I don't have nearly the experience level you have, but having just completed the Aviation Technology/Pilot Training program at University of Cincinnati and having just gotten my instrument rating, I would have to agree with your thinking and your actions. Part of CRM is identifying and speaking up when a possible error chain is being started. In my instrument I was taught that if you cannot confirm radio navigation TO YOUR FIX (you were landing on 24R, which had no radio navaid landing system), you cannot use that navaid. None of the ILS for 24L can legally be used for 24R. A visual approach is a VISUAL approach. The flying pilot should be looking at his/her sight picture of the runway, not the instruments (with exception of airspeed). Speaking out was the correct action, and I would hope you were able to continue the discussion after landing, preferrably out of public earshot. Maybe a review of the FAR/AIM was in order.
. . . and I would hope you were able to continue the discussion after landing, preferrably out of public earshot. Maybe a review of the FAR/AIM was in order.
Unfortunately this particular captain never took any constructive crtiticism well . . . he walked off by himself. I walked off with the flight attendants . . . ha ! We took separate cabs to the crews hotel. Didn't see him until the day we were required to report to the airport for the return flight.
Now Peter........what in the hell is wrong with you? It does not appear that the PIC was actually flying any component of the left approach here. The only nav aid was a VASI? And he wanted to use the co-located glide slope as a backup? Nothing wrong with that as long as he remained VFR and only used the G/S as reference. I don't care if you are a DPE or the administrator of the FAA. Use every tool available! That is a sign of a good pilot in my book. Where was the danger? I think you are out of line here.
Jim,
VFR it was not. We were in the clouds more then we were out of the clouds. I understand the the use of a "backup" instrument to incorporate into your scan for added situational awarness, however he was relying primarly on the reception of left glide slope when we were shooting an approach to the right parralle. Unfortunately, we could NOT see the VASI - - - because we were in the clouds IFR.
If he would have done what you suggested I would not have raised an eyebrow or felt that he was outside the parameters of the CFR's or our company manual. For an approach of this kind we needed to be IN VFR conditions AND have the the VASI system in continuous sight.
Jim, one final thought, our company manual did not athuorize or approve the use of a co-located glide slope for an approach of this kind.
Thanks Jim, I do appreciate someone reading some of my stuff and if I am wrong or incorrect, such as this, I also enjoy a light debate on any most topics. I hope you see where I was coming from.
Regards,
