It's not the smartest move when being filmed, but people here call him stupid and a potential danger and rule-breaker - even though we don't even know if he broke any company rule.It makes me think of the ones who got burned and died, just because the captain wouldn't brake any rules and make a overweight landing with smoke from an unknown source. I'm not saying that you would do that, but some captains are way to strict. Of course the crew shouldn't breake any rules unless it necessary, but this is far from being dangerous with the information we have.Have a nice weekend all and have safe flights, those who work with the best "office"-view :)/Baudie

I never said whether they broke any rules or not. Go back and read my first couple of posts. I made a a very clear point of saying I do not know whether or not they had a sterile cockpit rule in their books. All that I was saying is that under the paradigms we have in the United States, what happened there would have been viewed as a blatant violation. So the calling of "stupid" of those who noticed this potential violation, is well, stupid.The example of somebody who wouldn't land overweight in a fire situation is not a matter of being strict or not strict. It is a matter of judgement. We are all allowed to break whatever rule we feel the need to break in the interest of safety. That is what the declaration of emergency is for. It spells out in the rule books very clearly that any rule can be broken if necessary. The key is in deciding what is necessary to break. Is the breaking of the sterile cockpit rule in order to take breathtaking pictures necessary for safety? I don't know. You decide.

Edited January 14, 201214 yr by KevinAu

That was a situation of the captain not being the owner of the airplane and therefore wouldn't make an overweight landing with overstress to gear etc. It's wierd that you talk about ownership and the cost of the plane, because I couldn't care less about who is the owner. I take the same professional care regardless ownership. If it's my little piper or a 737. It doesn't make any difference.You miss the point that he might have checked if they were on profile and with correct speed just before and after the foto. I would agree that one foto should be enough, but it really seems like he is in the loop and a few seconds is not dangerous in that situation as I see it. Can you say that you never have thought about anything else than flightsafety before being on cruise or after leaving arrival segment? Not even a few seconds thinking of something which didn't have anything to do with the current flight? If so, shouldn't you focus on speed, profile, ATC etc. As you said, it could be dangerous to think of anything else than current flight (in your perspective)./Baudie

Edited January 14, 201214 yr by baudie

That was a situation of the captain not being the owner of the airplane and therefore wouldn't make an overweight landing with overstress to gear etc. It's wierd that you talk about ownership and the cost of the plane, because I couldn't care less about who is the owner. I take the same professional care regardless ownership. If it's my little piper or a 737. It doesn't make any difference.You miss the point that he might have checked if they were on profile and with correct speed just before and after the foto. I would agree that one foto should be enough, but it really seems like he is in the loop and a few seconds is not dangerous in that situation as I see it. Can you say that you never have thought about anything else than flightsafety before being on cruise or after leaving arrival segment? Not even a few seconds thinking of something which didn't have anything to do with the current flight? If so, shouldn't you focus on speed, profile, ATC etc. As you said, it could be dangerous to think of anything else than current flight (in your perspective)./Baudie

Whether or not the pilot flying managed to adhere to the proper profile during that approach upon hindsight review is irrelevant. The point is at the moment, while you are conducting this approach, with the completion of this approach at some point still in the future, the future is still unresolved, and that is when it matters what you do and how you conduct yourself. It's all I can do to keep my mind off sex 24/7. So I know how hard it is to concentrate on any other task at hand, let alone take pictures while flying an approach. That is why I believe concientious adherance to proper procedures is all that important. Good night!

Edited January 14, 201214 yr by KevinAu

What if they missed a radio call because they were chit chatting or taking pictures and ended up having a near miss with a Cessna?

Not likely; they were on an IFR approach, so IFR separation is given

What if they went through a step down early or missed a step down on that approach because they were looking elsewhere?

Not likely either; that particular approach seems to be the visual circle-to-land, so they did not have to meet any new altitude criteria

What if that caused them to be too high on final and instead of an embarressing go-around with a camera rolling, he pressed it.

Funny that your company has "tried over the years to press out of the pilot group that wilful disobedience and normalization of deviance" but still have that ancient view that a go-around is somehow "embarrassing" when every modern flight instructor will tell you what, for example, I was told in my initial training: "A go-around is probably the safest manoeuvre in aviation". Or is that just you?

A lot of the comments you've made are indicative of a lot of the things that our company has tried over the years to press out of the pilot group. The examples of willful disobedience and normalization of deviance that you're defending probably isn't going to kill you or anybody, but it is going to increase the odds that something untoward can result given enough time operating in that manner.

I'm not defending such thing; I think I said precisely that "I don't condone such type of behaviour". What I am saying is that while he technically did break a rule, it's not something to make such a fuzz about, again, given the conditions. Again, had they been in solid IMC or with heavy traffic around or something of that order, I would agree with you; but in this case, my feeling is that you're blowing things way out of proportion.And since by inference, you're calling me wilfully disobedient towards basic aviation rules and that somehow it's normal for me to deviate from standard procedures without even knowing me (which I find offensive), I will stop commenting on this argument. I've expressed my view towards this particular incident very clearly and I will not allow you to accuse me of things I don't/won't/didn't do, especially without even knowing me a tad, when in fact I try to do my job as good as I can, which obviously needs adherence to proper procedures.Will remain as a bystander from this point on.

Not likely; they were on an IFR approach, so IFR separation is givenNot likely either; that particular approach seems to be the visual circle-to-land, so they did not have to meet any new altitude criteriaFunny that your company has "tried over the years to press out of the pilot group that wilful disobedience and normalization of deviance" but still have that ancient view that a go-around is somehow "embarrassing" when every modern flight instructor will tell you what, for example, I was told in my initial training: "A go-around is probably the safest manoeuvre in aviation". Or is that just you?I'm not defending such thing; I think I said precisely that "I don't condone such type of behaviour". What I am saying is that while he technically did break a rule, it's not something to make such a fuzz about, again, given the conditions. Again, had they been in solid IMC or with heavy traffic around or something of that order, I would agree with you; but in this case, my feeling is that you're blowing things way out of proportion.And since by inference, you're calling me wilfully disobedient towards basic aviation rules and that somehow it's normal for me to deviate from standard procedures without even knowing me (which I find offensive), I will stop commenting on this argument. I've expressed my view towards this particular incident very clearly and I will not allow you to accuse me of things I don't/won't/didn't do, especially without even knowing me a tad, when in fact I try to do my job as good as I can, which obviously needs adherence to proper procedures.Will remain as a bystander from this point on.

I wasn't speaking of that video specifically with those examples. Just general, random things that could happen to you any given day.Our company has a no-fault go around policy. We just do it. We can fill out an ASAP if we want. But there is no requirement to fill out any report or tell anybody or ever speak of it again. They rather we just do them and shrug it off, versus pressing a bad landing. When I said "embarressing" it was with reference in general to anybody that might think they were performing for a camera and then have that act go wrong. I mean, don't you think somebody having his cool approach being filmed might want to make sure he got it done, instead of having to go around and try again and having that recorded and maybe end up on youtube as a fail? As far as I'm concerned, I've no issues with go arounds, I think I even did like nine go-arounds/missed approaches out there on the line one particular year.Heck I haven't even gone as far as to say he technically broke any rule. I made it very clear that none of us knows whether or not he actually even was subject to a sterile cockpit rule. The only point I was trying to make was to those who were calling the original poster "stupid" for bringing up the issue of sterile cockpit, was that in FAA eyes, that would appear to be a sterile cockpit issue. That was all. And I'm pretty sure those guys weren't under FAA jurisdiction. You're the one who blew everything out of proportion in "defense" of that crew.I haven't "accused" you of anything. I only said those examples you were giving are representative of some of the issues that get talked about in CRM class. Whether or not you really are any of that, only you know.Well, it's been interesting, and I didn't mean to get your knickers all tied up in a knot.

Edited January 15, 201214 yr by KevinAu