Several days ago, I wrote about how two United Airlines pilots were fired following a Colorado Rockies charter flight back in 2024 (this is getting more attention now due to a whistleblower hearing that’s happening). Specifically, one of the coaches had posted a video of him in the captain’s seat while inflight, which is a massive no-no.
Following the flight, both the captain and first officer were terminated. Understandably, many people wondered how it was possible for a sports coach to end up in the captain’s seat while inflight, since something like that should never happen.
I recommend checking out my previous post for background, since the captain’s defense sounded pretty compelling — according to her narrative, she had just gone to the bathroom, and while she was there, the coach sat in her seat without permission, totally catching her off guard. That logically raised the question of how the first officer would allow such a thing to happen. Well, we now have his perspective as well, and if anything, I’d say he has an even strong defense…
In this post:
Why a United Airlines pilot let a sports coach into captain’s seat
With a lot of people coming to the defense of the captain, this sort of puts the first officer in an awkward position. He has reached out to share his take on what happened. Let me just quote his explanation of what happened — while it’s long, I think it’s worth understanding (and again, see the previous post for context).
Here’s the first officer’s perspective on what went down before the flight, in terms of preparation, and establishing rules around the cockpit door:
This was my first sports charter I have worked at United or any airline I previously worked at. I meet the Captain (CA) in the preflight briefing room just like any other flight. After we got to the aircraft I store my belongings, complete some preflight checks, and went to do the walk around.
I returned from the walk around to the CA and Flight Attendants (FA’s) doing their brief. The CA and lead FA said something that caught my attention. They both agreed to leave the door to the flight deck open. I thought this was going to be a normal flight except that we will be carrying “celebrities.”
While in the flight deck I questioned the CA about that decision and why we would allow the flight deck door to be open. She goes on to tell me that she worked a Denver Broncos charter in 2019 as a First Officer (FO) where she and her CA allowed a member of the team to sit in the jumpseat from departure through landing and other members of the team came up during flight to visit and take pictures/videos.
I had a hard time believing that was allowed but the CA also had around 25 years of experience at UA, had experience as a UA instructor (including teaching new hires about the Flight Operations Manual-FOM) and received the United 100 award given to the top employees at UA. I had my hesitations with what she was telling me, but her credentials were hard to ignore.
The team was late and we had some had time to kill. I went to the cabin to get some water and food. Thats where I ran into the lead FA and I asked her if what the CA was telling was true about charters. The lead FA is part of a crew who is dedicated to the Rockies. She proceeds to tell me that she allows the door to be open on charters and will bring members of the team up to the flight deck during flight flight to say hi and take pictures/videos.
At this point I have an experienced CA and the lead FA who flies the charters all the time telling me the same thing. It is ok for the door to be open and members of the team to be in the flight deck during flight. I want to make a note since I’ve seen confusion online. This was my first charter flight at any airline and was at UA for 15 months when this flight occurred. I was off probation.
Then here’s what happened during the flight, whereby the sports coach ended up in the captain’s seat:
The coach of the Rockies came to the flight deck about 35 minutes after departure. He was brought up by the FA who would eventually take the video. CA invited him to sit in the jumpseat behind me. The coach talked about his playing and coaching career and asked us questions about aviation.
The coach started taking pictures and videos of the flight deck and us just as the CA and lead FA told me would happen. In my mind I’m thinking this is weird but my fellow crew members and the coach seem so nonchalant about the situation, so I don’t say anything.
After the coach being in the jumpseat for about 30 minutes the CA mentions she needs to get up to use the restroom. She just gets up and leaves. Doesn’t call a FA to take her spot per the two-person policy. Door is still open at this point. It was open the whole flight. The coach and I were in the flight deck for about 20 seconds until a FA sees the CA has left and comes to satisfy the two person rule.
I was contacted by air traffic control about turbulence ahead and was asked if I wanted a new altitude. I go to the iPad to my right to check the turbulence at different altitudes, request a new altitude and start programming the aircraft for the new altitude. While I was task saturated, the coach left the jumpseat to go to the CA’s seat. By the time I noticed he was getting in her seat, he had given the FA his phone and said he wanted to take a video.
Ill be honest here, I initially froze. I have never been in a situation like this in my career. At that moment I should have told the coach to at least get back to the jumpseat. I wish I would have. The FA didn’t try to stop him from entering the seat. The coach also knew how to operate the CA’s control seat which made me think the coach has done this before. How was he so comfortable in the flight deck?
Again, my biggest mistake was not telling the coach to get out of the control seat but the way the FA was encouraging the coach while taking the video and the way the coach looked so comfortable in the seat I was at a crossroads in my head. This seemed so wrong but at the same time everyone around me seems so comfortable doing this. I did not listen to my intuition about the situation.
While the FA was filming, I could hear the CA’s voice in the galley. It was at this time where the second member of the Rockies came in for a few seconds. I read his statement. According to him the CA was out of the bathroom and by the flight deck door as he went into the flight deck, and she was by the door when he left the flight deck. The door to the flight deck was not closed at this time unlike what the story going around now says.
The coach was lifting himself out of the seat when the CA came back into the flight deck and they shook hands and left. The CA did not seem to have an issue once he left. I couldn’t believe it. There was no way she could have noticed him not in her seat. The jumpseat the coach was originally in is behind the FO’s side. The jumpseat behind the CA seat was latched and unusable.
The pilots are absolutely being used as scapegoats here
Initially I felt worse for the captain than the first officer, and wondered how the first officer just allowed the sports coach into the captain’s seat inflight. However, after reading the first officer’s perspective, I think there’s more merit to what he’s saying.
What a strange situation. Typically the airline industry is all about very clearly defined rules and procedures, yet somehow on charter flights, the rules go out the window. Based on what we know:
- The lead flight attendant, who primarily works charter flights, told the captain that they just leave the cockpit door open on charter flights
- The captain then seemingly very much bought into that, and communicated that to the first officer as her policy
- I get the first officer’s struggle here — he was a new hire pilot who had just been at the airline for 15 months and had never worked a charter flight, and here he had a flight attendant who primarily does charters, along with an experienced training captain, telling him that things are done a certain way
Regardless of how you want to break down responsibility between the two parties, it’s clear that there’s fundamentally a bigger issue here. It seems that it’s common for charter flights on airlines to have the cockpit door open, even though that’s a direct violation of regulations.
For an industry that otherwise takes a zero tolerance approach to things that eat into the safety margin, this is a downright strange oversight.
I think that’s what has caused so much confusion with this story. Like, we question how the pilots could just leave the cockpit door open like that, but then also learn that this is just accepted as a standard practice on charter flights across many airlines.
For example, in an email that has been shared with me from the head of the United pilot union’s Central Air Safety Committee, he acknowledged that “the door being open is the systemic piece,” and notes that “the ERIC did uncover a serious problem in the charter operations,” and that “the FAA came to the same conclusion.”
I am inclined to think that United is essentially scapegoating the two pilots, and especially, the first officer. It sounds like airline charter operations have for years largely been in complete violation of regulations, and somehow the world’s biggest airlines don’t do anything about it.
If the rules are the same as they are on Part 121 operations otherwise, crews can’t just arbitrarily decide what policies they’d like to apply. Of all the parties, I feel worst for the first officer, since both the very experienced captain and lead flight attendant insisted what they were doing was okay. Like, the captain didn’t even ensure two crew members were in the cockpit when she went to go to the bathroom?!
Also, in the below video, it sure seems to me like the captain is very comfortable with what’s going on, while the first officer looks super uncomfortable.
Bottom line
A United Airlines Colorado Rockies charter flight in 2024 got a lot of attention for all the wrong reasons. One of the coaches ended up in the captain’s seat during the flight, raising serious concerns about how something like that could happen.
The pilots both claimed they were being scapegoated over systematic charter issues, which I increasingly think is absolutely true. It sounds like it’s totally normal (at least historically) for charter flights to allow cockpit visitors, even if they’re on Part 121 operators.
Initially I felt worse for the captain, who claimed she had gone to the bathroom while the coach took the captain’s seat without permission. However, the first officer’s defense is arguably even more compelling, since he apparently repeatedly brought up concerns about the cockpit door remaining open, only for the captain to insist that was the correct policy.
What do you make of this United pilot cockpit door scapegoat situation?
Kinda stunned you would excuse this conduct. As far as I am concerned they both deserved to be fired and really the flight attendant should have been fired too. Completely inappropriate. I don't think they door should have been open but that isn't really the main issue here. Its this guy being on the flight deck and then in the captain's chair Not only could it endanger everyone on the plane it could endanger people...
Kinda stunned you would excuse this conduct. As far as I am concerned they both deserved to be fired and really the flight attendant should have been fired too. Completely inappropriate. I don't think they door should have been open but that isn't really the main issue here. Its this guy being on the flight deck and then in the captain's chair Not only could it endanger everyone on the plane it could endanger people on the ground or other planes in the area. Him being in the jump seat is not ideal but if that was all it was then I would say a suspension would be more appropriate. Him being in the captain's seat is where I think they should be terminated. I have difficulty believing that the first officer would not clearly know this is inappropriate from his training and the captain leaving the flight deck while the passenger was still there makes her conduct inexcusable. Again I don't feel bad for either of them. Under the circumstances I would have given the first officer a pass, but when he allowed the guy to remain in the captain's seat that was inexcusable. The captain should have known better from the start and so should the FA.
Where is the FA in all of this? Have they been reprimanded and terminated? Seems like doing this for multiple charter flights has been the norm for them and should be fired immediately.
Its our own fault. We the people put way too much value on these other people way beyond reason. Because they play a sport, makes lots of money. So what.
Just like actors, thats their job, many make alot of money. So why do lay down in front of them?
They are people, who do something. Why do we lay down in front of them? What are we?
Why does the cockpit need to be sterile in a charter operation?
Private flights don’t require it. And the pax probably didn’t go through TSA or board in the terminal right?
Seems overkill. The players are not gonna hijack the plane. United has bigger safety issues than this.
-G
Some people just never get aviation safety and security. Stick to your car Z and don’t bother the rest of us …. Yes?
However, I am sure that Ben appreciated your click.
This is what happens when you have these DEI crews. Just lucky nothing more serious happened, like in Toronto or Washington.
“DEI crews”, really 747, are you sure now?
It's a damn shame that the world has deteriorated to this point in time. I remember fondly my first visit to the cockpit of a DC3. And many visits on Wardair 747's. Life has sure changed when what was common becomes a punishable offence.
Bleeding’eck Azamaraal, your silver locks must be about the same age as mine old bean!
DC3? No Britannia, Viscount or Commet?
I feel bad that the FO was put in that situation. But he knows what he needed to do in that moment and he did not do it. Still, I think that this should have ended with reprimands all around instead of firings.
I agree that he should have spoken up. But fired for this? Cancel culture doesn't allow any correction to a young first officer. And what about the pilot? She should have known better no matter what happened in the past. None of this situation is ok. Rules exist for a reason, you gotta follow the rules. Or at least the FO should have registered a complaint or concerns on video or radio or something
While the Captain is not as innocent as Ben first thought, is it true that she filed a safety report unprompted? If so, that deserves credit, for doing something that might change the future. And did the FO agree that the one report would cover for both of them?
You don’t need 2 people on an open FD.
Wrong Dee, FAA Regulation 14 CFR § 121.587 “Closing and locking of flight crew compartment door”
It never fails to amaze me how few commentators really understand flight safety issues. Furthermore, blame shifting/avoidance is a common day practice and acceptable to many.
It is unequivocally fact that the Captain is responsible for flight safety. In the absence of the Captain, that duty falls squarely upon the shoulders of the First Officer. Furthermore, it is incumbent upon the First Officer to address any shortcomings that the Captain might allow.
Any deviation from...
It never fails to amaze me how few commentators really understand flight safety issues. Furthermore, blame shifting/avoidance is a common day practice and acceptable to many.
It is unequivocally fact that the Captain is responsible for flight safety. In the absence of the Captain, that duty falls squarely upon the shoulders of the First Officer. Furthermore, it is incumbent upon the First Officer to address any shortcomings that the Captain might allow.
Any deviation from the flight safety procedures/regulations which the Captain and/or the First Officer allow, is their sole responsibility. End of today’s lesson.
you just woke up feeling like you should post 20 times?
21+ Max, simply helping Ben, with his click count …. Yes?
I think this is the exact reason why the door should have been closed because of if / when a problem occurs.
iamhere, gets it!
What about the Rockies coach “breaching” the cockpit? What are the specifics about being up front during a flight regardless of whether you need to break down a door or walk in? Maybe I messed something but didn’t he break federal laws?
Serious question
And why would anyone want the responsibility of climbing into that seat? I wouldn't want to beat the burden of hitting something as I sat down and then have no way of knowing how to fix the problem. No way
for "special flight" on an airline that I dont want to name (I dont want anyone in trouble) - the pilot let me sit in the cockpit for a few minutes while the plane was still boarding.... even then I joked that I was afraid to touch anything... and I didnt.
Want to set an example? Suspend the coach for being entitled. Fire the lead FA for not ensuring a sterile cockpit. Fire Scott Kirby because the buck is supposed to stop at the top.
Hard to know where exactly to assign blame so it’s likely there’s a lot of blame to go around. What I do know is that the coach sounds like an entitled a-hole.
By products of frat boy athletes.
What do you expect?
Kevin doesn’t get it!
Oh its pretty clear where to assign blame. The captain and FO. It was their responsibility to put a stop to that behavior. I also think FA would know better as well.
Yet , we remain uninformed of how LONG the control seat pilot was OUT of the cockpit , no ?
And WHAT was happening during that time with the control seat pilot , no ? Mystery , no ?
it increasingly sounds like the coach and the cabin crew are at fault here. Not the pilots.
The coach should be reprimanded if not banned from future United flying, just like you or I would be if we tried to go in the cockpit when the door opens for a moment. Whether or not somebody stopped us.
There's adult responsibility - knowing what you are allowed to do which is completely separate from...
it increasingly sounds like the coach and the cabin crew are at fault here. Not the pilots.
The coach should be reprimanded if not banned from future United flying, just like you or I would be if we tried to go in the cockpit when the door opens for a moment. Whether or not somebody stopped us.
There's adult responsibility - knowing what you are allowed to do which is completely separate from what you can get away with doing. If you're old enough to fly unescorted, then you're old enough to understand the rules of living like an adult.
But considering everybody's nonchalance, I think we can guess the color of this coach. The "gets away with anything" ethnicity... So, no penalty rather than what everybody else would face.
Stop defending the pilots or blame the coach.
Coaches are not cockpit trained. They don't know the rules. The pilots do. They should be the one enforcing the rules. That's the reason coaches are not flying the plane themselves.
The captain is in command, and their responsibility is to operate the flight safely in accordance with the aircraft operating manual, company policy, and the law. This particular captain failed to do that, as was justly fired as a result.
PeteAU, gets it!
omarsidd doesn’t get it!
Exactly. A Rockies member could have been upset he wasn’t allowed to act like it’s his private jet if the FO says no or questions authority. FO ends up being fired bc a disgruntled client when only doing job properly by talking. Damn if do, damn if don’t situation. All parties are wrong. If this is allowed, then this is all on UA and it should be UA corporate getting axe and made example. Policy...
Exactly. A Rockies member could have been upset he wasn’t allowed to act like it’s his private jet if the FO says no or questions authority. FO ends up being fired bc a disgruntled client when only doing job properly by talking. Damn if do, damn if don’t situation. All parties are wrong. If this is allowed, then this is all on UA and it should be UA corporate getting axe and made example. Policy from top. If not unwritten rule, all flight crew responsibilities. Again, I don’t know enough on topic other than safety is safety and what should be done.
That guy was motioning to aircraft information and control. One slip on accident and there might not be Colorado Rockies team. I find it all inexcusable. Door needs be shut period and same rules as in a normal flight.
Just bc ur an athlete, philanthropist, musician, financier doesn’t mean you don’t want to possibly cause harm to yourself or others. Profiles are gone or becoming harder to categorize.
I have flown on two airline charters. One was ran completely professional as if a commercial flight while the other was the wild Wild West. Different airlines yes, but there is a reason why one sports team had a dedicated group of crew rotation and demand safety and it’s not your party plane. If you are that entitled or want less oversight, go buy your own plane like Mavericks.
Safety first. That’s paramount. And only important thing is safety and doing job safely and by mandated laws
THIS SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED. EVEN ASKED IF A POSSIBILITY.
Florida doesn’t get it!
If the FO told him no I see no way he gets fired even if they make a complainant. Seriously how would the airline explain that firing to the union?
Its clear that the first officer was very uncomfortable with the whole situation.
He should het his job back with back pay!
Or the very least the Rockies should pay for his loss of salary!
Liz, doesn’t get it!
Hahaha
You dont know me or my history but since you seem to KNOW so much please share your experience and then one of us might , MIGHT respect your opinion
Sorry Ben - I disagree here.
As an avgeek I am sure you read a million times the cautionary tale of Korean flight crews.
Research after research shows that this single most important attribute of a first officer (in addition to skill obviously) is the ability to question the decision of their superiors. Never easy, but was particularly hard with the Korean culture.
I agree with you that the pilots are "kinda"...
Sorry Ben - I disagree here.
As an avgeek I am sure you read a million times the cautionary tale of Korean flight crews.
Research after research shows that this single most important attribute of a first officer (in addition to skill obviously) is the ability to question the decision of their superiors. Never easy, but was particularly hard with the Korean culture.
I agree with you that the pilots are "kinda" used as scapegoats here, but they are also not without fault. UA's policy is peculiar and needs to change as a matter of urgency.
If the pilots are reading this - if you sue UA, you are very likely to get a very very generous settlement simply because UA will do anything within their powers to keep this away from the court and public opinion.
Maybe FAA might throw in some extra money too. Since they are probably the worst regulator in modern times and probably the most to gain if they kept this away from the court and public opinion.
737MAX blood will always be on FAA.
Mike, doesn’t get it!
There is plenty of NTSB findings the failure to speak up to superiors in the cockpit can and has resulted in accidents and deaths. The rules are there for every flight not to be selectively applied. Anyone who allowed this behavior should not be operating as a flight crew member. The coach should be banned from flights as well. Let him be responsible for his improper actions which put everyone on board at risk.
Bill, gets it!
I do t care if God himself is the “celebrity” on board. The cockpit door remains locked at all times. And yes the pilots are scapegoats here. I’m imagine the union will get them their jobs back, with back pay. United, and American for that matter, of all carriers should know better.
God himself would just unlock the door using his "miracles".
God would sit there while giving everyone else the middle finger.
It's all part of his big plan.
Don't question divine interventions.
uldguy, sort of gets it!
Allowing people who own private jets to smoke on their own jet is also weird. Sure, if you want to put your own life and property at risk that's your business (mostly, but even then we have seatbelt laws), but why should the pilot(s), flight attendant and potentially civilian on the ground be on the hook for this?
…. and your point is David?
Ben, I’m sure will appreciate your click.
More importantly than whether two pilots were fired or received lesser discipline, what is United, the FAA and the other airlines doing to end this open cockpit practice?
Fair point JohnB.
Seriously, what can one pilot do when the whole organization is doing this for money and turning a blind eye. From this description, which I feel highly reliable compared to the captain, the least responsible was the FO, then CA and then head of cabin crew, who acted like she knows everything about charter flights as if she owns this flight. But then UA is just horrible and I am quite speechless. The worst one...
Seriously, what can one pilot do when the whole organization is doing this for money and turning a blind eye. From this description, which I feel highly reliable compared to the captain, the least responsible was the FO, then CA and then head of cabin crew, who acted like she knows everything about charter flights as if she owns this flight. But then UA is just horrible and I am quite speechless. The worst one is probably FAA. Why didnt they investigate the corporate culture? Anyone with a decent intelligence would know UA is at most fault, not the pilots. Maybe FAA has its own reason not to blame UA and stop this culture....So corrupt!
Ken, clearly you do not understand the basics of this challenge.
Onboard safety is the responsibility of the Capt, the FO is responsible in the absence of the Capt. The FAA write the rules, UA writes the interpretation of the rules and issues them in the Pilots Standard Procedures (or whatever they choose to call it).
Regardless of what you might think about corporate governance or ethics, the bottom line is that the...
Ken, clearly you do not understand the basics of this challenge.
Onboard safety is the responsibility of the Capt, the FO is responsible in the absence of the Capt. The FAA write the rules, UA writes the interpretation of the rules and issues them in the Pilots Standard Procedures (or whatever they choose to call it).
Regardless of what you might think about corporate governance or ethics, the bottom line is that the flight crew are responsible for inflight safety and the security of the flight deck, period.
You seem to ignore the human behavior in all of your argument. If we all followed the rules we probably would have seen much less plane crashes... But it seems kinda useless to say anything to you either way as you seme to think you know everything and you are right about everything.
Ken, one needs to cut to the chase here. One needs to ask some very serious basic questions here. 1. Did the FAA have written rules in place to prevent open cockpit doors and flight deck visits? 2. Did UA have written procedures in place informing crews of these FAA rules? 3. Was the Capt in charge of the subject aircraft? 4. Was the FO in charge of the aircraft when the Capt was absent?
If you can...
Ken, one needs to cut to the chase here. One needs to ask some very serious basic questions here. 1. Did the FAA have written rules in place to prevent open cockpit doors and flight deck visits? 2. Did UA have written procedures in place informing crews of these FAA rules? 3. Was the Capt in charge of the subject aircraft? 4. Was the FO in charge of the aircraft when the Capt was absent?
If you can only answer “Yes” to all of those questions, then the Capt and FO were acting in breach of UA and FAA rules, yes?
The pilots want to make $500k/year on the basis that they are highly qualified professionals capable of making life or death decisions at any moment? Then act like it and pay the price when you don't. What is unfair is that ONLY the pilots seem to be getting it with both barrels here.
At my airline, I’d be fired immediately as a FA if I allowed it. Our rules for FD access are no different for charters than they are for any other commercial flight. I view this practice as an egregious breach of every safety and security protocol, and of extreme arrogance by charter cabin crew who believe they are above the rules because they can hold a charter like this. But that’s because that’s how we are trained.
How long was the control seat without a pilot ? 5 min ., 20 min., 40 min. ? What happened to the pilot when the pilot was absent ? Maybe the other pilot ought to call cabin crew to look for the pilot ? Ya think ?
Totally irrelevant Alert, Ok?
Yet another example of poor oversight of US carriers by a regulator who is patently unfit for purpose any longer.
Certainly blame the pilots for this specific situation because it was their (in)actions that predicated it, but the entire culture of private charters and the blind eye turned by the FAA towards what are clear violations of their own rules reflects more on the regulator and the operator than the individual involved.
Sean ... Ditto . Pax in a "control seat" is a bad precedent , charter or not . Safety first .
Yet , we do not yet have the statements of the FA or pax . Always get all the statements from all the individuals involved . How long was the Captain away ?
Sean, I find that I must strongly disagree with some of the logic behind your post old bean.
In the event that the FAA rules that flight deck visits are no longer allowed, it becomes incumbent upon the Airline to enforce that safety regulation. It would appear that both criteria applies in this case. I trust that you agree, yes?
Neither the FAA nor the Airline was required to oversee the rules during a flight....
Sean, I find that I must strongly disagree with some of the logic behind your post old bean.
In the event that the FAA rules that flight deck visits are no longer allowed, it becomes incumbent upon the Airline to enforce that safety regulation. It would appear that both criteria applies in this case. I trust that you agree, yes?
Neither the FAA nor the Airline was required to oversee the rules during a flight. The responsibility for doing so is delegated to the Capt, along with the FO. Both FAA and Airline rules were broken and therefore both the Capt and FO have been duly punished. I trust that you agree, yes?
The fact that the practice of flight deck visits, under the reported circumstances, were common knowledge amongst some crew members changes nothing in this case. Neither you nor I will ever know if “The Airline” was party to the practice. That is another reason for us all to keep politics and emotions out of this discussion, I trust that you agree with that too Sean, yes?
AeroB13a, your argument just completely ignored the corporate culture and institutional pressure. Things work differently when one individual in a system is pressured in a certain way. Of course, they should have acted, but ask yourself why didnt they. Also, please stop calling people by names
Ken, one needs to cut to the chase here. One needs to ask some very serious basic questions here.
1. Did the FAA have written rules in place to prevent open cockpit doors and flight deck visits?
2. Did UA have written procedures in place informing crews of these FAA rules?
3. Was the Capt in charge of the subject aircraft?
4. Was the FO in charge of the aircraft when...
Ken, one needs to cut to the chase here. One needs to ask some very serious basic questions here.
1. Did the FAA have written rules in place to prevent open cockpit doors and flight deck visits?
2. Did UA have written procedures in place informing crews of these FAA rules?
3. Was the Capt in charge of the subject aircraft?
4. Was the FO in charge of the aircraft when the Capt was absent?
If you can only answer “Yes” to all of those questions, then the Capt and FO were acting in breach of UA and FAA rules, yes?
Exactly. A Rockies member could have been upset he wasn’t allowed to act like it’s his private jet if the FO says no or questions authority. FO ends up being fired bc a disgruntled client when only doing job properly. Damn if do, damn if don’t situation.
I think everyone is to blame here - the pilots, the flight attendant, the operator and the regulator.
Yet the pilots are paying the price while the operator and regulator are pretending to be shocked about violations they knew were happening and even nudge-nudge-wink-wink encouraged.
The FAA's poor oversight has been a contributing factor in too many incidents and accidents in recent years to not accept that they are part of the problem rather than...
I think everyone is to blame here - the pilots, the flight attendant, the operator and the regulator.
Yet the pilots are paying the price while the operator and regulator are pretending to be shocked about violations they knew were happening and even nudge-nudge-wink-wink encouraged.
The FAA's poor oversight has been a contributing factor in too many incidents and accidents in recent years to not accept that they are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
Yes @Sean M.
This is an ICAO problem too.
FAA can't get IASA category 2 if they're the ones punishing other people.
I have long said even before 737MAX that USA and it's FAA deserves to be in category 2.
Years ago I remember a lawsuit against Delta that allowed both collegiate and pro teams to sit in on flight attendant interviews to pick their favorite eligible candidates for sports team charters. This is a slippery slope. Don't allow the stupidity and you're out. I suspect they may have influence on the flight deck as well.
My company often charters a United Air plane for sales reward trips from the US to Mexico. I've been on several and the cockpit door is almost always open. About 50% of the time they offer the jump seat for takeoff and/or landing. I only had enough seniority at my company to sit in the jump seat once during takeoff. The view was underwhelming. The angle from the jumseat doesn't really let you see the runway and once the plane rotates, it's just blue sky.
Female Privilege, Toxic Femininity - if FO had said anything he would have been accused of mansplaining.
I don't think we should give the FO a pass. One of that position's essential responsibilities is to speak up when s/he feels the captain is making a poor decsion. I would have complete sympathy had he directly expressing his objection to the open door/jump seat decisions and been overruled.
All this said, I think a suspension would have been more appropriate for both the CA and FO given the established and tolerated culture...
I don't think we should give the FO a pass. One of that position's essential responsibilities is to speak up when s/he feels the captain is making a poor decsion. I would have complete sympathy had he directly expressing his objection to the open door/jump seat decisions and been overruled.
All this said, I think a suspension would have been more appropriate for both the CA and FO given the established and tolerated culture of these charter flights. I would also be looking at the Chief Pilot and COO as potentially bearing some of the responsibility.
Mark, I was with you all the way to your sentence starting “All this said”. It was at that point which you lost my vote.
Both the Capt and FO broke the safety regulations in place. Both are therefore culpable and should be held fully responsible for their actions and inactions.
As a very senior military aircraft Capt, I was once reported by my FO for putting my aircraft, crew and embarked troops in danger...
Mark, I was with you all the way to your sentence starting “All this said”. It was at that point which you lost my vote.
Both the Capt and FO broke the safety regulations in place. Both are therefore culpable and should be held fully responsible for their actions and inactions.
As a very senior military aircraft Capt, I was once reported by my FO for putting my aircraft, crew and embarked troops in danger by carrying out an unorthodox flying manoeuvre. At the subsequent Board of Enquiry, I was cleared of all wrongdoing and received a commendation for my actions. Almost my first action upon reinstatement was to have that FO assigned as my 2i/c. Giving him a recommendation for promotion as he had the tenacity to call me out when he believed that I was wrong. His strength of character earned my respect and lifelong friendship.
Mark, I was with you all the way to your sentence starting “All this said”. It was at that point which you lost my vote.
Both the Capt and FO broke the safety regulations in place. Both are therefore culpable and should be held fully responsible for their actions and inactions.
As a very senior military aircraft Capt, I was once reported by my FO for putting my aircraft, crew and embarked troops in danger...
Mark, I was with you all the way to your sentence starting “All this said”. It was at that point which you lost my vote.
Both the Capt and FO broke the safety regulations in place. Both are therefore culpable and should be held fully responsible for their actions and inactions.
As a very senior military aircraft Capt, I was once reported by my FO for putting my aircraft, crew and embarked troops in danger by carrying out an unorthodox flying manoeuvre. At the subsequent Board of Enquiry, I was cleared of all wrongdoing and received a commendation for my actions. Almost my first action upon reinstatement was to have that FO assigned as my 2i/c. Giving him a recommendation for promotion as he had the tenacity to call me out when he believed that I was wrong. His strength of character earned my respect and lifelong friendship.
For military, the safety is important, for UA, money is more important. You seem to fail to see that. Your personal experience is not relevant in this case, actually yes, because you are biased due to your personal experience. For what it matters, no one cares about your vote...
Ken, you are projecting an attitude which has become personal, is this because you do not understand the basics of flight deck safety? Attacking the messenger personally is indicative of someone who has a weak standpoint …. Yes?
It matters not if the aircraft is military or civilian, the facts remain that the Capt and FO are responsible for flight deck security and safety.
Any corporate involvement off the flight deck does not change...
Ken, you are projecting an attitude which has become personal, is this because you do not understand the basics of flight deck safety? Attacking the messenger personally is indicative of someone who has a weak standpoint …. Yes?
It matters not if the aircraft is military or civilian, the facts remain that the Capt and FO are responsible for flight deck security and safety.
Any corporate involvement off the flight deck does not change the basic facts that the Capt failed to secure the door. Allowing passengers access and photo opportunities. The FO is complicit because he failed to question the actions of the Capt or FA’s.
And no one cares about yours Ken. Crawl back under the sheets.
I didn't say it matters, never said someone lost my vote. I am stating my opinion as you just did.
I didn't say it matters, never said someone lost my vote. I am stating my opinion as you just did.
Some may consider that the Cpt might be in the clear because she was not born with a pair. The FO is definitely in need of growing a pair, therefore either way, they both needed to be strung up by them for their actions and inactions.
They received their just deserts, well done United.
Gobi, Kalijari or perhaps Sahara?
Thank you Frank, for highlighting my inability to correct the word auto-insert on my iPad. My dyslexia rules KO! …. :-(
While I agree they should both be fired I don't think United deserves a pat on the back. Their training should be crystal clear about policies when it comes to charters. It sounds like if the FO was directly instructed about this he would have put a stop to it. Instead he hesitated because he wasn't sure the same rules applied to charters. Anyone working charters should be firmly instructed on what is appropriate behavior on charter flights
I feel bad too.
For all the passengers on the plane that the Captain put at risk with her shenanigans. Thankfully she'll likely never be employed as a Part 121 pilot again.
Her attempt to excuse her behavior by trying to get me to shed a tear with her "Well it happened when I was an FO, so it must have been OK" just further highlights her unsuitability of command.
Does the FOM allow...
I feel bad too.
For all the passengers on the plane that the Captain put at risk with her shenanigans. Thankfully she'll likely never be employed as a Part 121 pilot again.
Her attempt to excuse her behavior by trying to get me to shed a tear with her "Well it happened when I was an FO, so it must have been OK" just further highlights her unsuitability of command.
Does the FOM allow sports charter pax to come up and sit in one of the crew member positions while in flight (it most definitely does not, it actually prohibits it)? She intentionally violated the FOM (which the ASAP review committee screwed up by accepting her report because of the intentional nature) with this stunt to be cool, putting her crew and pax at risk.
Frankly, the Part 121 community (that includes visitors of this blog) is overall better (and safer) with her, and her FO's, termination. That crap is 100% unacceptable (and illegal) to happen on the flight deck of the Part 121 flight in today's environment.
Moral of this story.
If CA and FO breaks the rule, drag FA down with them too.
My sympathies to the people involved. But they all are rightfully fired.
Nathan Fielder is really onto something with the whole "a large number of these air disasters are a result of the captaim doing something they shouldn't and the first officer being too afraid to be assertive enough to say or do something" theory.
Great point. And this is the perfect example of how it happens. It’s easy to blame the FO but if I was in that situation? Yeah I don’t think I’d have spoken up either.
You gave that comedian too much credit.
Anything with chain of command will have an authority who abuse powers.
Just look at any politician holding any position.
I don't understand the extreme sympathy for the captain or either pilot, especially the captain.
The first officer also realizes what's going on is wrong whether initially or when the Captain leaves the cockpit and does nothing -- including bringing in an FA to have two crew in the cockpit.
The captain was still the authority on the aircraft regardless of how often she's let it slide -- she just wasn't caught so...
I don't understand the extreme sympathy for the captain or either pilot, especially the captain.
The first officer also realizes what's going on is wrong whether initially or when the Captain leaves the cockpit and does nothing -- including bringing in an FA to have two crew in the cockpit.
The captain was still the authority on the aircraft regardless of how often she's let it slide -- she just wasn't caught so blatantly before.
They get paid to be the authority on the aircraft. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they're fired because they give in to social pressure and ignore their own position of authority.
Yet we don't know all others' statements . What does the FA say ? What possibility could have happened to the Captain ? Fell down from turbulence ? We don't know .
The Captain may have been gone a long time and/or forgot to use the facilities previously , or stopped to have a long conversation with someone . What does the Captain say ? It is customary to obtain statements from everyone , not solely one person ? Perhaps without a lift bar, she could not stand up ?
Anyway , appears disorganized and/or not following rules , ( regardless of customary behaviour in the past ) . The primary job of a crew is to be organized and/or follow rules .