Narrative:

As the non flying first officer on this international flight with an FAA inspector on board, the captain briefed, including the inspector, that we were all part of the crew and we should all help out in any way possible with SOP's, traffic watch, safety, etc. We all agreed and pressed on to the aircraft after showing the inspector our licenses, medicals, and getting a briefing from him, eating into our flight preparation time. The inspector insisted he must situation in the middle seat of the 2 non-flying crew member seats for takeoff and landing despite the rest of the crew explaining this would interfere with our normal mode of operation. He insisted it was a 2 person aircraft and that my assistance as the non-flying first officer, should not be needed. This did not situation well with me, especially after the captain briefed we were all responsible for making this flight as safe as possible. My presence in the center seat as a rated B777 pilot, which the inspector was not, for an international flight over 8 hours, is an FAA safety requirement due to the length and complexity of this type flight. Obviously this 10+ hour flight is off on the wrong foot already. Later in the flight, the inspector asked to see our pubs. All checked out fine, except the captain's, who was 1 revision out of date. The inspector said he'd have to write the captain up for this. Nearing lhr, we all have our approach plates out, including the inspector, looking to give any assistance necessary. The inspector points out a note on the 10-7 airport page. As he does this, I look over his shoulder and point out that his pubs are out of date. As he turns the page, I further inform him that he is at least 2 revisions out of date. After block in, he tries to justify why his pubs are less up to date than the captain's and yet he is still going to write the captain up for a violation. Double standards and unsafe practices...I think so. Supplemental information from acn 561051: all issued pubs had been reviewed and appropriate approach plates were installed. FM issues were reviewed for bulletins and SOP and emergency changes. All pubs were in possession at the time of flight. Discussed situation with both first officer's and they were both up to date. Decision was made to not delay or cancel flight. Despite extenuating circumstances, captain assumes full responsibility for pubs being not completely up to date.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE PIC OF A B777 ON AN EXTENDED OVERWATER OP IS CHIDED AND WRITTEN UP FOR OUT OF DATE AERO CHARTS BY THE ACI RIDING JUMP SEAT. IT WAS FOUND LATER, PRIOR TO LNDG, THAT THE ACI'S CHARTS WERE MORE OUT OF DATE THAN THE CAPT'S. FLT TO LHR, FO.

Narrative: AS THE NON FLYING FO ON THIS INTL FLT WITH AN FAA INSPECTOR ON BOARD, THE CAPT BRIEFED, INCLUDING THE INSPECTOR, THAT WE WERE ALL PART OF THE CREW AND WE SHOULD ALL HELP OUT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE WITH SOP'S, TFC WATCH, SAFETY, ETC. WE ALL AGREED AND PRESSED ON TO THE ACFT AFTER SHOWING THE INSPECTOR OUR LICENSES, MEDICALS, AND GETTING A BRIEFING FROM HIM, EATING INTO OUR FLT PREPARATION TIME. THE INSPECTOR INSISTED HE MUST SIT IN THE MIDDLE SEAT OF THE 2 NON-FLYING CREW MEMBER SEATS FOR TKOF AND LNDG DESPITE THE REST OF THE CREW EXPLAINING THIS WOULD INTERFERE WITH OUR NORMAL MODE OF OP. HE INSISTED IT WAS A 2 PERSON ACFT AND THAT MY ASSISTANCE AS THE NON-FLYING FO, SHOULD NOT BE NEEDED. THIS DID NOT SIT WELL WITH ME, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE CAPT BRIEFED WE WERE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THIS FLT AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE. MY PRESENCE IN THE CTR SEAT AS A RATED B777 PLT, WHICH THE INSPECTOR WAS NOT, FOR AN INTL FLT OVER 8 HRS, IS AN FAA SAFETY REQUIREMENT DUE TO THE LENGTH AND COMPLEXITY OF THIS TYPE FLT. OBVIOUSLY THIS 10+ HR FLT IS OFF ON THE WRONG FOOT ALREADY. LATER IN THE FLT, THE INSPECTOR ASKED TO SEE OUR PUBS. ALL CHKED OUT FINE, EXCEPT THE CAPT'S, WHO WAS 1 REVISION OUT OF DATE. THE INSPECTOR SAID HE'D HAVE TO WRITE THE CAPT UP FOR THIS. NEARING LHR, WE ALL HAVE OUR APCH PLATES OUT, INCLUDING THE INSPECTOR, LOOKING TO GIVE ANY ASSISTANCE NECESSARY. THE INSPECTOR POINTS OUT A NOTE ON THE 10-7 ARPT PAGE. AS HE DOES THIS, I LOOK OVER HIS SHOULDER AND POINT OUT THAT HIS PUBS ARE OUT OF DATE. AS HE TURNS THE PAGE, I FURTHER INFORM HIM THAT HE IS AT LEAST 2 REVISIONS OUT OF DATE. AFTER BLOCK IN, HE TRIES TO JUSTIFY WHY HIS PUBS ARE LESS UP TO DATE THAN THE CAPT'S AND YET HE IS STILL GOING TO WRITE THE CAPT UP FOR A VIOLATION. DOUBLE STANDARDS AND UNSAFE PRACTICES...I THINK SO. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 561051: ALL ISSUED PUBS HAD BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROPRIATE APCH PLATES WERE INSTALLED. FM ISSUES WERE REVIEWED FOR BULLETINS AND SOP AND EMER CHANGES. ALL PUBS WERE IN POSSESSION AT THE TIME OF FLT. DISCUSSED SIT WITH BOTH FO'S AND THEY WERE BOTH UP TO DATE. DECISION WAS MADE TO NOT DELAY OR CANCEL FLT. DESPITE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, CAPT ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBS BEING NOT COMPLETELY UP TO DATE.

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.