A320-Checklist the good way?

[Flyman35]

In some checklist stages we have BARO REF _________SET(BOTH)

Some colleagues say that the good way is as follows:

PNF:BARO REF
PF ANSWERS: FOR EXAMPLE 1017 CROSS CHECKED.
PNF:1017 CHECKED.

Others say as follows:

PNF:BARO REF
PF:SET

I just want to know the standard way to do it because I’ve seen the line (___) also in APPROACH CHECKLIST :MDA/DH __SET(BOTH) which means for me that for example
PNF:MDA/DH .
PF:1200 SET.
PNF: 1200.SET

If any body has a reference or some information about doing it the good way please advise.

[c680_pilot]

We use this way on the A320 :

Passing TA :

PF : Pull Standard
PNF : Standard set, crosschecked, passing FL xxx (set Standard, crosscheck that PF also set Standard and read the FL which the ac passes right now)
PF : checked (confirm the altimeter readout)

then we read the after to checklist :

BARO REF _______ SET (BOTH)

PNF : Baro Ref
PF : Standard SET
PNF : Standard SET


Vice verca for the descend upon receiving a clearance to descend to a cleared Altitude based on a QNH/QFE Value

[waren9]

Getting one or both pilots to reply to a checklist item challenge by stating an actual value (eg "1015 set" or "10,500kg") makes crew more likely to look to gather their response and therefore is more likely to be correct than a checklist that simply requires the answer "checked" to each challenge.

The other added benefit for the company hindsight committee is that it has both your voices on the CVR if anything goes pear shaped.:ok:

[TyroPicard]

The ____ in the response column means you must read and say the value (although I cannot find an Airbus reference which states that). It's not just the good way it's the only way.

On type rating courses I teach "read exactly what you see"
i.e. "Standard Set" or "QNH xxxx set" - I believe it improves altimeter awareness. Likewise in responding to the MDA/DH challenge I encourage trainees to say "MDA" or "DH" as well as the value - it's a crosscheck that it's in the correct box.

[411A]

On type rating courses I teach "read exactly what you see"


Very wise indeed.
Far too often it becomes...checked and set...and yet, it well might be wrong.

Better really check, instead of parrot fashion, reading back.:}

[FlightDetent]

Same here:

PNF: Baro ref?
PF: reads whatever (s)he sees SET.
PNF: reads whatever (s)he sees SET.

Many in fact read the "STD" or "QNH" label from their on-side PFD, observe baro value in hPa when applicable, look across to ISIS and opposite side PFD and only then audiate "SET".

FD (the un-real)