Delta co-pilot busted in AMS

jtrain609

I'm a carnal, organic anagram.
So long as there's only one guy who has to sign his name on the release, the "other guy" up in that room in the front of the airplane will remain an assistant.
Yes and no. Plane can't go anywhere without the FO. The guy in the right seat is vouching for the captain by not walking off the plane.

Edit: maybe it's best to say that the captain has to sign for the flight, and the FO has to sign for the captain. It's a two man system for a reason.
 
Last edited:

KLB

Well-Known Member
I've totally corrected myself with saying "knees and nuts" while doing the flight control check to warn the person sitting next to me to watch their legs and saying flight deck instead of cockpit.
 

ClarkGriswold

Non Nutritive Cereal Varnish Engineer
“Co” means equal... co-signer, co-conspirator, co-defendant.... so isn’t a co-pilot an equal pilot?? Yet somehow people think co-pilot means “less of a pilot” ... wouldn’t that be sub-pilot for below? Sub-par, sub-standard, etc.,
This. WGAF
 

Making it Count

Well-Known Member
I read this entire thread and by the end of it I totally forgot why it was started. It got derailed so quick it has almost nothing to do with a Delta pilot showing up hammered. jetcareers.com FTW that’s For The Win btw.
 

milleR

Well-Known Member
I've totally corrected myself with saying "knees and nuts" while doing the flight control check to warn the person sitting next to me to watch their legs and saying flight deck instead of cockpit.
“Watch your sack, coming back ... (cough), I mean, flight controls free, pardon me”
 

Hacker15e

Dunning–Kruger Observer
It's a two man system for a reason.
Ah, but this is where I think a lot of folks let the logic jump the tracks: just because two are required doesn't imply an egalitarian relationship.

On one of my deployments to Afghanistan flying the F-15E, we had a sign on the squadron door that said:

The Mission is an 18 year old with a rifle
Everything else is support


None of us who flew on those pointy-nosed jets and dropped bombs from them had any notion that we were anything else but a support act for the Joes on the ground...and we were proud and happy to be acting in that role. As the saying goes, there are many parts to the spear, but there is only one tip.
 

jtrain609

I'm a carnal, organic anagram.
Ah, but this is where I think a lot of folks let the logic jump the tracks: just because two are required doesn't imply an egalitarian relationship.

On one of my deployments to Afghanistan flying the F-15E, we had a sign on the squadron door that said:

The Mission is an 18 year old with a rifle
Everything else is support


None of us who flew on those pointy-nosed jets and dropped bombs from them had any notion that we were anything else but a support act for the Joes on the ground...and we were proud and happy to be acting in that role. As the saying goes, there are many parts to the spear, but there is only one tip.
Sure, but that's the thing, an FO is a required position with clearly defined duties. The 18 year old with the rifle can and will go do his job with or without you, but a captain can't depart without an FO. If the captain wants the FO to do something that is against the book, and the FO doesn't agree, the captain can kick and scream and tell the FO they're ugly, but unless the FO consents to the captains course of action, the airplane doesn't leave the gate.

Does that mean the FO is in charge? No, there is only one person in charge, it's the captain, and it's not a democracy.

But if the FO walks off the plane or holds the brakes at the gate, the captain can't fly the plane by himself.

Again, two man rule; even though there was a Commander in a missile silo, there's a reason there are two officers, and two sets of keys.
 

Hacker15e

Dunning–Kruger Observer
the captain can't fly the plane by himself.
I was really looking at it from a philosophical perspective rather than pragmatic. The concept that having your mission be support isn't lesser or something to not be proud of, in the same way that being a "copilot" isn't a demeaning position or title.

Plus, let's be honest: the Captain could easily fly the airplane by himself, just like the ground pounder could go charge the bad guys without air support. But they don't, both because of rules and doctrine.
 

poser765

Well-Known Member
Guys it’s not a philosophical point or a matter of word origins. It’s a matter of social definition. When one says copilot the non flying public has a pretty strong idea what that is and it’s not really accurate to my job. That’s it. If someone assumes I’m JUST a copilot I’ll try to correct them if it’s a serious conversation. And they are seeking an accurate description of what I do. More than that I don’t really care.

It’s the same as working for a regional...”oh you fly for Delta?” If it’s a comment in passing with a stranger, sure, I fly for Delta. Someone that really cares and wants to know? I’ll explain it.
 

BigZ

Well-Known Member
Senior, lifer guy grandfathered on the pre bankruptcy uncapped payscale on OT: "Do you realize how much I'm making on this trip???!!!!! Zomgz" pulls out calculator to show me and screams "CHA CHING BABY!!"

face to the palm
You on 145?
 

knot4u

Repeat Offender
Being hired at a job, that took a long time and effort to achieve, that was clearly named and defined as a copilot and then complaining about being called a copilot is ridiculous. There are mechanics that prefer to be called maintenance technicians, I think you can give me any title you choose as long as I'm paid what I agreed to and the work hasn't changed drastically since when I took the job.
 
Top