I am still working on my PPL so i'm not sure if this is just a very ignorant question...

On the Heavys, Airbus/Boeing.. what happense to the plane if the Captain's control of the plane contradicts what the First Offier is doing... does the plane follow what the Captain is commanding and ignore the first officer??

Example: The captain turns the plane left but the F/O turns it right.. what does the plane do? Who does it react to?

thanks again
tim

[Edited 2005-01-22 18:47:45]

What happens on the trainers you fly?
Without hydraulics I guess it depends on who is stronger.
I'd suggest you talk it over with your instructor.

Large airplanes, the controlls are linked together but there are disconnects in that linkage. The disconnects are not for personal disputes, so much as for the possibility that some malfunction can jam one circuit to the flight controls. If that happens they may be able to "break out" the interlink and one, or the other of them will be able to fly and land the plane.

On the FBW Airbus there is a whole sidestick priority, and takeover system that is too lengthy for me to go into right now. Call it duelling sidesticks. "Priority Left" / "Priority Right" In a nutshell, the sidesticks add dual inputs algebraically. We each put our stick half deflection to our own side - then 0.5 left plus 0.5 right equals straight and level. We both put our stick halfway left and we get FULL left command.

As most pilots are sober, responsible people a disagreement between the two pilots is not likely to come to the point of armwrestling over the flight controls. If I was flying and the other guy gasped and grabbed the controls I'd assume he saw something that I didn't see and let him have it. Then we'd talk. Sometimes it is easier to act than to find the words.

There have been a few incidents where guys have sort of fought over the controls. What happens next depends on who is tougher, and after that, it depends on the culture of their company and country.

I read, just a few years ago, that South Korea just changed its rules and it was no longer a felony for a copilot to countermand the captain. I would never in my life permit my family to ride on a Korean airline because of the culture that permitted that to be the law in the first place is 100% inconsistent with flying safety, and I don't care if they did change the law. At least that is my feeling about it until someone tells me that what I read was not so.

I mean no offense to Korea but becoming captain does not make one a God.

Here in the US, and other places around the world we have a big thing called Crew Resource Management or CRM. CRM is designed to help us resolve disagreements and catch errors between crewmembers quickly and safely. I think it is a very good thing. I've had a few arguments with the other pilot in my career, but most of us believe that the safe outcome of the moment is far more important than our hurt feelings or bruised ego.

Get it down safely and talk about it over a beer.

Wow thanks for the indepth review~ but then if lets say the Capt. IS ACTUALLY stronger than the F/O would the plane actually comply with the captain's command and ignore the F/o's?


[We each put our stick half deflection to our own side - then 0.5 left plus 0.5 right equals straight and level]
Also, how does the Captain and F/O know how much to put down to ballance out the plane or to just make a turn?

thanks
tim

In a large plane with conventional, but hydraulically boosted flight controls, the stronger pilot could overpower the weaker, unless the weaker pilot was strong enough to break out the disconnect linkage.

In the FBW Airbus, even when hand-flying (not using the autopilot) the plane stays right where you leave it. Want straight and level? Put the plane there and take your hand off the sidestick. It will stay. Oops, starting to descend a little bit? Just a momentary application of aft stick and then let go of it. That will take out the descent and you have straight and level.

We might not actually take our hands off the stick when hand-flying but we will just hold it loosely in the center neutral detent. It is actually a delight to hand-fly an FBW Airbus.

A good real world example is the EgyptAir B767 incident. F/O pushed the yoke nose down, the capt pulled nose up. The elevators broke out, as SlamClick describes above, and the left elevator goes nose up -- right elevator goes nose down.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20020322X00388&ntsbno=DCA00MA006&akey=1

The answer I did not give: That's what the crash axe is for!

The answer I did not give: That's what the crash axe is for!

Is that good CRM?  

I gotta wonder though, did the EgyptAir Capt arrive at that conclusion?

The thing that troubles me with Flight 990 is that the relief F/O was left in the flightdeck alone, was that agaubst Egypt Air's procedures or was that a normal operating procedure, I know that at least all UK airlines require an F/A to join the F/D whilst one of the pilots are not there.

Wasn't there an accident in Korea where the F/O tried to go-around for no apparent reason or something very similar and he got imprisoned?

Phil
FlyingColours

F/A in the cockpit while the Capt takes a leak was a post 9/11 deal. EgyptAir was '99 I do believe.

Have a readthrough of the CHALLENGING THE CAPTAIN AND TAKING CONTROL section of this article.

The PACE profile seems a very considered approach to many situations where there's an authority gradient, in the cockpit and elsewhere. The article above is not the best I've read on the subject, but googling is a skill everyone should learn. Post what references you find!

Of course the profile will have to be adapted to the situation, as with any procedure. If there's a very stationary airliner in the windshield at 1 nm away and closing rapidly, get the PAC part over and done with in about 0.287 seconds, go straight to the E and heave yourself on the controls...

(Regarding adapting procedures: Always be prepared to do so, but always make sure you understand the procedure and know exactly why you are deviating from it. Same as the etiquette for formal dinners. It is OK to break it, but only if you know you are breaking it... this knowledge is part of the PACE profile, which is part of why I consider it a Good Thing(tm))

Yeah, I do HFA on the side. Don't tell my engineer pals, OK?  

Regards,
/Fred

The FO is usually flogged, scouged, and made to buy drinks for the crew at the overnight. 

How about Korean Airlines flight 2033, where it crashed off the runway because the FO wanted to go-around and the captain wanted to land. Here's part of the CVR transcript:

At this juncture, the Co-pilot decides that there is insufficient distance for the Airbus to land safely without crossing the end of the runway. The Co-pilot, when the aircraft is only 30 feet off the ground, decides to “go around” and pulls back on the yoke.

Co- pilot: Go around, forty [feet], thirty [feet]…

Captain: Get your hands…..Get off! Get off! Tell me what the altitude is. Twenty [feet] . get off.

Co-pilot: Go around?

Captain: No, no, ten, five [feet]

Here they touched down and the brakes and the thrust reversers were deployed, no matter. The Co-pilot still wanted to abort the landing and go around against the wishes of the Captain who was telling him not to go around but to brake the aircraft.

The plane crashed through a fence and into a rice paddy, and caught fire. There were only a few minor injuries, but the Korean aurthorities contemplated pressing charges on the pilots.

Harry

There are plenty of accidents on the books where the F/O questioned the captain's actions only to sit meekly by, too intimidated to push the issue.

From what I've witnessed, this scenario is quite common. It appeares to be just as prevalent today it seems as it was years ago before wide-spread acceptance of the study of human factors and CRM training.

I think it’s a result of the highly competitive job market in the airline pilot field.

The plane crashed through a fence and into a rice paddy, and caught fire. There were only a few minor injuries, but the Korean aurthorities contemplated pressing charges on the pilots.
What was the S.O.P.
regds
MEL

There are plenty of accidents on the books where the F/O questioned the captain's actions only to sit meekly by, too intimidated to push the issue.


Palm 90 comes to mind...


2H4

What was the S.O.P.

What's S.O.P.?  

Harry

Standard Operating Procedure = S.O.P.

Palm 90? I'd be more intrested in the TFN PA/KL accident.

I admit that the First Officer on 90 was a bit at unease with take-off and should have called RTO (my opinion based on what I have researched) but the whole PA/KL accident is more prominent in my mind both because of the huge loss of life but what was happening in the cockpit on the KL 747 in the moments leading up to the accident.

Yeah 990 was in 1999, but I thought that the F/A rule was from before then, I stand corrected, thanks  

Phil
FlyingColours

I remember reading an audit report of a flight from Korean Airlines, where there was an independent auditor that sat in the jumpseat during a longhaul flight. The things they did were pretty scary to say the least...pretty much took my urge away to fly with them! Just found it here:

http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/aviation/korean_audit.htm



Sebastian