3

According to Outliers: The Story of Success from Malcolm Gladwell, more crashes are due to the captain than the first officer. He claims that the reason is that the captain ignore the warnings the first officer gives.

While this may explain things, is it the only reason? Or are there other reasons, like the fact that when the situation become dangerous, the more experienced one take control of commands?

The book seems to take one real example, but are there any statistics to prove that it's the general case and not the exception?

When you are on board an aircraft, “This is the captain speaking” may well sound more reassuring than a message from the first officer. Yet crashes happen far more often when the captain, rather than the co-pilot, is flying the aircraft. This is counter-intuitive, since captains almost always have more flying experience than co-pilots.

The reason, says New Yorker writer Malcolm Gladwell in an alarming chapter of Outliers, is cultural. When the captain is flying, the first officer tends to defer, even when he or she suspects danger, while the captain does not hesitate in seizing the controls from …

ps: I don't own the book, so it may be better explained in it.

Kepotx
  • 151
  • 1
  • 4
  • 3
    as a person working in aviation and that reads a fair share of accident/incident reports, that sentence lacks some important qualifiers. starting from <> applies in some cultures, not all. moreover, taking away any cultural bias, the data can be skewed by the fact that captains might be taking control in more challenging scenarios – Federico Mar 02 '20 at 08:49
  • 3
    Ask A Korean was fairly critical of this chapter: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/blogger-dismantles-malcolm-gladwell-ethnic-theory-of-plane-crashes-2013-7%3famp – Andrew Grimm Mar 02 '20 at 09:39
  • 3
    Considering there are statistics indicating "flight crew error" but no distinction between whether the pilot or co-pilot (or anyone else for that matter) made a mistake, I don't see how he could have possibly arrived at that conclusion without going through hundreds of crash reports... Sounds like one massive sample bias. – Entropy Mar 02 '20 at 15:02
  • There have been several notorious cases in the past where captains have ignored their first officers and crashes resulted. It was a factor in the worst aviation accident of all time where two 747s collided on a runway, killing everybody on one plane and most of the people on the other. However the practice of Crew Resource Management training has supposed to have made such events a thing of the past, as the FO now has the authority to override the captain if they think there's an immediate threat to the aircraft, and captain and FO are now supposed to cooperate more – GordonM Mar 03 '20 at 10:11
  • One question first. If the captain is controlling the aircraft most of the time and if the captain always is in control in the most delicate moments like take off and landing then he would be more likely to be the cause of the accident, but for a statistical reason, not due to psychology. Can this be the case? – FluidCode Mar 07 '20 at 15:49
  • @FluidCode Common (though not universal) practice is for the captain and FO to alternate duties per flight. This is so that one pilot doesn't get fatigued by doing all the work, and so that the FO can log the hours necessary to get promoted to captain. Generally in an emergency the captain will take over flying responsibilities unless there's good reason for them not to. – GordonM Mar 09 '20 at 12:48
  • @ Asmael there are [10-20 crashes a year](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_commercial_aircraft) not all of them are due to [Pilot Error (around 75% are)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_error), and some of those can be quickly ignored. So it is a lot of work, but nothing out of the ordinary – Rsf Mar 09 '20 at 13:39

0 Answers0