Learjet 31
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Human Factors
Flying an ILS Runway 8L at IAH. Approach clears us to 'Maintain 3;000 feet until FLIBZ; cleared ILS Runway 8L.' During the FAC (Final Approach Course) intercept; we were 1/2 dot left of course centerline (barely off course) as the auto-pilot softly intercepted FAC. Approach said they show us 'Left of course' and the SIC (Second-in-Command) replied 'correcting.' Shortly after when the aircraft was indicating centerline; the Approach Controller said 'I still show you off course; confirm you are visual' and the SIC replied 'Affirm we are visual.' At that time; we were visual with Runway 8L and we were precisely on centerline. With my years of aviation experience; I simply believe the Approach Controller was being precise with us due to a few improper radio calls by the SIC while flying the arrival and approach. Previously; the SIC failed to respond with 'Descending via the GUSHR THREE arrival' on a check-in but incorrectly responded 'descending 12;000' (confusing reply since we were about to descend through 12;000; not level off at 12;000). When told to 'Maintain 3;000 until FLIBZ; cleared ILS Runway 8L' the SIC replied 'Descend 3;000; cleared approach.' In another radio call; the SIC failed to incorporate the call sign in the clearance read back and on two occasions (once with Approach and once with Tower); the SIC incorrectly used the reference 'Runway 18L' instead of 'Runway 8L.' Houston Approach is busy and these sloppy radio calls were probably slightly irritating to the Controller so he was giving the SIC a workout on the radios. While inbound on the approach and while configuring; the Controller asked our airspeed. The SIC replied '150 knots.' The Controller asked us to 'Maintain 170 knots.' The SIC was confused on whether we were cleared a visual approach after responding 'Yes we are visual' when asked 'Are you visual with the field' by the Controller and spun in 2;000 in the altitude alerter and I began to use a slight descent to accelerate to 170 knots. We were not ever 'cleared' a visual approach and we were not quite to FLIBZ yet so we should have maintained 3;000 feet. I piggybacked (corrected) a few of the improper radio calls and was discussing the errors with the SIC on the fly. CRM (Crew Resource Management) issues and poor communications (improper terminology and misunderstanding of terms by the SIC) led to an early descent and I allowed the SIC to detract from my situational awareness. We were told to call the Controller upon landing. I called the Controller and we had a constructive conversation. The Controller informed us that their risk on Runway 8L/8R/9 approaches is traffic departing off of DWH from Runway 17L/R. Although there were no traffic conflicts on this approach and despite the fact we were in VMC conditions; the Controller wanted us to be aware of this potential hazard. I debriefed the errors to the SIC and provided many instructional fixes. We departed Houston on a subsequent flight about 45 minutes after landing there and I handled all the radio calls. After landing following our subsequent flight; I provided another 45 minute instructional session on clearances; required read-backs; correct communications; proper terminology; using our call sign in our radio calls; clarifying doubts; CRM; etc. with the SIC. The debrief was constructive and beneficial.
Learjet 31 pilot reported that First Officer had problems communicating with ATC.