Narrative:

My company will soon have 2 openings for first officer's to fly in our 4 king airs, 1 300, 1 200, and 2 C-90's. A member of management, who is not a pilot, but has input from one of our pilots made the following statement to the department secretary regarding hiring those pilots: 'the bureau of aircraft has a policy of assigning 2 pilots on all passenger flts since a single pilot accident occurred in 1992. Currently the bureau of aircraft has 2 captain position vacancies resulting from terminations in feb/xx/95. Our pilot complement currently consists of 9 capts and 3 first officer's. Because of the high number of capts relative to first officer's, 2 capts are frequently assigned to fly together. This situation is undesirable and contrary to accepted industry practice. It also negatively impacts safety, administrative, and economic concerns for the following reasons: contrary to the widely held belief by some non-aviation persons, experience has shown that 2 captain crewing does not necessarily result in increased safety. Unsafe sits have occurred when 2 capts differ on a best course of action in a potentially hazardous situation. The captain with the stronger personality or more authoritarian attitude will generally prevail, right or wrong. With a crew consisting of a strong, experienced captain and a well trained first officer, the lines of authority/authorized are clearly drawn and the first officer's role is that of expert advisor and valued assistant. This is the crew concept advanced by the FAA, commercial airlines, and the military since the inception of crewed aircraft. Under this crew concept, capts take on the additional role of trainer and mentor to first officer's and thus aid in their development and preparation for future upgrade to captain. A significant benefit of this philosophy, is the promotion of standardization and uniformity in flight operations. The bureau of aircraft has experienced problems in promoting standardization and career development because of past practices of hiring only highly qualified capts (is this a contradiction or what?) who came from diverse backgrounds and who have strong, differing opinions as to how a flight operations should be managed. This situation has contributed to crewmember dissension and blurred lines of authority/authorized.' (this is absolutely not so!) I see no basis for that statement and I do not think research will bear it out. When one writes something, one usually refers to some authority/authorized such as the AOPA, air safety foundation, nbaa or other source for safety information, such as yourself for answers. Would you please tell me if you think that is a true statement? Also what would you do if your company was doing the hiring? Money is no concern. They want to have a ratio of 7 capts and 5 first officer's. (I am a captain, so it is not a personal issue and it matters not so long as the reasons are true). Also we have a company operations manual that clearly describes what each crewmember's duties are, no matter if there is another captain in the right seat or a first officer in the right seat. The duties are the same. It seems to me what this does is limit the availabilities of crews since first officer's cannot fly with each other as can capts. All capts area trained at flight safety or equal facility on an initial program and the first officer's accompany the capts to such a facility on a refresher course. I just returned from training and my instructor said that most crews that train there are co- capts.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT DISAGREES WITH THE PHILOSOPHY REGARDING THE MAKE UP OF FLCS. FEELS 2 CAPTS FLYING TOGETHER IS A HAZARD.

Narrative: MY COMPANY WILL SOON HAVE 2 OPENINGS FOR FO'S TO FLY IN OUR 4 KING AIRS, 1 300, 1 200, AND 2 C-90'S. A MEMBER OF MGMNT, WHO IS NOT A PLT, BUT HAS INPUT FROM ONE OF OUR PLTS MADE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT TO THE DEPT SECRETARY REGARDING HIRING THOSE PLTS: 'THE BUREAU OF ACFT HAS A POLICY OF ASSIGNING 2 PLTS ON ALL PAX FLTS SINCE A SINGLE PLT ACCIDENT OCCURRED IN 1992. CURRENTLY THE BUREAU OF ACFT HAS 2 CAPT POS VACANCIES RESULTING FROM TERMINATIONS IN FEB/XX/95. OUR PLT COMPLEMENT CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF 9 CAPTS AND 3 FO'S. BECAUSE OF THE HIGH NUMBER OF CAPTS RELATIVE TO FO'S, 2 CAPTS ARE FREQUENTLY ASSIGNED TO FLY TOGETHER. THIS SIT IS UNDESIRABLE AND CONTRARY TO ACCEPTED INDUSTRY PRACTICE. IT ALSO NEGATIVELY IMPACTS SAFETY, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND ECONOMIC CONCERNS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: CONTRARY TO THE WIDELY HELD BELIEF BY SOME NON-AVIATION PERSONS, EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN THAT 2 CAPT CREWING DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN INCREASED SAFETY. UNSAFE SITS HAVE OCCURRED WHEN 2 CAPTS DIFFER ON A BEST COURSE OF ACTION IN A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SIT. THE CAPT WITH THE STRONGER PERSONALITY OR MORE AUTHORITARIAN ATTITUDE WILL GENERALLY PREVAIL, RIGHT OR WRONG. WITH A CREW CONSISTING OF A STRONG, EXPERIENCED CAPT AND A WELL TRAINED FO, THE LINES OF AUTH ARE CLRLY DRAWN AND THE FO'S ROLE IS THAT OF EXPERT ADVISOR AND VALUED ASSISTANT. THIS IS THE CREW CONCEPT ADVANCED BY THE FAA, COMMERCIAL AIRLINES, AND THE MIL SINCE THE INCEPTION OF CREWED ACFT. UNDER THIS CREW CONCEPT, CAPTS TAKE ON THE ADDITIONAL ROLE OF TRAINER AND MENTOR TO FO'S AND THUS AID IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT AND PREPARATION FOR FUTURE UPGRADE TO CAPT. A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT OF THIS PHILOSOPHY, IS THE PROMOTION OF STANDARDIZATION AND UNIFORMITY IN FLT OPS. THE BUREAU OF ACFT HAS EXPERIENCED PROBS IN PROMOTING STANDARDIZATION AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF PAST PRACTICES OF HIRING ONLY HIGHLY QUALIFIED CAPTS (IS THIS A CONTRADICTION OR WHAT?) WHO CAME FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS AND WHO HAVE STRONG, DIFFERING OPINIONS AS TO HOW A FLT OPERATIONS SHOULD BE MANAGED. THIS SIT HAS CONTRIBUTED TO CREWMEMBER DISSENSION AND BLURRED LINES OF AUTH.' (THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT SO!) I SEE NO BASIS FOR THAT STATEMENT AND I DO NOT THINK RESEARCH WILL BEAR IT OUT. WHEN ONE WRITES SOMETHING, ONE USUALLY REFERS TO SOME AUTH SUCH AS THE AOPA, AIR SAFETY FOUNDATION, NBAA OR OTHER SOURCE FOR SAFETY INFO, SUCH AS YOURSELF FOR ANSWERS. WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU THINK THAT IS A TRUE STATEMENT? ALSO WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOUR COMPANY WAS DOING THE HIRING? MONEY IS NO CONCERN. THEY WANT TO HAVE A RATIO OF 7 CAPTS AND 5 FO'S. (I AM A CAPT, SO IT IS NOT A PERSONAL ISSUE AND IT MATTERS NOT SO LONG AS THE REASONS ARE TRUE). ALSO WE HAVE A COMPANY OPERATIONS MANUAL THAT CLRLY DESCRIBES WHAT EACH CREWMEMBER'S DUTIES ARE, NO MATTER IF THERE IS ANOTHER CAPT IN THE R SEAT OR A FO IN THE R SEAT. THE DUTIES ARE THE SAME. IT SEEMS TO ME WHAT THIS DOES IS LIMIT THE AVAILABILITIES OF CREWS SINCE FO'S CANNOT FLY WITH EACH OTHER AS CAN CAPTS. ALL CAPTS AREA TRAINED AT FLIGHT SAFETY OR EQUAL FACILITY ON AN INITIAL PROGRAM AND THE FO'S ACCOMPANY THE CAPTS TO SUCH A FACILITY ON A REFRESHER COURSE. I JUST RETURNED FROM TRAINING AND MY INSTRUCTOR SAID THAT MOST CREWS THAT TRAIN THERE ARE CO- CAPTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.