Sim Scenario For Upgrade

[BAROREF]

Good morning fellow pilots!
assuming you have eng fire that does not go out and you have to make an autoland.
just before ldg and below 200 feet without visual cues the autoland warning light(A320) comes on!!!:ugh:
what you do? press on and land or go aound for another try?
thanks in advance!!
appreciate in input or info for upcoming upgrade to Cpt!

[jet.man123]

Think about it...are you really going to go around with an uncontrollable fire? then what? wait for the wing to burn off.. the answers in the question..

[hawker750]

What a question! Are you seriously asking for clues? If so I would really suggest you ask for a voluntary deferment of your upgrade training.

[Clandestino]

How sadistic! Did your company recently hire a guy with heavy russian-like accent as TRI? We're missing a man.

Whether you go-around, or crash while attempting to land:

You're gonna burn, burn, burn, burn, burn...

[Dani]

Somehow I like these unrealistic sim scenarios. :\ Eighter way you do it, instructor can easily and simply proof that you are wrong: by failing the autoland capability or by giving you smoke or an aileron problem on the burning side. You cannot win in such a scenario. Anyway, all the best for your upgrading.

Dani

[powerstall]

Seems to me like your Sim instructor really has a beef with you!?! :E

[Big Pistons Forever]

When in doubt wind the clock.;) Oh wait you are not in a Boeing :(

[Nick 1]

What about to downgrade the checkpilot ?

Nick 1

[PappyJ]

Dear First Officer Baro

assuming you have eng fire that does not go out and you have to make an autoland. just before ldg and below 200 feet without visual cues the autoland warning light(A320) comes on!!!:ugh:

The general concensus has pretty much been covered with the previous posts. However, I'll give you a little something to think about that does not seem to have been covered thus far... (However, I've had a few Chivas, so consider all appropriately).

How did you end up in this spot? Was this a fire that began shortly after take-off, where a Take-Off alternate was required? If so, did the T/O alternate weather meet the requirements, and your own limits?

Or, did this happen enroute? If so, did you use some good common sense regarding Enroute Alternates (ETOPS or Non-ETOPS), or simply go "by the book" and ensure that they met the requirments of "suitable" without any regard for possible degradation of the weather conditions?

Or, was this a last minute fire, that occured during the approach, or occured past the ETP for your last enroute alternate?

The answer you post is irrelevent, so long as you have a solution for each of the above scenarios. Do you?

what you do? press on and land or go aound for another try?


Won't matter much, the result will likely be the same.

appreciate in input or info for upcoming upgrade to Cpt!

My first command was a Navajo, and the current command is a Heavy Wide-body. The entire time, two old adages have prevailed:

Use your superior judgment. That way, you won't have to use your superior ability, and

It takes only months to learn how to fly, but years to learn when not to!

Bottom line, be prepared! I don't really want to discourage you, but the simple fact of posting this question, indicates that you may not be ready.


With best regards.

(and too much Chivas)

[powerstall]

If all else fails, slug it out with your instructor and justify your actions. :ok:

[9.G]

BAROREF, consult your training manager in case your action whatever it was was regarded as failure. The scenario presented by you is dodgy one, not to say condemned to fail one or no failure at all depends on how one sees it. It falls into LOFT session category not the skill test. Many reasons behind it however there's part D and approved upgrade syllabus. The TRE might deviate from it but it has to be well justified and corresponding to the skill test requirements. If the check airman did deviate from the approved syllabus and failed you partially or completely again consult your part D for failure procedure. However bear in mind that examiners do represent CAA during the check. This part is simply resolved by FAA with the requirement to pass the oral exam where the check airman assesses one's knowledge in different fields like R&R aircraft systems etc before it comes to the sim ride. Good luck.
Cheers:ok:

[Checkboard]

The only reason I can see to present such a scenario to a candidate, is to see if they are prepared to exercise their command authority to break a "rule" or "SOP" in a situation which clearly calls for it.

i.e. Pilots are constantly trained to go around from minima when not visual, or with a failure. You want a Captain to quickly recognise when this is NOT appropriate, and act accordingly.

This scenario seems designed allow the candidate to demonstrate that - not a particularly good scenario though, as it would be better if they have at least a minute or two to make their decision.

[OzExpat]

Depending on your TRE, there's the possibility of 2 wrong answers to this scenario. I agree with the general thrust of the answers so far, especially by my god ol' mate Checkboard.

I think the point is that, whatever decision you make - no matter how impossibly unrealistic the scenario, you better have thought it though quickly so that you can justify why you did what you ultimately did and, equally importantly, why you didn't take the alternative option. This is what a TRE is likely to be looking for when assessing a candidate for command.

It has been said many times before, in many different ways, applying to many different types of transport medium - "When in command... Command!"