Lengthy superfluous checklists and airmanship lookout

[Centaurus]

Reading a thread on this forum about Jabiru flying techniques made me think about the latest CAAP called Updated Advice for Pilots on Non-controlled Aerodromes

Two extracts come to mind. One states: "The advisory sets out principles for good airmanship when flying at non-controlled aerodromes, as well as allowing flexibility in operations. Following the advice will improve situational awareness and safety for all pilots"

and the other says:

5.5.4 "Most collisions occur on downwind or on final approach. There are many distractions during this time, including configuring the aircraft, completing checklists, setting equipment and communicating. Early completion of checklists and configuration changes will help to minimise distractions at this critical time."

One flying school in the Melbourne area operating Jabiru aircraft requires a lengthy and mostly superfluous Before Landing checklist to be memorised by the student and which is conducted on the downwind leg of the circuit.
It went like this: Hatches and harnesses, brakes , mixtures, masters, mags, undercarriage down and locked, fuel pump on, fuel pressure Ok, fuel contents OK, carb heat hot, temps and pressures all OK, flaps as required. A total of 13 items. In fact, similar generic checklists are used by most flying school operators for various types of trainers including the Cessna 172.

In contrast the Jabiru POH/AFM states just three required items:
4.4.8 Before Landing (and flight below 1000ft AGL)
Brakes .....................................................OFF
Harnesses ............................................... SECURE
Fuel Pump ...............................................On

And the Cessna 152 POH also gives only three items for the before landing checks. They are: Seats, Seat belts, shoulder harnesses...Adjust and lock.
Mixture....Rich. Carburetor Heat.....On (apply full hear before reducing power)

............................................................ .........................................

What is it with flying school CFI's and instructors that demand such lengthy and superfluous and often erroneous checklists that student pilots have to memorise on the downwind leg of a circuit where the priority should be a good-look out for conflicting traffic? For example, Moorabbin must be one of the busiest general aviation circuits in Australia, with the vast majority of aircraft flown by student pilots who are already flat out trying to fly a circuit - let alone trying to remember all those downwind drills which means looking inside the cockpit trying to concentrate on making meaningful checks instead of merely mouthing drills by memory but not actually checking.

Superfluous drills like undercarriage down and locked in a Jabiru fixed gear aircraft, for goodness sake. How illogical is that? - or Master Switch and Magnetos on. Or Temps and Pressures. Do you ever hear of a Boeing or Airbus crew checking temps and pressures for each engine on the downwind leg?

The time is well overdue for an intelligent review by flying school operators of the way they overload students with checklist drills that are so illogical for the aircraft type and yet expect students to follow the principles of good airmanship espoused in the above referenced CAAP.

Re examine that CAAP extract above to see what I mean. Here it is again: 5.5.4 "Most collisions occur on downwind or on final approach. There are many distractions during this time, including configuring the aircraft, completing checklists

[thorn bird]

Centaurus,
probably can't blame the flying schools. CAsA imagine the more items in a checklist the safer it is, and a lot of the time it is FOI's who dictate this stuff.
I know one operator inflicted with a forty two item taxi Checklist, takes around twenty minutes to complete, assuming there are no interruptions from ATC and you are fairly confident where your taxiing to.

[ai_topple]

I'm pretty new - currently working towards my PPL. I train out of Moorabbin and the pre-landing checklist for us is BOUMFISH. Not particularly hard to remember after you get the hang of it.

But then again I have to admit, it is pretty strange to check Undercarriage down on a Cessna 172, and autopilot off (Switches) when I certainly don't use autopilot at my stage of training. I suppose it's for us to get into the habit?

Yes, Moorabbin's busy traffic can be quite hairy so I try to get the checklist completely out of the way, after I do my inbound call and before I'm at 3NM.

[compressor stall]

I've never heard of "autopilot off" in a checklist.

And that's over half a dozen pistons twins, a few turboprops, and a pax jet.

If you're on approach and your hands aren't on the controls, then the ap is prob on! It's a bit hard to forget.

The FOI bit is true. Many stories kicking around of FOIs who wouldn't approve the manufacturers checklist for high end GA aircraft.

[Homesick-Angel]

It goes back to primacy (they say)
I learnt at, and then subsequently worked at schools with heavy SOPs, and schools with the simplicity of almost the same checklist for every type.

I think there's benefits to both, but I think that up until PPL, the people that truly benefit from heavy SOPs are the operator. How do they charge? VDO, how does the AC work its service sched? A/S. Do the math. 50 students doing an extra .2 on the ground each flight adds up over a day, month and year. What's worse is that's less time in the air for them, and many of them need it.

After PPL, and if you plan to become a professional pilot, I think solid SOPs really stand out to employers (as long as you can actually fly as well), and help the process and cockpit organisatin required particularly with single pilot multi IFR workloads. Any company will teach you their SOPs, and if you've never integrated them into your flying by that stage, you will struggle even at that point.

The old boumfah and variations work fine for almost every single and multi engine piston.

The basic problem comes back to priorities. New instructors in particular are obsessed with numbers , don't lose height in a stall over getting the technique right, that AoB is 39 dg not 45, etc.. Lookouts are taught as cursory instead if the most important thing.

Power and attitude seems to get lost. And what happens when your looking at an attitude? Your eyes are outside.

I could go on...

[A37575]

it is pretty strange to check Undercarriage down on a Cessna 172, and autopilot off (Switches) when I certainly don't use autopilot at my stage of training. I suppose it's for us to get into the habit?


Some habit :rolleyes: With the before landing generic check of undercarriage down and locked foisted upon students who are in a fixed gear type, have you ever wondered why they are not taught undercarriage UP as part of the after take off checks, in order to be consistent with the principle that they may one day fly a retractable gear type and it gets then into the habit? And why not have cowl flaps and propeller pitch controls thrown in for good measure since most retractable gear aircraft have cowl flaps and pitch levers too? :D

[DirectAnywhere]

If you're on approach and your hands aren't on the controls, then the ap is prob on! It's a bit hard to forget. Not necessarily.
ASN Aircraft accident Boeing 747-467 registration unknown Hong Kong-Chek Lap Kok International Airport (HKG) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20040830-0)

There is no such thing as a generic checklist. There is a manufacturer approved checklist and that is it. No ifs or buts. Good luck trying to get any GA operator to change their 'checklist' procedures though.

[Oktas8]

There are always some who say "the manufacturer's checklist is the only correct one". Ok, sounds good.

In the official Cessna 172 POH, there are 32 items to accomplish in the Before Take-off checks. Only three of these relate to the run-up check.

32 items. At $300/hr, most likely.

Problem is, many of these items are drills not checks, and the POH does not differentiate between them. For example, item 32 is "release brakes", because that's the final step prior to commencing the take-off roll. "Release brakes" is sound advice, but it doesn't belong in any printed in-cockpit checklist. It is good advice in an expanded checklist, or in a how-to-fly manual.

No-one knows how to fly a Cessna (Piper, Jabiru, whatever) better than the manufacturer. But it is usually up to the poor old flying school to distinguish between drills and checks. That's why we have so many variations out there in the real world.

[tecman]

I know that many people like to, or are required to, use written checklists but I think the average PPL in a bug smasher should be more than capable of committing key checklists to memory, minimizing the amount of time that eyes are inside the cockpit within the circuit.

Having hired aircraft at many places I've lived around the world, I found very few instructors/check pilots took issue with the fairly standard lists I used for common types. My impression was that they were much more concerned to see that important checks were being done, rather than nit-picking specifics. Of course, there were some location-specifc items that an Oz flatlander like me had to add in e.g. Alps flying.

Nowadays with my own aircraft, I do have written checklists, POH etc as required, but I still exercise my brain with the memorized list, making a point of e.g. re-checking just 4 items before entering the runway. I appreciate that this is not the way to do it for all operations, including most commercial flying. But to my mind, nothing looks worse than having a PPL fumbling around with a written checklist on downwind.

To do a bit of nit-picking myself, I don't like this "down and locked" business. How do you know that? All you've got in the cockpit in most light aircraft are "3 greens" (or whatever) and that's what you're checking, as a proxy for all being well with your wheels.

[dubbleyew eight]

BUTMPFISCHH is the left to right scan of a tiger moth. :E


by the way did you notice the subtle unheralded change in procedure hidden in the CAAP?

for decades the circuit height has been 1,000ft and the safe overfly height 500ft above that.
according to the CAAP you should approach a circuit at a country airfield 1,000ft above circuit height and make a 1,000ft descent to circuit height.

another thing to ignore...

[BPA]

Most of the items contained in GA aircraft built in the USA have nothing to do with the manufacturer knowing how to fly the aircraft better. Those items have been added by the their LAWYERS to prevent litigation.

[Avgas172]

Many moons ago, one Instructor of note embellished in my head the pre take off check list ... That'll kill ya, that'll kill ya and This will just embarrass ya ....
He pointed at the fuel selector, trim position and DG in that order, never did forget them ...... :E

[ButFli]

What's the O in BOUMFISH/BOUMFAH?

Open carby heat?

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Mr D 8,
Would you care to elaborate please??

:}

[Blueskymine]

In GA I used 3 checks for everything .

Type specific flows to the runway.

Prior to rolling:

T - trim
I - instruments (DG/HSI check)
M - Mixture
F - Flaps
I - ignition
S - Switches (pumps/lights/transponder)
H - hatches & harnesses

Prior to landing

B- Brakes
U - undercarriage
M - mixture
F - fuel/pumps
H - hatches & harnesses

P - pitch
U - undercarriage
F - flaps
F - cowl flaps

Never had a wheels up or a prang.

[ai_topple]

What's the O in BOUMFISH/BOUMFAH?


I was taught:

Brakes pressure check
Oil Temperatures and Pressures Green
Undercarriage down
Mixture full rich, Masters On, Magnetos on both
Fuel Selector to both, fuel contents checked
Instruments (DG aligned)
Switches, beacon, landing, strobe and auto-pilot off
Hatches and Harnesses secure

[LeadSled]

Folks,
DirectAnywhere has it right ---- it is the AFM checklists for each aircraft, and some are good, some are a pain in the neck, but you are stuck with it.

See CASR Part 21 and CAR 138.

This has been the case since mid-1998, But, Hey!!!! Its only 15 years ago, can't expect Australian aviation to change too fast.

Tootle pip!!

[dubbleyew eight]

oil pressure checks are a product of the external oil tank on the gypsy major engine. if any of the joints leaked air you would lose oil suction.

lycomings and continentals have internal oil supplies but the checks remain nevertheless. :-)

we should see checklists as a move toward world peace.
no pilot using a checklist could ever be fast enough for combat demands.

[Black_Knight]

while silly to check for landing gear down and locked in a c152 For flight training I dont think its silly to be drilled to check if your gear is down.

Most flight students will end up in more complex aircraft, if its already habit to check your landing gear is down when you move to a retractable aircraft you hopefully wont forget it.

I was taught BUMFISH in the C152

first time using it was a mess, after memorising it, the checklist was not an issue landing checks complete in a matter of seconds and you can even time look out between each item. usually started the checklist mid downwind, aiming to complete before turning base. so all that's left to do is fly and communicate

[Oktas8]

while silly to check for landing gear down and locked in a c152 For flight training I dont think its silly to be drilled to check if your gear is down.

An example of a case where I would defer to the manufacturer's checklist.

With eleven years of flight training experience, including ATO responsibility for two regulators, I saw zero benefit to verbalising "gear down and welded". However there was a significant downside in terms of students taking home the idea that checking gear down is not important: that is, paying lip service.

Don't mean to be harsh black_knight, but that idea is firmly in the wrong, in my experience. Go with the manufacturer's advice and keep it simple.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Well there you go! W8, Centaurus tried to get me to left right scan the Cessna for ages....and to think I was already doing it if I was flying a tiger...

Imagine, if you will, the simple joy the very first time on downwind ... undercarriage down and locked and it really happens:8

[Black_Knight]

Oktas8 Nothing harsh with what you said.

From a student pilot perspective with less then 50 hours, learning one generic landing checklist that gets my backside on the ground with a working aircraft seems less complicated then learning a manufactures checklist every time a change type even if individually they are all shorter (this is during ppl training only).

commonly when you change type its to start the next phase of training ie navigation. So if you can bring everything you memorised from a C152 and bring it straight across to a new type, you can focus on learning that pesky navigation stuff and everything else should be second nature.


Have you changed aircraft type on a student during PPL for what ever reason and given them a new set of manufactures checklist to digest as well as the lesson material, how did that go? (serious question)

[Big Pistons Forever]

Have you changed aircraft type on a student during PPL for what ever reason and given them a new set of manufactures checklist to digest as well as the lesson material, how did that go? (serious question)

Yes and I walked the student through once and showed him the new flow then told him what I wanted him to memorize on the new emergency checklist. Then I told him the next flight won't happen until he had all the checks normal and emergency down pat.

Set high standards get high performance, set low standards get low performance.....

[LeadSled]

Set high standards get high performance, set low standards get low performance.....
Folks,
And boring as it sounds, comply with the law ---- see CAR 138.
Regardless of what you might have been taught --- and most of the stuff here is real WW11 vintage, what happens after an incident or accident is something to bear in mind, and lawyers for the person suing you will only be interested in showing your non-compliance (ignoring CASR 21 and CAR 138) contributed to the damages.

Slightly of the thread, but how many of you who hire aircraft make certain of terms of the insurance (if any) on the aircraft, and if you are adequately covered. Even small bingles can run up bankruptcy sized bills.

Tootle Pip!!

[pilotchute]

I swapped aircraft a few times during my training. My school insisted on airline type checklists so it didn't really make that much difference.

What was painfully annoying was flying with 7 or 8 different instructors up to CPL. Changing instructors every other flight was much more of a problem than a checklist. Read the list do the actions. Not that difficult.

Remembering all the little ridiculous things my multitude of instructors would insist on me doing was much more stressful.

[Tankengine]

Pilotchute,
I agree too much instructor swapping is bad.:ooh:

I do hope you do not "read the list do the actions":=

I hear this from "airline" type school students, but this is NOT the way airlines do checklists!:ugh:

And:
Definitely not the way for GA.

[Centaurus]

Pity the new student who is cursed with different instructors on almost every lesson; each of whom only teach what they in turn were taught - repeat ad nauseum.

Having learned a whole variety of mnemonics when I learned to fly, I have forgotten all except two. The first was PPUFF on final in a Tiger Moth which my brand new wet behind the ears Grade C (now called Grade 3) told me were "Killer" items. They stood for Pitch (not applicable). Power Poles. Undercarriage (not applicable). Flaps (not applicable). Feathered friends. Another instructor told me that was all bulldust and forget it. But how could I forget it when they were KILLER ITEMS?

Another instructor (seriously experienced with four gold bars on his shoulders, a BIG watch, a pair of BIG wings and a dinky coloured ID card dangling from his neck like one of those old grannies who have their spectacles hanging by a looped cord around their neck), well he told me to remember a mnemonic which I shall never forget and that was the wonderful MFFHHB.

Now I could never remember what each letter technically represented but I never forgot "My Friend Fred Has Hairy Balls" which, I was assured by that particular instructor, were the dreaded KILLER items before landing in a Tiger Moth. They stood for: Mixture. Fuel on. Flaps (not applicable but just in case I might fly a Boeing 747 one day in the future) Hatches. Harness. Brakes (not applicable in early Tiger Moths) In later years I wondered why airline pilots don't use mnemonics because they can be good fun.

One Pprune contributor to this thread said: "What was painfully annoying was flying with 7 or 8 different instructors up to CPL. Changing instructors every other flight was much more of a problem than a checklist. Read the list do the actions. Not that difficult.
Remembering all the little ridiculous things my multitude of instructors would insist on me doing was much more stressful"
I can only sympathise with him.

Yet another Ppruner, asks: "What's the O in BOUMFISH/BOUMFAH?". I have not a clue. Perhaps he should Google it? Maybe if general aviation flying school checklists weren't so illogical and lengthy, confusing mnemonics would go out of vogue.

Yet another Ppruner makes the point: "probably can't blame the flying schools. CASA imagine the more items in a checklist the safer it is, and a lot of the time it is FOI's who dictate this stuff."

Comment: It is up to the CFI or chief pilot of the operation to have the bottle to refuse to acquiesce to the whims of particular FOI's who demand checklist items be added or changed to suit his personal opinion. Make sure of your facts first, of course. FOI's are not experts. They are just normal pilots like you or me except they are fortunate enough to have cushy secure government paid work. They are Public Servants. You are perfectly entitled to disagree with Public Servants.

[Rabbit 1]

Gear down and locked in a fixed undercarriage light aircraft! Oh, how I don't miss those days but to be consistent, shouldn't instructors therefore be teaching to retract the gear as well? After all, where I work the QAR will sing a merry tune back to Ops if retraction is delayed beyond allowable tolerances. Then again, maybe I should bite my tongue...

[ButFli]

Yet another Ppruner, asks: "What's the O in BOUMFISH/BOUMFAH?". I have not a clue. Perhaps he should Google it? Maybe if general aviation flying school checklists weren't so illogical and lengthy, confusing mnemonics would go out of vogue.

Perhaps a Ppruner ought to try google before admonishing another Ppruner to use google?

The only thing Google will tell you is what OBUMMMFITCHH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BUMMMFITCHH) means. A checklist so fantastic that it tells you to both open and close carby heat.

[Aussie Bob]

Now surely if the mags and master were both on at the commencement of the flight they would still be on at the end? Seriously, does anyone turn mags off in flight? Master off may follow an electrical emergency but surely then it would stay off?

Weird ....

[jas24zzk]

Hmm
love it!

checking mags...not so critical in keyed mags, but button switch mags? did you bump it in the cruise?

whatever is in the checklist you use, orating it is not enough, you must ALWAYS confirm the action you are calling in your check...i reckon everyone here agree's.

As for the U in downwind. Ian Sharp taught me my power conversion, and he made a point with the U (I was training in a C150-A) that I look outside and confirm i could see a wheel, and also make him check we had a leg and a wheel. At least we knew neither had fallen off....yes guesswork when solo..........but as he said use all available assets.

Part of hi teaching with the U was to consider, and look for the gear lever...actually confirm you were in a fixed gear aeroplane, not just by rote.

I get to swap between a PA32-300 and a PA32R-300 with almost identical panels. (one has a tape deck the other has a cd player LOL) Not forgotten my feet yet.

Check is only as good as your application of it, otherwise its just unwanted wind

[Dash8capt]

If you are a professional pilot and have so little situational awareness as to realise you are in either a fixed gear or retractable aircraft you may have bigger issues to consider...

[dubbleyew eight]

checklists on complex aircraft are a valid aide memoire. no problems on that.

in simple aircraft though they can be quite funny.
I have a friend who doesnt fly often because of CASA fears.
in his start checklist is "within 30 seconds check that you have oil pressure"
I've secretly timed him. among the fumbles of rust and the missing of which line he is at he reliably completes reading the entry in 1 and a half minutes.

but he IS using the checklists!

me, I use an old wartime mnemonic after startup.
ROGER, revs oil gyro electrics and radio.

revs set
oil showing activity
gyros spinning
electrics on
radio on and set.

you have no idea how easy it was to fly an aircraft before the advent of CASA.

[Biggles78]

I learnt to fly at NZCH and before solo I had memorised the 112 pre engine start to post engine shutdown checklist for the circuit and none of this reading off a written checklist rubbish either.

Downwind was BUMP, Brakes, Undercarriage (fixed or down) Mixture (pump on, check pressure), Pitch (fixed or full fine).

Out of the circuit to the training area play ground it was FMHR. Fuel (change tanks if necessary), Harness on (they were never off; hatches were never opened in flight, funny that) and Radio (request joining instructions).

Turning Base, crank on the flap, Carb Heat on, set approach speed.
Finals, Carb Heat off, (cowls open if on a real aeroplane :cool: ), final instrument scan and reduce speed.

Why is everthing being complicated now. Watched a Youtube video of some guy READING their prestart checklist in a PA28. Took him ages. What is difficult with:
Brakes on
Fuel Fullest Tank
Mixture Rich
Carb heat cold (primer locked if used or checked if not)
Throttle Set
Master On
Fuel Pump On (check Pressure)
Clear PROP
and Crank

WHY does that need a written checklist? 35 years and it is still fresh in my memory. The only issue I did have was flying the same jump aircraft for 18 months and then climbing into something else. ATC replies included the jump aircraft callsign just from habit. After wrong reply number 3, I then looked at the rego that was located on the instrument panel before responding. Highly embarrassed as I considered myself a professional. A very good lesson for a 400hr TT beginner.

[ai_topple]

Maybe if general aviation flying school checklists weren't so illogical and lengthy, confusing mnemonics would go out of vogue.


Has anyone heard of the SSSSSSS mnemonic?

I'm pretty low hours, just started my training - so maybe I haven't yet realised this might be a joke you instructors are pulling on us, but this one really made me go.... what?

[scavenger]

In a fixed gear aeroplane, unless you can see the gear, including undercarriage in a checklist is bad training. All that is accomplished is that the student is trained to say the words without checking anything.

Far better to teach the use of undercarriage to control speed during the approach. Checklists, pre-determined points for lowering and warning systems are secondary defences. The primary defences should be, 'I need to slow down so I'll use the gear', or, 'I'm going faster than I normally would be for this situation, I should check the gear'.

The repeated reference to CAR 138 is quite boring. Nothing therein prevents items additional to the AFM unless also conflicting with the AFM, which I believe is the point of the thread.

[LeadSled]

Comment: It is up to the CFI or chief pilot of the operation to have the bottle to refuse to acquiesce to the whims of particular FOI's

Centaurus,
You speak in jest, of course !!! Don't you??
That is exactly what what got Polar Air./Butson into so much very expensive (~aud$1M) trouble, disagreeing with an FOI about being required to carry out very dangerous asymmetric training, for which the aircraft was not certified.
There are quite a few other examples.
Tootle pip!!

[Sunfish]

I was taught from C150 days to always pay homage to the undercarraige God.

By the way, It should not be "undercarriage down".

It should be "undercarriage welded down" in a fixed gear aircraft.

With retractables, it should be "undercarriage selected down", and your hand should not leave the lever until you can honestly say to yourself after watching the lights come on: "three greens, undercarriage down."

[Ascend Charlie]

Overly complex checklists in a simple aircraft are sometimes used "because it is preparing the student for more complex aircraft."

Horsefeathers.

Why include "Hatches and harnesses" in the pre-landing checks of an aircraft that cannot open a hatch or door in flight, and you never take your harness off??

Why include "Frictions - as required" for the cyclic and collective friction in the chopper, when you cannot have arrived on downwind from a cruise or climb if the frictions are ON??

Why keep "Compass - slaved" in the checks when we NEVER move the switch from Slaved to Free, and having checked it in the pre-start checks, there is no further need to look at it? And anyway, with the new glass screens, this switch has disappeared, and the standby gyro doesn't have a slave switch either.

If we are REALLY training for bigger machines, why don't the skid-equipped aircraft have a check for retracting after takeoff and lowering before landing?

Keep it REEEEEALLY simple, remove superfluous fluff.

[mcgrath50]

Why include "Hatches and harnesses" in the pre-landing checks of an aircraft that cannot open a hatch or door in flight, and you never take your harness off??

Almost any aircraft has seatbelts that passengers can take off. I was always taught to check them as part of pre-landing and before take-off.

Hatches is definitely important on the ground. My second area solo I hadn't latched the door properly and it popped open on the way out to the training area. Seeing the ground straight below sure freaked me out!

I do agree with questioning it's necessity pre-landing. At least in all the aircraft I have flown, any hatches that can be open for flight could be open for landing. Anything else shouldn't be touched so shouldn't have changed since you checked it pre-takeoff

[LeadSled]

CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 138

Pilot to comply with requirements etc of aircraft's flight manual etc (1) If a flight manual has been issued for an Australian aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft), the pilot in command of the aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft) must comply with a requirement, instruction, procedure or limitation concerning the operation of the aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft) that is set out in the manual.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) If a flight manual has not been issued for an Australian aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft) and, under the relevant airworthiness standards for the aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft), the information and instructions that would otherwise be contained in an aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft)'s flight manual are to be displayed either wholly on a placard, or partly on a placard and partly in another document, the pilot in command of the aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft) must comply with a requirement, instruction, procedure or limitation concerning the operation of the aircraft (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s5.64.html#aircraft) that is set out:
(a) on the placard; or
(b) on the placard or in the other document.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(3) An offence against subregulation (1) or (2) is an offence of strict liability.
Note: For strict liability , see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code .


Folks,
I will have another go at trying to get the message across. This has been the case since mid-1998.
Above is CAR 138.
Would anybody (Sunfish ??) like to comment on what CAR 138 mean to them, particularly if they are not using AFM/POH check lists, as required by law.
The Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) is often called the Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) or something similar for aircraft under 12500lb/5700 kg.

CAR 138 means what it says and says what it means, and non-compliance could be an expensive business.

Say you are ramp checked, and you, the PIC, do not have the AFM INCLUDING THE AFM CHECKLISTS, it is a strict liability offence, the maximum penalty that a court can impose is $8500.00 (plus costs)

That also means that CASA can impose an Administrative Fine of $1700, and I see lots of examples of people who, out of the blue (so to speak) find a demand in the mail from CASA for $1700 for whatever the offence was !!!

Things like not having the AFM, including AFM checklists on board is an absolute gift to CASA persons doing ramp checks. Administrative fines have become "A nice little earner", and I suspect the revenue potentials for administrative fines is the reason for the proliferation of "50 penalty points" offences in new regs, where the corresponding penalty in the old might have been 10, 20 or 25 penalty points.

checklists on complex aircraft are a valid aide memoire. no problems on that.

W8,
No they are not, and yes there is.
Checklists are exactly that, checklists, NOT aide memoirs, and you are expected to operate from knowledge of the aircraft with scan flows, in a modern checklist in an airline or similar environment, the items are very brief.
Typically, in a modern Boeing aircraft (anything less than about 30 years old) all the checklists, from off blox to on blox are in the centre of the control wheel for each pilot. Thus,for example, the before takeoff check will be just one item: "Flaps".

Tootle pip!!

PS: Most of the $1700 fines I have seen, that have "just turned up in the post" have been for alleged airspace violations, but it would seem that, increasingly, fines are being imposed after ramp checks and operator audits.

[Jabawocky]

Leadie, I am sure I am preaching to the converted but what is a problem in Australia, is that Mr Plod from CASA as well as all the gullible folk who have listened to Mr Plod and all the other OWT spinners over the years. This has resulted in the above mentioned well meaning folk believing that everything in its entirity contained in a POH must be adhered to.

This is despite the fact that many things can't be achieved at the same time, or are simply recomended examples of operation and not all the possible combinations.

I sit here right now with the G36 current model Bonanza POH as a reference and despite some elements being completely deplorable I note they are not any of the above mentioned requirement, instruction, procedure or limitation concerning the operation

As usual the definitions are the problem and OWT's abound ;)

[dubbleyew eight]

leadsled the manual for my aircraft was a minimum effort job by the first pilot.

the weight and balance information in it is incompetent because it is incomplete and misleading.
flying in accordance with the manual's information has caused me significant control issues before I realised how deficient it was.
I went back and worked up a full weight and balance schedule from first principles for my aircraft. In use it has proved valid and I no longer have control issues in flight.

in every single interaction I have had with CASA the answer has been a flat "NO".
it has been utterly useless trying to get anything out of CASA.
so why would I bother?

I fly with a competent weight and balance schedule. that is all I need.
CASA can get Fcuked and the law be damned.

[Jabawocky]

W8

Over time I have learned enough from your posts that your aircraft may in fact not require an AFM, but the fact you have something that is wrong and the wrong folk at CASA seem too incompetent to help. Despite this you have failed to address this with the one person who can.

Ask yourself .....Who was the AP who issued the CofA? ;) They are in fact the best folk to consult.

[VH-MLE]

Hi there FIG, if you’re doing a multi-engine endorsement on say a C310 or Baron, are you saying that there is no requirement to conduct simulated asymmetric operations at a safe height as part of the endorsement process?

Cheers.

VH-MLE