after a while things can't really be called a "surprise" anymore. Over time, pretty much everything happens, and you'd better know it and be prepared.

    So that brings me to a question regarding a cockpit crew. Who sits in the two pilot seats at takeoff and landing. Do they spin a wheel of fortune, or do they use more acumen than that? If they are passing near severe storms, would a captain actually leave at that time for a break? Or try to be in control when closest to the storm and choose another time for a break? This could apply to any flight or any airline. I have worked in environments where no good sense was used at all. People just left when they needed a smoke or were bored. But that doesn't seem to be wise on an airliner with hundreds aboard.

  • #2
    Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
    Watching a program pertaining to air safety, I came across what I'd call a teamwork question. I worked for 50 years, and a lot of them were in jobs involving groups of people with skill sets. What I know from that is that if you know the flow of work and the timing of difficult dcisions, then you know you don't go out for breaks randomly. Anyone who is out on a break misses an event or call with their expertise involved. The boss COULD come and grab you, and sometime might. But often action is more urgent than that. So what a rational arrangement does is put either all parties o r the most experienced parties on deck when something critical happens. Surprises happen, but after a while things can't really be called a "surprise" anymore. Over time, pretty much everything happens, and you'd better know it and be prepared.

    So that brings me to a question regarding a cockpit crew. Who sits in the two pilot seats at takeoff and landing. Do they spin a wheel of fortune, or do they use more acumen than that? If they are passing near severe storms, would a captain actually leave at that time for a break? Or try to be in control when closest to the storm and choose another time for a break? This could apply to any flight or any airline. I have worked in environments where no good sense was used at all. People just left when they needed a smoke or were bored. But that doesn't seem to be wise on an airliner with hundreds aboard.
    Yes.

    Comment


    • #3
      The problem is you're trying to compare two different types of teams, and it's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison.

      Many teams have members representing multiple disciplines. For example when building a house you might have a framer, a plumber, and an electrician. If the framer has an issue that requires the plumber's skills and the plumber is not on site but the electrician is, that does him no good - only the plumber has the necessary skills to handle the situation.

      An airline cockpit crew is different. At least in theory, all cockpit crew members are equally qualified to fly the plane. There may be small differences in skill levels, but both will have at least the minimum skill set needed to do the job. So any person or combination of persons should be able to handle any situation. There is of course another factor in that when one person is missing from a 2-person cockpit the workload of the person flying will (or can) be higher. But that's a factor of the *number* of people present, not which particular individual(s) is/are there.
      Be alert! America needs more lerts.

      Eric Law

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
        So that brings me to a question regarding a cockpit crew. Who sits in the two pilot seats at takeoff and landing. Do they spin a wheel of fortune, or do they use more acumen than that?
        The airline cockpit is a seniority-based environment and the cockpit crew is composed of a captain, who is the "pilot in command," a first officer who is second in command, and, on flights over 8 hours, one or two extra pilots. The captain will always occupy the left seat and has overall command of the flight, just like the captain of a ship. The first officer (aka FO) sits in the right seat. Both have the exact same training and share flight duties equally. Typically one pilot will fly one leg and the other will work the radios. The next leg they would switch and the other pilot would fly while the pilot who flew the first leg works the radios.

        With a few exceptions (check airmen who are part of the training department), a pilot will either fly as a captain or a first officer. So you don't routinely have a pilot being captain one month and first officer the next or vice-versa. That being said, the captain is generally the more senior pilot, though not always. I've known cases where a pilot would stay in the first officer's seat because his relative seniority is better instead of upgrading to captain. For example, before I upgraded to captain on the 737 I flew as first officer on the 757. As FO on the 757, I was 34% down the seniority list of 757 first officers in my base, thus I could bid better schedules, get summer vacations, Christmas and other holidays off, and that sort of thing. After upgrade to captain on the 737, I am now 74% from the top of the list which means that weekends off, summer vacations, Christmas off, New Years day off, etc are a thing of the past and will be a long time coming in the future. In fact, about the only holiday I can get off now is Groundhog day... I could have become a captain a year or two earlier but I chose to stay in the right seat and be able to spend more time with my family while the kids were still in school. I upgraded the year my daughter started college.

        In the case of an augmented crew--flights over 8 hours have one extra pilot, flights over 12 have two. The extra pilot, called a relief pilot or "International Relief Officer (IRO)" will occupy the seat of the captain or first officer while that pilot is on a break. By regulation, the pilots must take a break, but it's required to have two pilots in the cockpit at all times. No matter which seat the IRO is occupying, he or she is always third in command.

        Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
        If they are passing near severe storms, would a captain actually leave at that time for a break? Or try to be in control when closest to the storm and choose another time for a break? This could apply to any flight or any airline. I have worked in environments where no good sense was used at all. People just left when they needed a smoke or were bored. But that doesn't seem to be wise on an airliner with hundreds aboard.
        First of all, I think your definition of break and ours are different--depending on the operation (domestic vs. long-haul). In a domestic situation my definition of a break is just enough time to go back and take a leak and get back to the cockpit. You really can't go back and sit for fifteen minutes and disconnect from work. That being said, if we were having to work our way through a line of weather, I would stay in the cockpit until we were through the weather. If it's a case where there is a large storm that is easy to navigate around, then I wouldn't have a problem going back as long as we were on a heading that would miss the storm by a safe margin.

        Long-haul is a different animal since you have another pilot in the cockpit. A pilot can leave the cockpit and disconnect--reading or take a nap--which is the very reason the system is set up that way with an extra pilot. In an emergency or unusual situation, the pilot on break can always be recalled to the cockpit, especially if it's the captain who is on break.
        The "keep my tail out of trouble" disclaimer: Though I work in the airline industry, anything I post on here is my own speculation or opinion. Nothing I post is to be construed as "official" information from any air carrier or any other entity.

        Comment


        • #5
          ...and, of course, there is the disparity of:

          The low-time regional pilot flying at low altitude IN the weather in a not-so-fancy (no autopilot) turboprop (or Cape Air piston twin Cessna with mixture, cowl flap and prop controls) to a not so fancy airport to shoot a not so fancy approach, without an on-field weather station nor a pirep from 3 minutes earlier from someone else who shot an approach...

          versus

          The highly experienced guy sitting at FL410 looking down on storms in a super automated 797 on autopilot cruising 6 straight hours and then doing a totally automated approach into busyville International airport with a 2 mile by 200 ft wide runway and ATC involved the whole way down...
          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 3WE View Post
            The low-time regional pilot flying at low altitude IN the weather in a not-so-fancy (no autopilot) turboprop (or Cape Air piston twin Cessna with mixture, cowl flap and prop controls) to a not so fancy airport to shoot a not so fancy approach, without an on-field weather station nor a pirep from 3 minutes earlier from someone else who shot an approach...nway and ATC involved the whole way down...
            Pretty much OT but...
            Are there really turboprops (carrying paying pax in regular service) with no autopilots? The fanciest airplane I've ever piloted was a Piper Arrow and *it* had an autopilot... sort of.

            Even farther OT: I noticed you mentioned Cape Air... do you live in the northeast US? The first "light plane" I ever flew on was Cape Air - it's what inspired me to take flying lessons.

            Oh and I'm pretty sure all the airports they fly to have on-field weather stations - I know BOS, HYA, ACK, and MVY do.
            Be alert! America needs more lerts.

            Eric Law

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by elaw View Post
              Pretty much OT but...
              1) Are there really turboprops (carrying paying pax in regular service) with no autopilots? The fanciest airplane I've ever piloted was a Piper Arrow and *it* had an autopilot... sort of.

              2) Even farther OT: I noticed you mentioned Cape Air... do you live in the northeast US? The first "light plane" I ever flew on was Cape Air - it's what inspired me to take flying lessons.

              3) Oh and I'm pretty sure all the airports they fly to have on-field weather stations - I know BOS, HYA, ACK, and MVY do.
              1. Yes. While turboprop service has been reduced greatly, I still see the occasional turboprop here and there, and there's even some airlines running single engine turboprops. (I bet a beer that there's some without autopilots)

              2. No.

              3. There is still a disparity in weather information between an ASOS versus a large airport, with tower, lots of operations and recent pilot reports, on-field human weather observers, RVR thingies, wind-shear detection systems, etc.

              and, 4. There's yet another interesting contrast of the extremely good safety record of ERJ/CRJ aircraft- flown by lower-time pilots, yet their record beats most of the big-iron stuff.
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by snydersnapshots View Post
                After upgrade to captain on the 737, I am now 74% from the top of the list.
                Aha. I had you on the A320 for some reason.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by elaw View Post
                  Pretty much OT but...
                  Are there really turboprops (carrying paying pax in regular service) with no autopilots? The fanciest airplane I've ever piloted was a Piper Arrow and *it* had an autopilot... sort of.
                  Great Lakes Airlines' B1900s have no autopilots or FDs, at least most of them don't. For which I respect Great Lakes crews immensely.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Evan View Post
                    Aha. I had you on the A320 for some reason.
                    What difference does that make for the purposes of this topic?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by elaw View Post
                      Pretty much OT but...
                      Are there really turboprops (carrying paying pax in regular service) with no autopilots? The fanciest airplane I've ever piloted was a Piper Arrow and *it* had an autopilot... sort of.

                      Even farther OT: I noticed you mentioned Cape Air... do you live in the northeast US? The first "light plane" I ever flew on was Cape Air - it's what inspired me to take flying lessons.

                      Oh and I'm pretty sure all the airports they fly to have on-field weather stations - I know BOS, HYA, ACK, and MVY do.
                      I spent 4500 hours in a British Aerospace Jetstream and another 1200 in a Fairchild Metroliner, neither of which had an autopilot. In fact, the first autopilot I used was in the 737!

                      Jetstream from outside (This airplane, N410UE, was lost at Pasco, WA after a tail-stall event due to icing on short final approach):


                      Here's a picture of the cockpit of N410UE. The Jetstream had a flight director--that we never used because it didn't work worth a darn, but no autopilot. We would run around all day hand-flying approaches down to 200 feet and 1/2 mile visibility and not think twice about it. In the 737 hand flying an approach to 200 & 1/2 is practically an emergency procedure!

                      The "keep my tail out of trouble" disclaimer: Though I work in the airline industry, anything I post on here is my own speculation or opinion. Nothing I post is to be construed as "official" information from any air carrier or any other entity.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Ok guys, no AP. But not even a wing leveler? The DC-3 had more than that.

                        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                          Ok guys, no AP. But not even a wing leveler? The DC-3 had more than that.
                          Another Jetstream operator I know of said, "no autopilot, just a flight director".

                          I'm guessing that "Weber Airlines" Turbo 206's have glass cockpits and autopilots.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                            Ok guys, no AP. But not even a wing leveler? The DC-3 had more than that.
                            Yes--a carbon-based organic analog wing-leveler...
                            The "keep my tail out of trouble" disclaimer: Though I work in the airline industry, anything I post on here is my own speculation or opinion. Nothing I post is to be construed as "official" information from any air carrier or any other entity.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by snydersnapshots View Post
                              Yes--a carbon-based organic analog wing-leveler...
                              Mark III or Mark IV-236A?
                              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X