How do you teach the use of checklist?

[Capt. Spock]

Hello,

I have seen some discussion regarding the use of checklist in the previous threads but nothing really conclusive. There is a range of ways of using and teaching the checklist but what would be the most prefered way and how should a new PPL student taught to use it on a typical training aircraft.

Thanks for any feedback, :ok:
Spock a fresh and new FI

[foxmoth]

If you are teaching at a school then the person to ask is the CFI as you ideally want all instructors teaching the same thing.

Personally I advocate learning all airborne checks, checks on the ground can either be learnt and done from memory or from checklist -normally for a new student, use a checklist here, but I would add that if they are done from memory they must be done correctly, and I would advise anyone not flying regularly to use a checklist on the ground.

[Capt. Spock]

Thanks Foxmoth, I will ceratainly consult my CFI but I'm also looking for some better understanding on the matter.

I guess the guestion is as well whether a PPL student should use a checklist to verify that all checklist items have been covered or as a "to do" list.

[Dudley Henriques]

Hello,

I have seen some discussion regarding the use of checklist in the previous threads but nothing really conclusive. There is a range of ways of using and teaching the checklist but what would be the most prefered way and how should a new PPL student taught to use it on a typical training aircraft.

Thanks for any feedback, http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
Spock a fresh and new FI

Checklists are a long proven method of handling a laundry list of items that if missed or not selected properly can cause serious issues as a flight progresses.
The process begins on the ground and continues through a flight on through shutdown.
I've found over time that especially in new instructors, there is a perception that finding a "single solution" that covers a specific situation has a tendency to squelch a more desired creative approach to flight instruction.
I always encourage new CFI's not to let this happen if possible.
There is no "single best way" to use a checklist. The best approach from the instructor's point of view is to stress the importance of using the checklist rather than the exact procedure to use to complete it.
Most pilots properly trained will develop a solid "attitude" toward the use of a checklist and develop a professional habit pattern that places their checklists in a proper order that insures a safe flight. The exact method used will of course differ from pilot to pilot based on the above, but I can't stress enough the need for instructors to impress students with the NEED for checklists and to demonstrate by action the importance THEY as instructors place upon the use of a checklist.

All this being said, my own personal preference developed over years of professional flying is the verbal touch and verify method. I use this in conjunction with written checklists where warranted and as well on all my axiom cross checks used in flight.
Dudley Henriques

[Big Pistons Forever]

Spock

As a new flight instructor you should be following the schools procedures. Unfortunately the majorty of flight training establishments have poor checklist formats and SOP for their use. The first problem is schools tend to use the checklist as a training tool instead of its real purpose which is purely a flight safety aid.

In other words if the checklist action will not have a significant potential effect on flight safety and and reasonable high probabilty of occuring, than it should not be on the checklist. I recently rented a 172 from a club in Ottawa and was pained to see the checklist was longer than the one we used on the Douglass DC6.

Secondly the checklist should be clearly divided into "do list actions" and "checklist" actions. This distinction is IMO poorly understood. A "do list" means you read the checklist and then do the action one by one,, a "checklist" means you do all the actions in that section and then pull out the written list and review it to make sure you have not forgotten anything. Do list are best suited to low work load phases of flight like the pretakeoff check, and checklists for higher work load times. For instance the prelanding check should IMO never be accomplised by means of a do list.

Finally most checklist are very poorly ordered with actions jumping all over the cabin. I strongly believe in flow checks, especially for single pilot operations, (by flow I mean the actions follow a consistant ,logical and linear pattern. For the typical trainer I like to use a counter clockwise circle starting at the fuel selector on floor and moving up through the throttle quandrant and than around the instruments, radio stack, and switch panel).

However since you indicated you are a low time instructor your abilty to influence the checklist format and SOP's is probably limited. So a few things to think about:

1) Everything on the checklist is not of equal importance, isolate the "killer items" and make sure the students (and you) pay particular attention to them

2) Reading the checklist can Never take precedance over flying the aircraft or keeping a good lookout. Correct the student immediately if you see an example of this.

3) Emergency checklist will have memory items. Make sure your students know them and challenge them with simulated emergencies, especially when they get into the later stages of training. The flight from/to the practice area is good time to do this. This also means you have to undestand the aircraft systems so that you can explain the "why" for every procedure not just the "what".

[Dudley Henriques]

I strongly believe in flow checks, especially for single pilot operations, (by flow I mean the actions follow a consistent ,logical and linear pattern.

I would add my voice to this.

Flow pattern check list procedure is something I recommend highly for exactly the reasons you have stated and is part and parcel of the habit pattern development that in my opinion should be stressed by all instructors.
Dudley Henriques

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I have a few " Fear factor " checks that take precedence over everything else in the items to check and pay particular attention to them because they are killer items.

Fuel on and selected to tanks with proper quantity for take off.

Trims set for take off. ( Some airplanes have very powerful trim devices. )

Landing gear in correct position for take off and landing. ( Improper gear position can kill you in a heart beat. )

And last but not least is ....

Controls free.

One day we had returned to the airport after a three and a half hour water bombing mission and parked the airplane and went to town for something to eat.

Upon returning to the airport we were dispatched to another fire.

We got in the thing fired it up and got our take off clearance on the roll to the runway, just prior to entering the runway I got to the last item on my check list...controls free.....the fxxxxx ailerons were locked solid, looked out on the wings and there were the gust locks in place.

The engineer had put them on while we were in town even though there was no wind so we had to stop the airplane and shut down both engines so we could climb up on the wings and remove the locks.

It was very embarrassing that is for sure but at least the controls free check may have saved our pathetic lives. :E

[Dudley Henriques]

I have a few " Fear factor " checks that take precedence over everything else in the items to check and pay particular attention to them because they are killer items.I've always used a personal GUMPS derivative verbal/touch check as a pre-lineup check and a final approach check in addition to any required and/or regular recommended checklists. This meant in many cases touching and verbally rechecking an already checked item, but I always did it anyway as there were occasion when we ferried WW2 fighters where no check list was available. In the case where I had a formal checklist, I did the touch verbal simply to not break the habit pattern.

Trims set for take off. ( Some airplanes have very powerful trim devices. )

This is an item I have always suggested be placed on the shutdown checklist as well as on the lineup checks for the exact reason you have given. In every aircraft I ever flew, I always left the trim set in takeoff position after engine shutdown just in case the next pilot who flew the airplane forgot to check it. Believe it or not, the reason for doing this was verified positive 4 times for me during my career.
Dudley Henriques

[protectthehornet]

we had quite a discussion of "KILLER ITEMS" memory check on line up during the discussion of the MD80 crash in spain.

but, I prefer and see the wisdom of using the "do list" and a challenge, response response method.

for example> copilot reads: Altimeters: check and set 30.10...captain says: check and set 30.10

If one is constantly changing planes, getting retrained on different types, using a do list is the right thing

now, if you truly will only fly one plane ther est of your life...well then flows and a true "check only" list might be ok


but I've seen people switch between the entire fleet that my airline had in a course of 7 years...always learning something new and getting things a bit confused with other planes.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Protectthehornet

You are absolutely right with respect to challenge and response do lists....for 2 crew large aircraft operations, although they should still flow logically. But Spock's question was with respect to flight training in small aircraft. This is by definition a single pilot operation with inexperienced pilots. The checks have to be doable in considering there will be times during every flight when the pilot will not be able to safely devote the heads down time to read a printed checklist.

A big thumbs up to the idea of setting the trim for takeoff as part of the shut down check. I learned that the hard way .....

[protectthehornet]

ok...then let me say this///when I taught in small planes, I made my student become his own copilot...

now, we both know that checklists for smaller planes are usually, though not always, less complicated than big planes and certain checks should be easily done while in flight...but setup and pre takeoff...take your time to do it right

[TheOptimist]

Personally I think checklists are a fairly poor method of preparation. For certain actions they are useful but you run the risk of falling into unvoluntary automaticity and simply reading the checklist like a book, and not actually paying attention to what you're checking.

I know the verbal and touch check obviously reduces the effect but it still stands. Nothing you can do about it though.

[Big Pistons Forever]

protectthehelmet
quote ok...then let me say this///when I taught in small planes, I made my student become his own copilot...

now, we both know that checklists for smaller planes are usually, though not always, less complicated than big planes and certain checks should be easily done while in flight...but setup and pre takeoff...take your time to do it right unquote


I guess we are in violent agreement then, as that is exactly what I said on my earlier post (no 5) :)

[Capt. Spock]

Thank you for your input. I have read all your posts several times to make sure I have understood them in the correct way.

I will be instructing in small club style environment where my input seems to be expected. Verified by this discussions, for me personally it makes most sense following the checklist as a do list on the ground and using memory items and flows in air and emergencies. Killer items is a good point and something about which I haven't heard before. But as I said earlier I will consult my CFI and try to prevent any excessive creativity. ;)

[protectthehornet]

those line up /cross the threshold things are really vital...flaps/slats, trim, controls free and correct...parking brake off and spoilers retracted on bigger planes

and please in this modern age...I also do TLC (which used to mean Tender Loving Care)...but now means:

T for Transponder on (it helps and is required for anti collision devices on big planes to work...TCAS)

L for Lights: on...for recognition and collision avoidance

and the big one that killed 49 people here in the usa...C for compass check with runway heading/bearing....if the crew had done this at Lexington , Kentucky, USA...they would have realized they were on the wrong runway...too short.

TLC, get it?

And in small planes...GUMP for landing, even in fixed gear planes

and before leaving the cockpit...MMM MMM GOOD...just like campbell's soup?

M...mixture/idle cutoof

M...master switch off

M...magnetos off and keys on top of anti glare panel

and read "Stick and Rudder" by wolfgang langweische

[Mach E Avelli]

Manufacturers and operators of light aircraft (and some larger types) seem to want checklists to cover every action needed to make the aeroplane go. Stuff like paperwork done, seatbelts on, clearance obtained etc. All to avoid potential litigation. The danger with that can be too much heads down and distraction so that ATC calls and other traffic gets missed.
At the other end of the spectrum we have the latest thinking from Boeing which is to keep the checklist down to the 'killer' items or items that could cause acute embarrassment if forgotten. However, they do back up their short checklists with comprehensive training manuals.
For the question of the PPL in a simple aircraft type there are pros and cons to the case for a checklist versus learning old-fashioned memonics such as TMPFISCH, BUMPF etc.
When I fly my little bugsmasher, I have a simple pre-start checklist to make sure that I have got the pitot cover off, fuel on, canopy locked (because in this one the canopy could be a killer) flaps set for takeoff (because they are left full down when parked) and trim full forward (because that makes it a whole lot more manageable on takeoff). In other words, stuff that could cause a real problem if forgotten. However, I do these from memory, then consult the checklist as insurance. Thereafter, I rely on memory and scans because it really is a simple aeroplane. In a basic single engine aircraft it should not be necessary for the checklist to tell you to turn on the battery and ignition to start the engine, or to set radios, QNH etc; and checking brakes and flight controls full and free are essential airmanship items that apply to every type.
It may be appropriate for a more complex aircraft checklist to include mixtures and props etc, but the aim should be to keep it as simple as possible. In usage, it should be taught to do the checks from memory in a logical sequence, then read the checklist item by item while confirming with a second look at the switch, control etc.
Multi-crew operation is not much different in concept.

[Centaurus]

But Spock's question was with respect to flight training in small aircraft. This is by definition a single pilot operation with inexperienced pilots.

Many will doubtless disagree, but using a written checklist from a students very first flight is a trap for the unwary.

From the time they enter the cockpit all checks should be done by scan flow and no checklist permitted. On countless occasions I have seen checklists being used as a crutch to see what should be done next. I have seen students who are unable to operate unless they have a checklist to tell them how to start an engine and how to stop an engine. Their confidence is eroded so much they cannot think for themselves. I took over a student who had not yet gone solo despite 35 dual flying hours. When requested to conduct the before start scan, the hapless student sat there for a moment and said "I haven't a clue what you are talking about. I don't know how to fly this aeroplane (a Cessna 152) unless you allow me to use my checklist.

His instructor had even given him a checklist to read to cover the engine failure after take off case. Once we sorted out that problem, the student quickly gained confidence and it was not long that he flew his first solo. It was pointed out that in airliners the crew knew off by heart all required cockpit drills.

Without going into the different types and method of using written checklists in sophisticated multi-engine two crew aircraft types, I am convinced that written checklists are detrimental to the training of student pilots. By all means give the student a written list of cockpit drills to study at home. Better still ensure the student has a copy of the manufacturer's Pilot Information Manual for the type of aeroplane he intends to fly. He should be quizzed on it's content before first flight.

You don't need a written checklist to learn to start a car or hop on a bike. You are led through the procedure until it becomes second nature. Same applies with flying a Tiger Moth or similar light trainer like a Cessna.

[Dudley Henriques]

Many will doubtless disagree, but using a written checklist from a students very first flight is a trap for the unwary.

You're right. I disagree.
The use of a written checklist is not only necessary but CRITICAL when teaching a new student. Flow patterns are formed FROM checklists. The checklist is the very basis from which ALL habit patterns are formed.
There is a reason why checklists are supplied, and that reason has been proven over time to be extremely sound.
This reasoning holds true for a J3 Cub as well as a 747.
I would respectfully suggest that you revisit your thinking on this subject.

Dudley Henriques

[Big Pistons Forever]

I also strongly dispute the contention that written checklist not be used. With respect to large aircraft operations I think it is important to note that the checklist is just one part of a larger set of written codified SOP's. For instance the normal operations section of the CONVAIR 580 I fly is 42 pages long. The problem is most Flight Training establishment try to use the checklist as direction on how to operate the aircraft instead of its real purpose which is as purely a flight safety device. I have restructored my PPL/CPL training curiculum to follow the same philosophy, So for example after you have started the engine, checklist (not do list !) says "check engine". The associated SOP is " after engine starts set 1000 RPM and check oil pressure guage. It should show oil pressure starting to rise within 10 secs and should stabilize above the low redline within 30 sec. If it does not shut down the engine immediately. After checking the oil pressure check the ammeter. It should be near the zero mark. If it shows a very high discharge shut down the engine immediately as you have a hung starter". I expect my student to know the SOP's and do the after start engine check as a flow.

[Pugilistic Animus]

This is a very intersting mixture of techniques,...I can see where Centaurus is coming from,...I think it boils down to the general laziness of students,... that makes his approach for training very reasonable,...poor systems knowledge is one of those things that follow many pilots to the grave yard [ask you typical ppl where the alternate air source and how do you operate it:}]

so I think his approach enforces systems knowledge

however if high systems knowledge is demanded from ground school the checklist is an appropriate aide,...but

detailed reading of the POH and all expanded supplemetal sections is just as important for a student as it is for a person embarking on transport type training ---these issued must be adressed on the ground,...a checklist is a tool to aide in the proper accomplishment of flows not as a systems guide therefore being able to operate the sytems and perform all flows competently i.e not just say mags checked or trim ok w/o looking/ actually checking is inapropriate but no checklist will help that,...


... you can give me the checklist to the space shuttle and I will be at a total loss,...even though I believe in early/disciplined and knowledgeable checklist usage,...I don't disagree with Centaurus' points just more 'old skool' an approach,..I see both sides but my final word for ALL flight training is that one learns to fly on the ground and that the air is for practice:)

Dudley Henriques is your name pronounced enrikays or ahnreek?

PA

[Dudley Henriques]

Dudley Henriques is your name pronounced enrikays or ahnreek?

Hen re cus Same as the first king of Portugal. Ancestor.

[Centaurus]

Dudley,
Go back in history and you will find that thousands of military student pilots learned to fly their aeroplanes by simply remembering a few checks called Vital Actions. Mostly the before start and after start cockpit drills were done left to right until it became natural for any new type of aircraft they flew was also left to right. When the war started (Germany against the British in 1939) did their fighter pilots use checklists? I doubt it because every second counted. A bullet or more would be up your arse before you could say where's my checklist?

That is all in the past and there is no point in visiting that again. It has been my personal experience over the sixty years I have been flying that blind reliance on checklist use in ab-initio flying training has led to the same flawed thinking that results from blind reliance on automation. The result of the latter has seen crews fly into the ground upside down while still screaming for the autopilot to be engaged.

Well placed confidence in his own ability is one characteristic of a good pilot. To see, as I have, a student or private pilot quite unable to function without a written checklist to direct him what instrument to check next; what setting for the elevator trim; at what stage to put on the park brake; when to check his safety harness is locked; when to ask for ATC clearance - and without these reminders, to watch his eyes looking around and wondering what he should do next. I don't call that a safe and efficient way to fly an aeroplane.


One thing is for sure, however and this has nothing to do with airmanship. The total reliance on a checklist costs the student under instruction money out of his own pocket and money in his instructors pocket. And money into the flying school bank. Think about the time it takes to be reading long winded and often superfluous checklist items while the propeller is turning at dollars per minute. And all so unnecessary when with a modicum of commonsense, a left to right eye scan can cover all required cockpit drills.

Blind reliance on written checklists is a waste of time and money and erodes a student's self confidence. I am talking about those who are learning to fly for the first time. Can you just imagine how a first time student would feel if his instructor hopped in beside him in his Cessna 150 and said no flying today, Mr Bloggs - I have left my checklist at home. Imagine that happening 60 years ago when thousands of military students were learning to fly in Engand, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other Allied countries.

I was 21 years old and with 210 hours when I first strapped into a Mustang and flew it without a checklist. I am still alive to type this.

[Dudley Henriques]

Dudley,
Go back in history and you will find that thousands of military student pilots learned to fly their aeroplanes by simply remembering a few checks called Vital Actions. Mostly the before start and after start cockpit drills were done left to right until it became natural for any new type of aircraft they flew was also left to right. When the war started (Germany against the British in 1939) did their fighter pilots use checklists? I doubt it because every second counted. A bullet or more would be up your arse before you could say where's my checklist?

That is all in the past and there is no point in visiting that again. It has been my personal experience over the sixty years I have been flying that blind reliance on checklist use in ab-initio flying training has led to the same flawed thinking that results from blind reliance on automation. The result of the latter has seen crews fly into the ground upside down while still screaming for the autopilot to be engaged.

Well placed confidence in his own ability is one characteristic of a good pilot. To see, as I have, a student or private pilot quite unable to function without a written checklist to direct him what instrument to check next; what setting for the elevator trim; at what stage to put on the park brake; when to check his safety harness is locked; when to ask for ATC clearance - and without these reminders, to watch his eyes looking around and wondering what he should do next. I don't call that a safe and efficient way to fly an aeroplane.


One thing is for sure, however and this has nothing to do with airmanship. The total reliance on a checklist costs the student under instruction money out of his own pocket and money in his instructors pocket. And money into the flying school bank. Think about the time it takes to be reading long winded and often superfluous checklist items while the propeller is turning at dollars per minute. And all so unnecessary when with a modicum of commonsense, a left to right eye scan can cover all required cockpit drills.

Blind reliance on written checklists is a waste of time and money and erodes a student's self confidence. I am talking about those who are learning to fly for the first time. Can you just imagine how a first time student would feel if his instructor hopped in beside him in his Cessna 150 and said no flying today, Mr Bloggs - I have left my checklist at home. Imagine that happening 60 years ago when thousands of military students were learning to fly in Engand, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other Allied countries.

I was 21 years old and with 210 hours when I first strapped into a Mustang and flew it without a checklist. I am still alive to type this.

I fully understand that we are in complete disagreement on this issue. I have no problem with that nor will I attempt to change your mind.

All the best of luck to you, and I will disengage with you on the issue at this point.
Dudley Henriques

[Cows getting bigger]

A while ago i decided to take my fixed wing experience and have a dabble with helicopters. After a reasonably thorough ground brief about hair dryers etc, we went and strapped into a R22. No checklist, no real instruction, just a 'see if you can get it started'.

With a small amount of guidance it was a relatively easy task to get things going.

If we actually look at the checklists we provide to PPL students, in essence, we are telling them to check everything that moves or indicates something. Consequently, I am warming to the scan/flow technique for basic aircraft as long as the student understands what he is doing.

[Dudley Henriques]

A while ago i decided to take my fixed wing experience and have a dabble with helicopters. After a reasonably thorough ground brief about hair dryers etc, we went and strapped into a R22. No checklist, no real instruction, just a 'see if you can get it started'.

With a small amount of guidance it was a relatively easy task to get things going.

If we actually look at the checklists we provide to PPL students, in essence, we are telling them to check everything that moves or indicates something. Consequently, I am warming to the scan/flow technique for basic aircraft as long as the student understands what he is doing.

This is fine really. The objective in using these highly detailed checklists with new students isn't to have them using them constantly all through their flying careers.
It's to impress them with the items on the list and their locations and use as much as the actual check. These two aspects of instruction simply go together.
Checklists form the very basis for good flow pattern checks and pilots flying the same aircraft constantly will naturally eventually use a flow check coupled with any written checks required as normal procedure. Well trained pilots using the same aircraft constantly can tend to flow checks and backup mnemonic checks for critical items at prearranged times. These methods serve the single engine community quite well.
Large multi-engined crewed aircraft naturally trend toward the more formal written checks with verbal confirmation.
But the MAIN reason checklists are used is to create habit pattern in a new student.
Sending an applicant up to any examiner to take a flight test WITHOUT a checklist for the airplane being used for the test will usually result in an instant failure. There is good and well proven reason for this.
Dudley Henriques

[Centaurus]

Sending an applicant up to any examiner to take a flight test WITHOUT a checklist for the airplane being used for the test will usually result in an instant failure.

Certainly not under Australian regulations and you can rest assured that any flight operations inspector in Australia who failed a candidate purely for not using a written checklist for a flight test, would find himself quickly removed from testing duties by the regulator and retrained. I guess it all depends on the regulatory authority of the country concerned. Some inspectors are quite anal - depending on personality and own pet hates.

[Dudley Henriques]

Certainly not under Australian regulations and you can rest assured that any flight operations inspector in Australia who failed a candidate purely for not using a written checklist for a flight test, would find himself quickly removed from testing duties by the regulator and retrained. I guess it all depends on the regulatory authority of the country concerned. Some inspectors are quite anal - depending on personality and own pet hates.

Interesting. Not doubting this mind you, but if you would be kind enough to copy and post an Australian regulatory flight test guide that indicates a checklist is a non requirement when taking a flight test down there I'd be VERY interested in seeing it for possible use in safety seminars I do up here in the United States.
It would appear that we are just chock full of "hateful" examiners up here. :-))

Dudley Henriques

[DFC]

Big Pistons Forever has covered it perfectly.

The average PPL could be expected to do everything from memory if we only permitted the best to progress through training and washed out every student who could not perform to the high required standard. We would also ensure that unless they flew reguluarly they would be trained and tested again. Practical - no.

There are 3 levels to the information we deal with;

1. Technical Information and procedures
Explanations of what does what and how they are used on the aircraft. Especially important on more complex aircraft since it is a very good idea to know what series of actions (complications) arrise when one moves a particular switch / lever in various situations.

2. Standard Operating Procedures
Operator specific in conjunction with the manufacturer. How things are to be done safely.

3. Expanded Checklists
The checklists with an explanation of each item / action. This is where the mag check drop / difference figures are listed.

4. Cockpit Checklists
The same items as the expanded version but no explanation

Unfortunately, schools try to get away with simply passing out (selling) a generic checklist written by some aviation supermarket and expecting to cover 1 to 4 above in a single action.

I am in favour of flows (fully described in SOP) backed up by checklists which cover the essential items. These items may not be necessarly killer items but may cause a problem with a later flow if not completed.

Memory Items are Emergency Actions which are time critical but are not flying technique.

i.e. Under Engine Failure - Establish a Glide should never be a checklist item for an SEP. It is basic flying technique and having it in the checklist simply wastes ink because there is not time to refer to the checklist at that stage and if you have not done it by the time you drag out the checklist, you are in such a problem that the checklist is not going to solve.

The memory items should be repeated when the checklist is actioned.

Every single pilot (those that claim to use checklists and those that don't) uses an established flow pattern often without realising it.

Example - taxi checks - Brakes, rudder, instruments. Everyone does that simple flow without a checklist while the aircraft is moving.

However, how many reach the run-up point / hold point and then take out the checklist and read

"taxi checks - Brakes, checked - Rudder, full & free - Instruments, checked and set."

I feel that those calling for not using a checklist are doing so because they have seen pre-takeoff checkists with 20+ items simply because for run-up the checklist lists the run-up (power check) procedure rather than the simple single line - Run-up, complete.

Go look at your checklist;

Under run-up / power checks, remove all the basic technique items which should be learned and automatic;

example - Aircraft into wind, clear all round, RPM 2000, Carbheat check, Mags check, Suction, check propeller................

If a student is not performing the run-up correctly it is not because they are failing to use the checkist or they have not memorised the checklist or they don't have a checklist. It is because they have not learned how to do the run-up.

Same goes for starting the engine, taxying, departure. flight, arrival, taxi back in and shoutdown. There are various procedures involved and these procedures have to be learned. Everything from speeds to RPMs etc etc

The checklist is there to ensure that certain items have been actioned / checked prior to the next phase of flight.

People generally become frustrated by the time it takes to action these so-called checklists because they are using the checklist to prompt them as to what to do. That lack of knowledge is what takes the time.

People who are not current / students should have one document that tells them how to do things and another separate document that is the checklist. The first should be memorised but if not flying reguluarly can be used as a prompt. The second is always used as a checklist - a check that actions have been completed.

Mnemonics should not replace checklists they should compliment them or assist pilots in doing every day basic tasks (airmanship). Example HASELL - a simple reminder of the airmanship actions before aeros / stall / spin.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

How much heads down reading of check lists is safe if the airplane has no brakes and is not only moving forward when the engine/s are running but is also moving sideways?

[DFC]

How much heads down reading of check lists is safe if the airplane has no brakes and is not only moving forward when the engine/s are running but is also moving sideways?


Who was the idiot who bolted the checklist onto the floor? :D

Every aircraft I have flown has included a paper checklist that I can hold up at a suitable position so that I can look out the window without having to raise of lower my head.

Hold the checklist at top of panel / head height when using it. Same for the map - don't sit it on your knee and look down at it.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There are written check lists and memory check lists and there are vastly different circumstances and different types of flying machines that can make it quite difficult to read a written check list before take off for instance.

I will exempt helicopters that are being operated on say a river with a strong current and use a Grumman Goose single pilot as our example.

You are maneuvering on a river with a strong current and a x/wind of say ten knots and are performing a take off check, how do you hold the list up where you can look out the window and still control the airplane? :(

This can be a very common situation in when flying that type of airplane.

[DFC]

how do you hold the list up where you can look out the window and still control the airplane?


With the hand that is not on the throttles!!! :ok:

Perhaps a pilot who can't counteract the combination of wind and current should not be out on such a day. i.e. such an example says nothing about the checklist and more about pilot technique.

I am surprised you didn't ask how the run-up could be performed without the Goose moving forward so that a checklist could be used!! :}

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Perhaps when flying an airplane such as a Goose in those conditions not only are we competent to handle the airplane in those conditions we can also do the checks from memory?:ok:

[groundfloor]

WHAT ICAO SAYS...SEEMS TO WORK....:)

CHECKLISTS

2.1 GENERAL

Operators shall establish checklists as an integral part of standard operating procedures (SOPs). Checklists should
describe the actions relevant to specific phases of operations (engine start, taxi, take-off, etc.) that flight crews must
perform or verify and which relate to flight safety. Checklists should also provide a framework for verifying aircraft
and systems configuration that guards against vulnerabilities in human performance.

2.2 CHECKLIST OBJECTIVES

2.2.1 Normal checklists should aid flight crews in the process of configuring the aircraft and its systems by:
a) providing logical sequences of coverage of the flight deck panels;
b) providing logical sequences of actions to meet both internal and external flight deck operational requirements;
c) allowing mutual monitoring among flight crew members to keep all flight crew members in the information
loop; and
d) facilitating crew coordination to assure a logical distribution of flight deck tasks.

2.2.2 Checklists for use in abnormal situations and those for emergency situations should aid flight crews in
coping with malfunctions of aircraft systems and/or emergency situations. They should also guard against
vulnerabilities in human performance during high workload situations by fulfilling the objectives in 2.2.1 and, in
addition, by:

a) ensuring a clear allocation of duties to be performed by each flight crew member;
b) acting as a guide to flight crews for diagnosis, decision making and problem solving, (prescribing sequences of
steps and/or actions); and
c) ensuring that critical actions are taken in a timely and sequential manner.

2.3 CHECKLIST DESIGN

2.3.1 Order of checklist items
2.3.1.1 The following factors should be considered when deciding the order of the items in checklists:
III-5-2-2 Procedures — Aircraft Operations — Volume I
23/11/06

a) the operational sequence of aircraft systems so that items are sequenced in the order of the steps for activation
and operation of these systems;
b) the physical flight deck location of items so that they are sequenced following a flow pattern;
c) the operational environment so that the sequence of checklists considers the duties of other operational
personnel such as cabin crew and flight operations officers;
d) operator policies (for example, resource conservation policies such as single-engine taxi) that may impinge on
the operational logic of checklists;
e) verification and duplication of critical configuration-related items so that they are checked in the normal
sequence and again immediately before the phase of flight for which they are critical; and
f) sequencing of critical items in abnormal and emergency checklists so that items most critical are completed
first.

2.3.1.2 Critical items should appear no more than twice on a given checklist (see 2.3.1.1 e)). Critical items should
be verified by more than one flight crew member.

2.3.2 Number of checklist items

The number of items in checklists should be restricted to those critical to flight safety.

Note.— The introduction of advanced technology in the flight deck, allowing for automated monitoring of flight
status, may justify a reduction in the number of items required in checklists.

2.3.3 Checklist interruptions

SOPs should include techniques to ensure a step-by-step, uninterrupted sequence of completing checklists. SOPs
should unambiguously indicate the actions by flight crews in case of checklist interruptions.

2.3.4 Checklist ambiguity

Checklist responses should portray the actual status or the value of the item (switches, levers, lights, quantities, etc.).
Checklists should avoid non-specific responses such as “set”, “checked” or “completed”.

2.3.5 Checklist coupling

Checklists should be coupled to specific phases of flight (engine start, taxi, take-off, etc.). SOPs should avoid tight
coupling of checklists with the critical part of a phase of flight (for example, completing the take-off checklist on the
active runway). SOPs should dictate a use of checklists that allows buffers for detection and recovery from incorrect
configurations.

2.3.6 Typography

2.3.6.1 Checklist layout and graphical design should observe basic principles of typography, including at least
legibility of print (discriminability) and readability under all flight deck lighting conditions.

Part III — Section 5, Chapter 2 III-5-2-3
23/11/06

2.3.6.2 If colour coding is used, standard industry colour coding should be observed in checklist graphical design.
Normal checklists should be identified by green headings, system malfunctions by yellow headings, and emergency
checklists by red headings.

2.3.6.3 Colour coding should not be the only means of identifying normal, abnormal and emergency checklists.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Excellent post groundfloor

My only comment is the principals you lis are specifically for multi crew operations. They must be modified for single pilot ops. Specifically:

1) The challenge and response methodology obviously does not literally apply with only one pilot so alternative approaches are necessary. These should IMO include carefully thought out flows so that the flow backs up the checks, and

2) I also believe that except for certain special circumstances the aircraft, should not be moving when carrying out any checks including flows, especially for ab intio training.

I think the example of a float plane in a fast moving current and an x wind is a pretty good example of picking fly s**t out of the pepper grains ;)

There will never be a one size fits all for every aviation procedure. Use of checklist has to fit the operation not the other way around. Personally, for floatplanes, I always try to do as much of the pre takeoff check as possible while the airplane is still tied to the dock. But in my experience most of the time life is pretty easy for a float plane pilot. The "taxi way" width can often be measured in hundreds of yards or even miles and you are never 5 th in line for the active :cool:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

We all look at these issues through a different prism and form our ideas, opinions and methods of performing checks, especially the vital checks when flying a given type of airplane in a given environment.

I was not picking fly sh.t out of pepper with my scenario of a twin engine flying boat departing on a river with a X/wind. I only wish I had a dollar for every time I was in that situation during the thousands of hours I flew twin engine flying boats.

For sure most flying on sea planes is routine and fairly easy, however that is not the yardstick by which we should measure how we perform and operate an airplane.

There is a vast difference between flying an airliner in the multi crew concept and flying a sea plane single pilot...especially a twin engine one.

There is a poll on Avcanada asking how sea plane pilots conduct check lists.

89% said they use the flow method.

11% said they used written check lists.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I should have been clearer on point 2 of my post above. I was discussing the use of checklists for land planes which obviously, unlike float planes, have the option of stopping.

Since I also said the checklists has to fit the operation , not the other way around.... I think we are in violent agreement on this issue :)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Yup we seem to be. :ok:

[Dudley Henriques]

I think some of us in this thread might actually be on the same page but not communicating with each other for some reason.
In the US anyway, when we start new students, we stress the use of written checklists for very sound reasons that have been proven by us anyway over time to be an effective way to acclimate them to a new world that dictates a simple premise. Airplanes have critical items that if not selected or checked in a specific manner before or during flight, the result might very well NOT be the same result that the student might expect to experience in a car if they forgot something or didn't select it properly.
Basically, it's for this reason, and to engender in a new student good solid habit patterns that we introduce them to the written checklist.
There is a natural process that in reality dictates when and where a pilot having moved on up from the student stage will be using a written checklist and where a flow pattern is indicated.
There is a big difference between single pilot and and crew operation when it comes to checklists and how they should be handled. There actually is no one single answer that fits all scenarios.
For a pilot flying the same aircraft day in and day out, a natural flow pattern is indicated. Hell, I flew the same P51D all the time for several years. We had a written checklist for the airplane but knowing it like I did, I developed a flow pattern that went through both the exterior and interior checks and did them each time, every time, exactly the same way without the written checklist.
Conversely, when I moved over to the F8F-2 for a few flights, I used the written checklist each time I flew this airplane.
So it's not a 'written in stone' thing with checklists.
I've never been a member of a crew in a 121 or 135 operation so I won't even comment in that area, but if asked, I would say that when it comes to flight safety, as PIC you do whatever it takes to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.
Dudley Henriques

[groundfloor]

Hoo Boy... A Check list is just what it says it is ie: a list of things you check to have been: completed, done, carried out, briefed.

For Normal Checklists whether you are by yourself in a single or 2 up in an airliner you do your "vital actions" when commanded or started off by a "trigger" which can be: a verbal command from the flying pilot, an a/c mode change or if by yourself when a set of conditions has been achieved. The actions should form a "block" of actions that follow a logical ergonomic cockpit "flow". Once you have completed the actions as a crew or by yourself and it is safe to do so you call for the checklist or run it yourself. These "normal" checklists must be run at the end of every phase of flight to CHECK that you have done all the actions required.. So before landing prepare the a/c and then run the approach checklist especially after sorting out an emergency to make sure you have done it all.

Check out the Airbus website for their FOBN`s (Flight Operations Briefing Notices) Safety Library (http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/ethics/safety_lib) specifically those relating to checklists and SOP`s...

[DFC]

So before landing prepare the a/c and then run the approach checklist


Exactly.

Far too often students are taught that the before landing actions and the before landing checklist are the same thing. They are not.

Typical Example -

Jonny is taught the typical memory actions - Brakes, off - Undercarriage, Down - Mixture, Rich -etc etc etc

Every time they fly, they carry out the actions but never run a checklist of any sort to check that the actions have indeed been done. When Jonny progresses to something with retracting undercarriage, they arrive downwind and start....Brakes, Off - Undercariage, Down (Moves lever) - Mixture, Rich..........and fail to note that they only have 2 greens. Far better to carry out the actions / flow from memory and then run a short checklist to check that the requires items have indeed been done correctly.

I would not get into much of an issue with regard to Challenge and Respond Checklists being for multi crew only. They are perfect for single crew also.

For those who have never flown multi crew, in an abnormal situation where a checklist must be run, it is normal for 1 pilot to fly the aircraft and look after the radio while the other pilot actions the checklist. The pilot actioning the checklist is doing just what a single pilot would do with a challenge and respond checklist -

Call out the item, Call out the Required Response, Check the indication / switch position etc and then Call out the Observed position

eg -
"Oxygen - Override"...(moves switch to override).....Override"
"No Smoking Signs - On".....(Checks switch position)....."On"
"Fasten Seatbelts - On".....(Turns on fasten seatbelts)...."On"

Note that in the above, the pilot tells themselves what the indication / switch position should be, they then compare the actual situation with the required situation and adjust as necessary and then when correct, announce the correct situation.

What they are doing is a "read and do" checklist. However, they are doing it correctly. They are reading the checklist, carrying out the action and then checking that the action has been completed.


1) The challenge and response methodology obviously does not literally apply with only one pilot so alternative approaches are necessary.


I don't necessarly agree 100%;

YouTube - Airbus A320 Video Training 2 of 32 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-zqo2QpIC0)

Have a look at the above video of a simulator exercise. The part relevant to what I am saying here starts at about 3:10 when the non-flying pilot starts using a paper checklist in the read and do mode. Note how the checklist is actioned as a read and do checklist.

Compare that to what is done at about 5:25 when the after-take-off checklist is read. That checklist is backing up a flow / SOP and is being used simply as a check that things previously done have indeed been done i.e. no actions should be involved if everything is correct. I hope that you can see the big difference in how this checklist is read and how the read and do one is done.

As an aside, note where the hand remains while the flaps are moving i.e. note the LOI being used for flap retraction - "Speed checked, flap xxx selected, flap xxx indicated" and hand remains on the level until required indication is received.

Perhaps the one big thing that students and PPLs (and CPLs) can learn is that doing 50 checks in 10 seconds from memory is not cool / good.


These should IMO include carefully thought out flows so that the flow backs up the checks, and

2) I also believe that except for certain special circumstances the aircraft, should not be moving when carrying out any checks including flows, especially for ab intio training.



Checklists should back-up flows not the other way round.

Item 2 is 100% correct except that certain actions (flows) require the aircraft to be moving eg checking brakes, rudder and instriuments during taxi. Having said that. the taxi-checklist should only be actioned when the aircraft is stopped.

[Big Pistons Forever]

DFC

I do not aggree with you with respect to challenge and response checklists. You need two people to do achieve the full measure of extra rigour that this method gives. A good example of this is pulling the fire handle. The challenge and response requires one pilot to "challenge" the other pilot to "respond" with a confirmation that the correct handle is being pulled before the action is actually taken. Your discription is simply a single pilot properly performing a "do list". The video shows proper use of a flow which then is backed up by "checking" the checklist, which is I think what everyone has been advocating.

By saying flows should back up checklist my intent was to articulate that the flow and the checklist compliment each other. That is the order of the flow should be consistant from for each section of the checklist and should be in the same order as do and checklists. This concept is unfortuantely seldom followed in the checklists I have seen at flight schools.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Amazing that this conversation has taken on a life of its own.

I am in a generous mood this morning so I am going to share some simple truths with all of you out there across the globe.

Check lists are nothing more or less than a method of assuring that certain actions have been performed that if not performed correctly could or will result in an accident.

So the first step in assuring safety is " Never do something stupid fast. " in other words take enough time to think about the action you are about to start.

That is lesson one for today.

I did something stupid yesterday, I burnt my hand because I was reaming out the hole in my tail wheel front spring attachment point without leather gloves on....amazing how hot those little pieces of steel can be isn't it? :}

[DFC]

A good example of this is pulling the fire handle. The challenge and response requires one pilot to "challenge" the other pilot to "respond" with a confirmation that the correct handle is being pulled before the action is actually taken.


I think that you are confusing an SOP that requires both pilots to confirm any action involving engine controls, fire handles etc with a totally separate issue of a challenge and respond checklist. If you look at the video again it is only the engine critical actions - throttle and fuel cut-of movements that are crosschecked. For many other actions, the non-flying pilot is completeing a read and do checklist in a challenge and respond manner just like a single pilot would.

[Pugilistic Animus]

Don't play Mr/Mrs. octopus in a plane no matter which camp you subscribe to

keep a fast mind and slow hands...don't rush either! :} keep your mind on the present while thinking five minutes ahead...and all the while it may be good to have one eye continually upon the traffic and another continually upon heaven

sounds a bit tough -no? :}

PA

[DFC]

There is plenty of time to view checklists when you fly multi-crew, for single pilot operation you need to fly the aeroplane first.


I am trying to think of situations where the pilot can not make suficient time to carefully and correctly run a well designed checklist.

Engine Failure at low level on a single or light twin
Fire
Running out of fuel

That is probably the only 3 occasions where there will not be time to execute the required actions and then run the checklist. Even the second two may give enough time.

I fear that your need to use memory rather than the written checklist stems from the problem that that chacklist contains far too many items.

I teach my students to only view the checklist when they're on the ground and parked. Ultimately you can't control an aeroplane safely if you have your head buried in paperwork!


Perhaps you might considder getting your student to learn the SOPs and the procedures / flows for each phase of flight and then have them complete a very short checklist at the appropriate moment.

After all, how many schools call BUMCPFHH (or similar) the pre-landing checks when in fact that are the pre-landing flow. The pre-landing checklist can simply be Mixtures Rich, Props Fine, Gear Down. Tell me that there is no time to read that and you have to be rushing unnecessarily.

Schools in general put very little thought into their SOPS, flows and checklists. They prefer to use a generic "checklist" which they sell to the students. The teaching of checklist use is practically non-existant. Exercise 1 and 2 is all but ignored.


Ultimately you can't control an aeroplane safely if you have your head buried in paperwork!


Makes me wonder how they read the map, record the progress on the OFP and brief the arrival procedure etc?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

DFC why would you put your props fine during the landing approach?

[DFC]

DFC why would you put your props fine during the landing approach?

The simple answer is that the POH / Flight Manual says that is to be done.

The better answer would probably so say that the fine pitch setting is the one for climbing at full power - like what one might want to do in the event of a missed approach / balked landing.

One could perhaps also say that the (slight) extra drag reduces the landing distance!

You could have also pointed out that putting he mixture to full rich for landing at an elevation of 9000ft is not a good idea. ;)

-----------

What's so difficult about remembering BUM FELCH for your landing checks? If you use your initiative you can create an acronym for any checks you want.


The problem is not remembering "BUM FELCH". That is a good flow that gets things done. The problem is that if you miss something important out there is no check to catch the error.

I am looking at a checklist for a light aircraft. It has 9 Before Start checks, 18 Start Checks, 4 Taxi checks and 24 before take-off checks. Now it is mostly true that 55 things need to be done before take-off but there are not anywhere near 55 things that need to be "checked".

Just like "BUM FELCH", 8 items, not all of which have to be actioned / checked to land safely every time and some things that are checked regularly during the normal flying anyway.

That is why we need to teach the difference between a procedure / flow and the checks that are completed after to catch the posibility that something was missed.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Lets dig a little deeper into this putting the props full fine during the approach DFC.

First off if the POH / flight manual calls for this to be done can you give me a link to a POH that requires this to be done so I can see where exactly on the approach you must do it?

I have found that leaving the props in cruise setting on piston engine airplanes during the approach works just fine, I select full fine when I close the throttle / s for the landing for two reasons....

(1) If for some strange reason I need to reject the landing I will be able to apply take off power and the prop / s will be selected full fine.

(2) They will be in the correct position for take off on the next flight.

If for what ever reason I might need to reject the approach and go around it is easy to increase RPM to climb RPM and then apply climb power.

Why would you need to add take off power to do a missed approach?

Have I been doing it wrong?

[1049]

Folks, Its clear that there are many ways to interperet the use of checklists. However, when it comes to the training and establishing of time proven aviation habits I believe that the student should be taught to do the checklist verbatim not just pay lip service to it.
The habits and respect for checklists you develop aquiring a PPL will serve you well in the future in whatever aircraft you fly. You will not last long at an airline if you neglect proper checklist procedures - end of story.

[Pugilistic Animus]

1049 excellent post,...I have a few more things to add to the discussion unfortunately I don't have time to properly construct my rants now:} as may have been noted by others.... I suck at fast typing and my thoughts out run my hands:uhoh:


...lively little thread:D

PA

[Dudley Henriques]

Lets dig a little deeper into this putting the props full fine during the approach DFC.

First off if the POH / flight manual calls for this to be done can you give me a link to a POH that requires this to be done so I can see where exactly on the approach you must do it?

I have found that leaving the props in cruise setting on piston engine airplanes during the approach works just fine, I select full fine when I close the throttle / s for the landing for two reasons....

(1) If for some strange reason I need to reject the landing I will be able to apply take off power and the prop / s will be selected full fine.

(2) They will be in the correct position for take off on the next flight.

If for what ever reason I might need to reject the approach and go around it is easy to increase RPM to climb RPM and then apply climb power.

Why would you need to add take off power to do a missed approach?

Have I been doing it wrong?You're not doing it wrong, but it all fairness, this is a HUGE issue in the United States in the Warbird community anyway where we're running Merlins, Allisons, and round engines all the way to 4360's.
Basically speaking, we're taking a long hard look at prop settings on final due to accidents involving ham handed pilots cramming in high MP with the props in (fine pitch for you Brits:-) . The resulting go around considering an initiation at high angles of attack and low airspeed has killed quite a few operators.
First of all, running up the props to full increase or even METO as is the case in most prop fighters (in my case specifically the Mustang) creates a huge drag on final in many cases causing power to be used that if you get low enough can result in a backside approach which by any definition isn't optimum.
Next, we have the various factors that come into play as something like a P51 is ham handed into a go around in the conditions I have mentioned. Having the prop all the way up allows all the power you can cram in.

Couple this into the addition of an 11 foot 2 inch Hamilton Standard 24D50 prop up front with a nice set of 6547 Paddle blades grabbing a ton of air when you rotate with high alpha/ slow airspeed/ and a prop disk rotating in pitch and you can throw in gyroscopic precession and P Factor to boot, not to mention slipstream effect.
The result here will be a yard of right aileron needed for the torque and two yards of rudder needed for the rest of it.
Operator not ready for this = dead operator.
It has been suggested by one side of the issue that leaving the prop in cruise on final and accepting any ham handed MP over boost during a go around attempt won't hurt the engines and is acceptable and even preferred procedure that will save lives.
The other side of the issue postulates that the airplane should be set up for approach as the dash 1 dictates and that pilots should be trained properly not to cram in go around power.
I've flown these airplanes for years using the dash 1 recommended procedures. I flew my approaches slightly high in the Mustang, and ran up the prop as the dash 1 asks for, at 2700RPM (METO) as I got close in on final.
This is simply my preference. I also agree that leaving the prop in cruise is a viable option. The main thing is that you are flying the aircraft in a manner that YOU can handle if suddenly faced with a go around.
So for me, it's Prop to 2700 close in. I was trained in proper throttle response and I teach proper throttle response so the prop position recommended by North American for the P51 is fine for me.
Different strokes for different folks :-))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

[Big Pistons Forever]

Guys I think it is time to go back and re read post No 1. The tread initiator is asking about checklist with respect to PPL training. So frankly I think the correct way to handle large radial engines (of which I have a lot of personal experience, hence my posting handle) is IMO not very germain. The issue of advancing the props for small aircraft with controllable pitch props used in a flight training environment is however an area that is IMO worth some discussion. When I am flying any aircraft with a constant speed prop I leave the prop lever in the cruise RPM position untill very short final and then bring the prop lever up to full forward when the airspeed is reduced to a low enough value that the prop is allready on the fine pitch stops. I used to teach that method from the beginning but found if given an unexpected go around low time pilots were reverting to the Cessna 172 or Piper PA 28 habits and instinctively firewalling the throttle and forgetting to bring the prop up first. So now I get them to set the POH derived minimum RPM setting which will still allow full MAP to be applied (It seems to be 2400 RPM for most 4 and 6 cylinder GA engines) as part of the prelanding checklist items. I then get them to do the full fine on very short final method. As they gain experince and confidence I would see them moving away from the intermediate higher RPM setting and just go from cruise to full fine on short final. However going to a higher setting earlier will have no effect on the working life of any of the common direct drive GA engines although it does increase the noise level a little

[Dudley Henriques]

Guys I think it is time to go back and re read post No 1. The tread initiator is asking about checklist with respect to PPL training. So frankly I think the correct way to handle large radial engines (of which I have a lot of personal experience, hence my posting handle) is IMO not very germain. The issue of advancing the props for small aircraft with controllable pitch props used in a flight training environment is however an area that is IMO worth some discussion. When I am flying any aircraft with a constant speed prop I leave the prop lever in the cruise RPM position untill very short final and then bring the prop lever up to full forward when the airspeed is reduced to a low enough value that the prop is allready on the fine pitch stops. I used to teach that method from the beginning but found if given an unexpected go around low time pilots were reverting to the Cessna 172 or Piper PA 28 habits and instinctively firewalling the throttle and forgetting to bring the prop up first. So now I get them to set the POH derived minimum RPM setting which will still allow full MAP to be applied (It seems to be 2400 RPM for most 4 and 6 cylinder GA engines) as part of the prelanding checklist items. I then get them to do the full fine on very short final method. As they gain experince and confidence I would see them moving away from the intermediate higher RPM setting and just go from cruise to full fine on short final. However going to a higher setting earlier will have no effect on the working life of any of the common direct drive GA engines although it does increase the noise level a little

I think I'm getting out of this thread as it's going around and around in circles.
My last post was in direct response to a post directly related to prop rpm on landings. I posted several times prior addressing the exact reasoning behind the use of checklists in PPL training.
I guess there's a bit too much thread creep here at that, so I'll leave it to you nice folks and go feed the cat.
:-)
Dudley Henriques

[DFC]

I have found that leaving the props in cruise setting on piston engine airplanes during the approach works just fine, I select full fine when I close the throttle / s for the landing for two reasons....

(1) If for some strange reason I need to reject the landing I will be able to apply take off power and the prop / s will be selected full fine.

(2) They will be in the correct position for take off on the next flight.

If for what ever reason I might need to reject the approach and go around it is easy to increase RPM to climb RPM and then apply climb power.

Why would you need to add take off power to do a missed approach?

Have I been doing it wrong?

You have proved my point perfectly - There is a lot of confusion out there about the big difference between a checklist / checks and a procedure / technique.

First, since this is an instructor forum, should it not be more about what the student will do. Quite a lot of "I"'s highlighted in your above statement.

Second. I said;


The pre-landing checklist can simply be Mixtures Rich, Props Fine, Gear Down


I did not say when the actions would be done. All I said is that at a suitable moment, a check would be made that they were indeed done.

Thus my point that many people seem to confuse actions to be done (flows) with checks. Putting the gear down does not also check that it is down. Moving the props to a fine setting (as per the POH) is not a check that the props are in the required position. If you put the props to fine as you cross the hedge then I doubt that there is a further deliberate check (memory or otherwise) that you have indeed carried out the action i.e. you either did it or you did not.

Someone said that they use a GUMPS check on final to set the props. So we have "BUM FELCH " or similar downwind and then GUMPS on final approach- both flows / actions. Hopefully getting distracted on downwind and leaving out the G will get caught on final but in effect the aircraft is alnding without having completed any check that the required actions have indeed been done other than having the required actions repeated several times rather than done and checked.

As other have said this is about teaching PPLs who on average will need to start with the basics and work up to your level of proficiency after how many thousands of hours on a particular type (something that most PPLs never reach).

In simple terms Chuck, this is not about "you" being able to advance props and throttles together it is about the student / average PPL.

Me? in most cases, I set the props after the MP has been reduced slowing for gear and flap extension. However where the fine setting described is specific eg 2500 or 2600RPM then it is impossible to set this RPM when the prop is out of the governed range. That is an SOP / Procedure and not a check since the check - Props..... will be separately checked in all cases.

The checklist (very short and written on the pannel) is then run to check the actions have been done and hey presto, you are at the start of a stable approach. Now don't go off jumping to conclusions that I set landing flap 4 miles out in a C182 because I have not said any such thing!! :=

[flythisway]

Landing gear in correct position for take off and landing. ( Improper gear position can kill you in a heart beat. )

But didnt you say you dont check Undercarriage in an aircraft not fitted with retractable gear?

[belowradar]

As a flying instructor and Examiner I enjoy taking the "war and peace" encyclopedia (checklist) from the pilot (qualified ppl normally) and throwing into the back seat, I then sit and watch as the pilot goes into a state of confusion and utter disbelief (what you can't be serious ? Oh yes I am !) Great fun and thoroughly enlightening for me and them.

So for what it is worth my method for checklists on pre departure

1 - Nothing is that critical on the ground.....I will say that again NOTHING IS THAT CRITICAL ON THE GROUND ! (Yeah I know that turbines can punish you if sequence of start is incorrect but you get my point for average PA28 / Cessna 172.

2- Get the thing started and forget about everything else for now

2 - Flow through the panel and check and setup everything that you need for taxi - then get clearance to taxi

3 - Do your taxi checks while you are taxying (I know this will offend many who don't think that checks should be done while moving but remember we are heads up and outside , not reading war and peace. So have a look to see if rudder is moving when pedals depressed, controls free and correct (why do only a few pilots actually look to make sure rigged correctly) set trim, set flaps and anything else that is appropriate.

3 - Stop and complete power checks from memory and final take off checks

Now when you think you are ready whip out the checklist and see if you missed anything (don't do all of the checks again !!!)

This works well after a few tries and has the following benefits

1 - Faster and more efficient
2 - Safer (eyes outside for much longer)
3 - You are forced to think about what you are doing
4 - Makes good use of taxi time (hell why not brief the departure if a long taxi)
5 - You still get to have a look at the checklist just to find out what you missed

[welliewanger]

How do you teach the use of checklist?

With a very big stick! :}

[CaptainInsaneO]

I'm trying to get a hold of the Flipper board type checklist that you mount on top of the instrument panel...

The type that, when you check things off as you takeoff, leaving all the tabs with an 'up' arrow. And when landing, it leaves all the tabs with a 'down' arrow.

Does anybody know of a supply shop or even a private seller that has these available for purchase?

Thanks in advance.

[Pugilistic Animus]

you will find that most generic GA checklist...are horribly formatted and designed for distraction...generally it's nice to only use those checklist for preflight, startup and run-up and if available use the placards for landing/ approach...and just have flows for emergencies....:)

[mistermdd11]

hi all ..a fresher here ...
my instructor here in india had vital actions before entering the rwy and made us learn it by hard as for the checklist .... we had to learn in too!! for 172s
but as time passed he left and the new instructor did not emphasized on learning too much ,.... but the flow(say feel do) and fly***

while transitioning to multi I still remember ... after t.o it was night and when was abt to select the landing lights off... somehow luckily i saw that my fingers were on the Left Eng magnetos both L and R ....corrected my self and told him... calmy he said the same thing he always used to say ...

[Centaurus]

and keys on top of anti glare panel

You surely must be jesting. Why not another checklist item which tells you to undo your harness lest you forget and strain your back....

Or how about another which reminds you to check your shoe laces are secure before stepping down from your aircraft.:mad:

[Mach E Avelli]

Good one Centaurus. And in similar vein, WHY do so many Australian operators have: (challenge) "Takeoff Clearance" (response) "Received/Not Required" and ditto "Landing Clearance- -Received/Not required?" It's a real mouthful at a quite critical stage of the operation, i.e. entering/on the runway or on short final/approaching minima. The same checklists don't have 'Crossing Active Runway Clearance' 'Descent Clearance' etc. Or maybe the more anal ones do? All clearances are potentially critical, but can be acknowledged to the other crewmember with signals such as using landing lights, strobes, altitude alerters etc. The checklist was never intended to replace basic airmanship stuff. Whenever I hear this Received/Not Required palaver I think of "roger, Roger" in that movie 'Flying High'.
There must be some history to this for it to be so popular with so many Aussie operators. It wasn't a belated local kneejerk to Tenerife, surely? Someone must have an explanation. It's not one we can blame CASA for, as I have seen them approve some very brief checklists.

[Pugilistic Animus]

some common sense applies to the whole thing no!...too mant FI's in epaulets:E

[gigi116]

Small Aircraft Manufacturer usually pubblish on AFM / POM the (expanded or condensed ) "normal procedures" . To avoid any litigation they tend to include everything regardless consideration to workload and real aircraft operations :=

Note : some other important procedures related to Avionic or optional installed are pubblished on separate AFM supplements, some other important requirements for operations are pubblished by Authority / Safety Organization :confused:.

Small Operators, for any eventual litigation as above (and with the acceptance of Local Autority) simply make a copy of the AFM / POM procedures and use it as a "check list", (also without any reference to such supplements for optional installed or operations requirements)

Result is high workload , confusion between DO and DONE items, lack of very critical items to control CFIT hazards. This may also constitute a pilot "mental refuse attitude" for check list.

THIS IS WRONG AND DECREASE SAFETY :{

-PROCEDURE means a step by step detailed set of instrucions e.g Rotate handle counterclockwise, pull handle, pull door etc etc.

Procedures cannot be read neither during the operation as they interrupt the flow of actions nor after operation completed as it makes no sence. ( if door is opened the handle as been rotated)

-CHECK LIST is a list of critical items to complete/check or already completED/ chekED e.g. Door.....open (or... opeNED).

When the check list has been structured to be used as "DONE check list" it means that, at the moment of reading, most of the items have been completed already following a mental logical model called "flow pattern".

Between AFM Procedures and Check list should be pubblished a "Procedures Guide " to be used as a "training tool " for such flow patterns and task sharing between crew members :ok:.

The check list should depict only "safety critical items" as used mainly as the "last barrier" (see Reason's cheese Model) to discover any slip or lapse.

Aviation Authority must pretend all Operators a customized and "smart" Check list :*!

Ciao