Narrative:

On our arrival into sjc at approximately xa:40PM with first officer flying; norcal approach cleared us down to 5;100 feet flying over low; unlit mountainous terrain just east of coast. With VMC conditions prevailing; norcal asked if we would like a visual approach. With the airport in sight; the first officer indicated yes he would. The aircraft (nav radios and FMC) was set up for the ILS 30L approach for back up guidance and had been appropriately briefed. We set 2;700 feet in the altitude alerter window for the crossing restriction at hivak (GS intercept) intersection as back up. The first officer asked for a leg intercept to hivak. While I was head down executing leg intercept and then looking at ipad to confirm tower frequency and tune radios; the first officer had smoothly initiated a vertical speed descent that I did not notice or feel in the seat of the pants. A terrain GPWS alert got my full attention. With a delayed response in the right seat; I took control of the aircraft and immediately executed an escape maneuver to ascend free of terrain. When well clear of terrain; configured aircraft; reestablished stable approach; and made uneventful landing.especially in critical phases of flight (below 10;000 and sterile); great example of the need for communication between pilot monitoring and pilot flying.I've done this arrival countless times and am very familiar. In the debrief I learned the first officer was not familiar. Although I had brought up the terrain and how dark it was to the first officer as we approached; I could have been briefed up better. Additionally; I do believe norcal kind of baited pilot flying with a visual approach clearance at night while still over unlit terrain.in the future; especially at night; the RNAV Z to 30L would have been a much better option and prudent.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-800 flight crew reported a CFTT event during a night visual approach to SJC airport.

Narrative: On our arrival into SJC at approximately XA:40PM with FO flying; NorCal approach cleared us down to 5;100 feet flying over low; unlit mountainous terrain just east of coast. With VMC conditions prevailing; NorCal asked if we would like a visual approach. With the airport in sight; the FO indicated yes he would. The aircraft (Nav Radios and FMC) was set up for the ILS 30L approach for back up guidance and had been appropriately briefed. We set 2;700 feet in the altitude alerter window for the crossing restriction at HIVAK (GS Intercept) intersection as back up. The FO asked for a Leg Intercept to HIVAK. While I was head down executing Leg Intercept and then looking at IPad to confirm Tower Frequency and tune radios; the FO had smoothly initiated a Vertical Speed descent that I did not notice or feel in the seat of the pants. A Terrain GPWS Alert got my full attention. With a delayed response in the right seat; I took control of the aircraft and immediately executed an escape maneuver to ascend free of terrain. When well clear of terrain; configured aircraft; reestablished stable approach; and made uneventful landing.Especially in critical phases of flight (below 10;000 and sterile); great example of the need for communication Between Pilot Monitoring and Pilot Flying.I've done this arrival countless times and am very familiar. In the Debrief I learned the FO was not familiar. Although I had brought up the terrain and how dark it was to the FO as we approached; I could have been briefed up better. Additionally; I do believe NorCal kind of baited Pilot Flying with a Visual Approach Clearance at night while still over unlit terrain.In the future; especially at night; the RNAV Z to 30L would have been a much better option and prudent.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.