CAPTAIN AND CO-PILOT

Captain is pilot in command vested with  a legal responsibility and is overall incharge of the flight.
Aviation has evolved from a single pilot operation to a  co-pilot being introduced who was generally a backup, should the Captain be unable to discharge his duties. An element of safety being introduced  or enhanced, with a backup pilot in the name of co-pilot. The co-pilots during earlier days of introduction were not allowed to handle controls by the captains.


From the earlier concept of backup pilot, the role of a co-pilot has undergone a sea change.  With modern aircrafts and introduction of complex aircraft systems, the Captain needed an active helping hand to share the workload. The role of copilot  evolved from a backup mode to that of  an active crew member, opportunity in handling the controls as well, and last but not the least, in taking command decisions under Captain grooming for the role of captaincy.


Copilot in his new avatar is being viewed as Captain in waiting and is being accorded all the exposure in decision making and handling the controls.
The power gradient between a Captain and co-pilot seemed to have reduced over a period of time and the role of a co-pilot being accorded equal importance.


I wouldn’t be surprised if one comes across a old pilot who still believes the role of a copilot as a backup only!!!!!!

RUNWAY INCURSION

A runway incursion is an incident where an unauthorized aircraft, vehicle or person is on a runway. This adversely affects runway safety, as it creates the risk that an airplane taking off or landing will collide with the object.  It is defined by ICAO as Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle, or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft.

A major disaster was averted at the CSI Airport , Mumbai last year after an aircraft, which was supposed to be on the taxiway, entered the runway area, while another had been cleared to land.

These close calls between aircraft and other planes, ground vehicles and hazards have grown steadily over the years and are now a grave concern for safety officials across the world.

An effective Runway incursion prevention program should be capable of

·         Alerting the pilots to conflicting traffic in the air and on the runways, taxiways and ramps;

·         Allowing more aircraft to land safely on time in bad weather

·         Improving communication between pilots and air traffic controllers ; and

·         Virtually eliminating the world’s greatest cause of aviation fatalities – controlled flight into terrain or CFIT.

Please offer your comments experiences and suggestions.

RED STOP BAR AND SAFETY ENHANCEMENT

Red stop bar is one row of flush-mounted unidirectional red lights installed across a taxiway with a 3m spacing to designate a runway –holding position or intersection/taxiway holding position.

To prevent runway incursions, crew need to be trained and instilled in adopting a disciplined approach in not crossing the red stop bar even if ATC clearance is accorded.

Even in some cases where conditional taxi clearances are given by ATC such as “cleared to lineup after the landing aircraft”, the taxi shall be commenced only if the red stop bar light is off and the green centre lights are switched on.

This is akin the red signal of the traffic light where the traffic comes to a standstill. This holds good for operations in any part of the world.

Good habit forming and disciplined procedural approach  is the key to enhancing safety.

LINE ORIENTED FLIGHT TRAINING (LOFT)

Line Oriented Flight Training is representative line operations flight conducted in the simulator as if it were just like in real time, with weather, abnormalities , etc ,simulated, but not reversed to be retrained or practiced again.The whole essence of the LOFT being airline centred in checking the effectiveness of operational and training policies and not merely individual performances.

Of course, individual crew undergoing LOFT are encouraged to self critique and judge their performance, and more important from organization standpoint to check how robust its policies and procedures are.

LOFT malfunctions are not pre-briefed and no repositions allowed, which makes it as realistic as it can be on line and crew decision making and other attributes tested in a more realistic environment.

Also, being a training oriented session rather than a checking session, crew are more involved and receptive to the feedback derived from such exercise and the airline would do well to incorporate some of the LOFT scenarios from airline incidents/accidents to check the overall crew and procedural effectiveness.

The LOFT is more of a facilitation tool and the instructor plays more of a facilitator in the exercise and accords opportunities to crew to talk about the flight session happenings and derive benefits from it.

If you have experiences with LOFT exercise and have something to say, or are curious about it and have more questions, kindly send in your comments/posts.

APPROACH BAN AND CONTINUE APPROACH

Here are some ambiguous regulatory provisions. How does one interpret the same? Can a PIC continue with the landing if the required visual references have been established at DA/H or  MDA/H, when reported RVR is below minima? Who is to say that the required visual references have been established and maintained below DA/H or  MDA/H? Will there be a trust deficit issue here ?

EU Ops 1.405

(c) If, after passing the outer marker or equivalent position in accordance with (a) above, the reported RVR/visibility falls below the applicable minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H.

(e) The approach may be continued below DA/H or MDA/H and the landing may be completed provided that the required visual reference is established at the DA/H or MDA/H and is maintained.

ICAO Annexe 6

4.4.1.3 If, after passing the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or after descending below 300 m (1 000 ft) above the aerodrome in case of non-precision approach, the reported visibility or controlling RVR falls below the specified minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H. In any case, an aeroplane shall not continue its approach-to-land at any aerodrome beyond a point at which the limits of the operating minima specified for that aerodrome would be infringed.

Indian DGCA CAR  D8C-C1

Approach ban: If weather deteriorates after an aircraft has passed the approach ban point, the aircraft already on approach may continue to DA (H) or MDA (H).

The approach may be continued below DA(H) or MDA(H) and the landing may be completed provided that the required visual reference is established at the DA(H) or MDA(H) and is maintained.

Indian DGCA CAR  D8O-O2

4.4.1.3 If, after passing the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or after descending below 300 m (1000 ft) above the aerodrome in case of non- precision approach, the reported visibility or controlling RVR falls below the specified minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H.

In any case, an aeroplane shall not continue its approach-to-land at any aerodrome beyond a point at which the limits of the operating minima specified for that aerodrome would be infringed.