UNITED???? Passenger in CAPT seat in FLIGHT?
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 3,234
The FO could’ve been batting for the other team (no pun Intended) and thought he needed a bunch of sweaty good looking men up there with him too.
#115
Trying to figure out how we eliminate more operations related CBT's in exchange for one about not letting Bam Bam Muelens take the controls. Honestly the Rockies are 4-15, I wouldn't worry about the hitting coach making contact with anything.
#116
You tell me if the roles were reversed and the plane was filled with super models, that some pilots out there wouldn’t be tempted to get up close and personal with them? Plenty of pervs flying planes, so why wouldn’t a female be capable of the same mindset?
#117
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,268
At Expressjet the cockpit was so small the FA would have to sit in our seat when we would go use the bathroom in flight...is that bad? Is that any different then what's on video? When I was an intern with JS privileges the captain on a 777 let me sit in his seat and took a pic on a pax flight between hubs. Is that any different then an FA sitting at the controls when a pilot is in the LAV?
In a post-9/11 era of cockpit security, it's problematic.
Which one of those admissable, is this passenger?
§ 121.547 Admission to flight deck.
(a) No person may admit any person to the flight deck of an aircraft unless the person being admitted is—(1) A crewmember;
(2) An FAA air carrier inspector, a DOD commercial air carrier evaluator, or an authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board, who is performing official duties;
(3) Any person who—
(i) Has permission of the pilot in command, an appropriate management official of the part 119 certificate holder, and the Administrator; and
(ii) Is an employee of—
(A) The United States, or
(B) A part 119 certificate holder and whose duties are such that admission to the flightdeck is necessary or advantageous for safe operation; or
(C) An aeronautical enterprise certificated by the Administrator and whose duties are such that admission to the flightdeck is necessary or advantageous for safe operation.
(4) Any person who has the permission of the pilot in command, an appropriate management official of the part 119 certificate holder and the Administrator. Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not limit the emergency authority of the pilot in command to exclude any person from the flightdeck in the interests of safety.
(b) For the purposes of paragraph (a)(3) of this section, employees of the United States who deal responsibly with matters relating to safety and employees of the certificate holder whose efficiency would be increased by familiarity with flight conditions, may be admitted by the certificate holder. However, the certificate holder may not admit employees of traffic, sales, or other departments that are not directly related to flight operations, unless they are eligible under paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(c) No person may admit any person to the flight deck unless there is a seat available for his use in the passenger compartment, except—
(1) An FAA air carrier inspector, a DOD commercial air carrier evaluator, or authorized representative of the Administrator or National Transportation Safety Board who is checking or observing flight operations;
(2) An air traffic controller who is authorized by the Administrator to observe ATC procedures;
(3) A certificated airman employed by the certificate holder whose duties require an airman certificate;
(4) A certificated airman employed by another part 119 certificate holder whose duties with that part 119 certificate holder require an airman certificate and who is authorized by the part 119 certificate holder operating the aircraft to make specific trips over a route;
(5) An employee of the part 119 certificate holder operating the aircraft whose duty is directly related to the conduct or planning of flight operations or the in-flight monitoring of aircraft equipment or operating procedures, if his presence on the flightdeck is necessary to perform his duties and he has been authorized in writing by a responsible supervisor, listed in the Operations Manual as having that authority; and
(6) A technical representative of the manufacturer of the aircraft or its components whose duties are directly related to the in-flight monitoring of aircraft equipment or operating procedures, if his presence on the flightdeck is necessary to perform his duties and he has been authorized in writing by the Administrator and by a responsible supervisor of the operations department of the part 119 certificate holder, listed in the Operations Manual as having that authority.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1...ection-121.543
(b) A required flight crewmember may leave the assigned duty station—
(1) If the crewmember's absence is necessary for the performance of duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft;
(2) If the crewmember's absence is in connection with physiological needs; or
(3) If the crewmember is taking a rest period, and relief is provided—
(i) In the case of the assigned pilot in command during the en route cruise portion of the flight, by a pilot who holds an airline transport pilot certificate not subject to the limitations in § 61.167 of this chapter and an appropriate type rating, is currently qualified as pilot in command or second in command, and is qualified as pilot in command of that aircraft during the en route cruise portion of the flight. A second in command qualified to act as a pilot in command en route need not have completed the following pilot in command requirements: The 6-month recurrent flight training required by § 121.433(c)(1)(iii); the operating experience required by § 121.434; the takeoffs and landings required by § 121.439; the line check required by § 121.440; and the 6-month proficiency check or simulator training required by § 121.441(a)(1); and
(ii) In the case of the assigned second in command, by a pilot qualified to act as second in command of that aircraft during en route operations. However, the relief pilot need not meet the recent experience requirements of § 121.439(b).
§ 121.543 Flight crewmembers at controls.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each required flight crewmember on flight deck duty must remain at the assigned duty station with seat belt fastened while the aircraft is taking off or landing, and while it is en route.(b) A required flight crewmember may leave the assigned duty station—
(1) If the crewmember's absence is necessary for the performance of duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft;
(2) If the crewmember's absence is in connection with physiological needs; or
(3) If the crewmember is taking a rest period, and relief is provided—
(i) In the case of the assigned pilot in command during the en route cruise portion of the flight, by a pilot who holds an airline transport pilot certificate not subject to the limitations in § 61.167 of this chapter and an appropriate type rating, is currently qualified as pilot in command or second in command, and is qualified as pilot in command of that aircraft during the en route cruise portion of the flight. A second in command qualified to act as a pilot in command en route need not have completed the following pilot in command requirements: The 6-month recurrent flight training required by § 121.433(c)(1)(iii); the operating experience required by § 121.434; the takeoffs and landings required by § 121.439; the line check required by § 121.440; and the 6-month proficiency check or simulator training required by § 121.441(a)(1); and
(ii) In the case of the assigned second in command, by a pilot qualified to act as second in command of that aircraft during en route operations. However, the relief pilot need not meet the recent experience requirements of § 121.439(b).
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1...ection-121.545
(a) A qualified pilot of the certificate holder operating that aircraft.
(b) An authorized pilot safety representative of the Administrator or of the National Transportation Safety Board who has the permission of the pilot in command, is qualified in the aircraft, and is checking flight operations; or
(c) A pilot of another certificate holder who has the permission of the pilot in command, is qualified in the aircraft, and is authorized by the certificate holder operating the aircraft.
§ 121.545 Manipulation of controls.
No pilot in command may allow any person to manipulate the controls of an aircraft during flight nor may any person manipulate the controls during flight unless that person is—(a) A qualified pilot of the certificate holder operating that aircraft.
(b) An authorized pilot safety representative of the Administrator or of the National Transportation Safety Board who has the permission of the pilot in command, is qualified in the aircraft, and is checking flight operations; or
(c) A pilot of another certificate holder who has the permission of the pilot in command, is qualified in the aircraft, and is authorized by the certificate holder operating the aircraft.
#118
I hadn’t been following the story closely until reading that WSJ article. Very poor judgement.
Having said that, I think the decision making that night could be sexual in nature. Think about it. You’re an older female who all of a sudden has a bunch of young, athletic and generally good looking pro baseball players on your plane. Perhaps she got “excited” and wanted to show off and impress the players/coaches. It’s similar to how men act around good looking females.
When sexual feelings get involved, decision making gets cloudy and can often backfire. Happens to me and things get uncomfortable quick. That’s my theory
Having said that, I think the decision making that night could be sexual in nature. Think about it. You’re an older female who all of a sudden has a bunch of young, athletic and generally good looking pro baseball players on your plane. Perhaps she got “excited” and wanted to show off and impress the players/coaches. It’s similar to how men act around good looking females.
When sexual feelings get involved, decision making gets cloudy and can often backfire. Happens to me and things get uncomfortable quick. That’s my theory
The infraction in and of itself was not a huge deal, we all know it's happened before and it's not like she opened the door to the general public. The risk of pax-induced UAS is real, but pretty low.
The bad judgement was more about doing it in today's context... post 9/11, UAL in the media spotlight, Boeing in the media spotlight, even that FA-induced UAS in the media.
The really, really bad judgement was the video
#119
*Assistant to the hitting coach. It’s a vital role in the operation of a team fighting for the first overall pick in the 2025 MLB draft. His duties and responsibilities; polishing each players bat and verifying buckets of Big League Chew bubble gum are fully stocked pre-game.
#120
Of course the risk is low...becuase allowing pax to sit in a control seat is illegal and essentially (until now) never happens.
Anyone rember Aeroflot 593? If the guy sitting in the UAL seat the other day had put a bit more pressure on the yoke, things could have gotten out of hand very quickly.
Anyone rember Aeroflot 593? If the guy sitting in the UAL seat the other day had put a bit more pressure on the yoke, things could have gotten out of hand very quickly.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post