A CRAF FLT; RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES WITH A DOUBLE AUGMENTED CREW; SPENDS SOME TIME IN CRUISE WITH ONLY 1 PLT IN THE COCKPIT AND IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH REGS AND COMPANY POLICY REGARDING A SECURE COCKPIT.

Narrative

THIS WAS A CRAF FLT THAT BEGAN WITH A FERRY LAY-OVER; THEN A RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES WITH MIL TROOPS AND NO WEAPONS ONBOARD. IN THE INITIAL BRIEFING BY THE CAPT; HE STATED HE WANTED TO KEEP THE COCKPIT DOOR OPEN SO THE TROOPS COULD COME UP AND VISIT. THE FLYING FO AND OTHER RELIEF PLT STATED THAT WOULD BE AGAINST FAR AND COMPANY POLICY. HE STATED HE WAS A LAWYER; AND HE WOULD LOVE TO ARGUE THE CASE IF ANYONE CAME AFTER HIM FOR DOING THIS. HE MADE IT SOUND LIKE THE FAR DIDN'T APPLY IN THIS CASE. HE CONVINCED US THAT HE WAS KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THIS AREA; AND WE AGREED TO HIS REQUEST. DURING THE SHIFT CHANGE; SINCE WE WERE NOT USING THE 2 PERSON RULE IN THE COCKPIT WITH THE DOOR ALWAYS OPEN; THE FLYING FO CHANGED WITH THE OTHER RELIEF PLT; AND THEN I CHANGED WITH THE CAPT. THE CAPT TOOK A PHYSIOLOGICAL BREAK; AND SINCE WE WERE NOT USING FLT ATTENDANTS TO BLOCK THE DOOR; I GOT UP AND TOOK A PHYSIOLOGICAL BREAK. THE OTHER RELIEF PLT WAS ALONE IN THE COCKPIT WHEN THE CAPT RETURNED FROM HIS PHYSIOLOGICAL BREAK. THIS IS HOW WE TOOK OUR PHYSIOLOGICAL BREAKS. IT ALWAYS LEFT 1 PLT AT THE CTLS; AS IT WOULD HAVE IN A NORMAL OP -- THE DIFFERENCE BEING; THE DOOR WAS OPENED; AND THERE WAS NO NEED TO HAVE A FLT ATTENDANT IN THE COCKPIT TO REOPEN THE DOOR. DURING MY PHYSIOLOGICAL BREAK; I ALSO SPOKE TO THE PURSER ABOUT THE COMPANY GETTING AN EMER FLT FOR A TROOP; WHOSE MOTHER WAS KILLED IN A FIRE A FEW DAYS EARLIER. IT TOOK ME ABOUT 5 MINS TO RETURN TO THE FLT CTLS. I BELIEVE THE EVENTS THAT HAPPENED BEGAN WITH THE INITIAL BRIEFING THAT LED TO A RELAXED NON STOP FLT.