Briefing Checklist

[MD83FO]

Outfit turned briefing laid out in Airbus FCTM into a checklist,

and is demanding its use for departure and approach briefing,

do you consider this a healthy practice?

[Flying Wild]

Well, if people in your 'outfit' have been giving rubbish briefings, missing things which ought to be briefed and the company has identified this as a problem, then what's the problem. At the end of the day you're employed to fly how your company wants you to. What's wrong with a structured briefing?

[Lancelot de boyles]

Absolutely not, and totally indicative of the industry, east and west of the puddle.

I experienced a similar practice in another place, where the briefing would include a verbatim (risk a fail in the sim if you get it wrong) departure brief.
Delivered monotone, and on cue, for both pilots. The way that it was instigated resulted in some pilots not deviating in any way at all. For other pilots, it was briefed verbatim, and then the actual brief added at the end (the latter being a best fit compromise because we are quite likely to remember those last few things we hear, rather than the same old sh1t repeated per sector. Imnsvho)

Rather akin to the (B737) intermittent warning horn brief introduced because some folks would insist on fighting a takeoff config warning when successfully airborne, instead of ensuring that they can still breathe.

All done with (for B737. I know nothing about airbus), recorder set on, rather than in auto.
It strikes me that the risk (cost) of litigation is perceived as being greater than the risk of spearing in.

The ramifications of this are (again, in my not so humble opinion)-

We are not specifically focusing on the immediate risks; instead we end up dulling ourselves with generic risks.
We (read; The company/lawyers/competent authority) are more concerned with the outcome of an inquiry, rather than preventing one.




16years to retirement and counting....:ouch:

[Flying Wild]

Absolutely not, and totally indicative of the industry, east and west of the puddle.

I experienced a similar practice in another place, where the briefing would include a verbatim (risk a fail in the sim if you get it wrong) departure brief.
Delivered monotone, and on cue, for both pilots. The way that it was instigated resulted in some pilots not deviating in any way at all. For other pilots, it was briefed verbatim, and then the actual brief added at the end (the latter being a best fit compromise because we are quite likely to remember those last few things we hear, rather than the same old sh1t repeated per sector. Imnsvho)

Rather akin to the (B737) intermittent warning horn brief introduced because some folks would insist on fighting a takeoff config warning when successfully airborne, instead of ensuring that they can still breathe.

All done with (for B737. I know nothing about airbus), recorder set on, rather than in auto.
It strikes me that the risk (cost) of litigation is perceived as being greater than the risk of spearing in.

The ramifications of this are (again, in my not so humble opinion)-

We are not specifically focusing on the immediate risks; instead we end up dulling ourselves with generic risks.
We (read; The company/lawyers/competent authority) are more concerned with the outcome of an inquiry, rather than preventing one.




16years to retirement and counting....:ouch:

I agree that a verbatim briefing which is regurgitated each sector is not appropriate as it then becomes one of those things which is paid lip service and swiftly tuned out. E.g. Emergency actions on the takeoff roll. How many times has it been briefed, whilst the other pilot is looking at you with a thousand yard stare...

However, I personally believe that a checklist can be helpful to structure a briefing to cover the pertinent points. Particularly at the end of a long day in the dead of the night.

[Denti]

A guideline, in form of a checklist, rather than a verbatim briefing text, can be helpful. We used to have something like that in a small box on our 737-300 checklist. If one is quite tired on day 5 early duty and sector 6 it can help.

[RAT 5]

I once flew for an outfit whose takeoff safety brief finished one scenario with, "and then we'll climb to MSA." This was said everytime from every runway. There were over 200 airfields in the network = >400 runways. At many airfields there were 2/3/4 MSA's. At some there was a very high MSA straight ahead and a much lower MSA left or right. So after the PF had put in the cassette, and pressed the play button for the regurgitated monkey brief, I asked which MSA was he talking about? Blank stare.
The reply was that the takeoff brief had been given as written. I then discussed that, surely, a brief was a declaration of intent. That was agreed, but the PF had no real answer about what was expected. He had quoted the written SOP.
I wrote a suggestion that the take off brief should be changed to, "we'll climb to XXXX'." Again, no reply.
Meanwhile the takeoff briefing became longer & longer and listened to less and less. It was a regurgitation of SOP's. There was a written SOP that briefings should be brief because the listener could not absorb too much information. OMG. Agh!
I once flew for another operator, years ago, with more sensible and less rigid techniques.
Takeoff brief from some old farts. "today we shall operate using SOP's. If I decide it is safer to deviate I will tell you. In the event of an engine failure during takeoff we shall climb MFRA, clean up and XXXX YYYYY ZZZZ. Clear?"
Let's go.

[Lancelot de boyles]

I confess that my reply was based on prior encounters with such a checklist where each item was briefed, in prescribed order, and added to, to become a cumbersome rigid SOP, where previously, we'd had an aide memoir to assist as sector four brain fog kicks in.

[falconsRfab]

...they didn't read that bit in the Airbus Flight Operations Briefing Notes on conducting effective briefings then...the bit that says...
The routine and formal repetition of the same points on each sector may become counterproductive;

[fireflybob]

I detest these parrot style briefs.

The main purpose of the brief is to highlight what is unique or different. Let's say there is an emergency turn for the planned departure (or engine out escape procedure if you prefer). If someone gives the coma inducing standard company brief but omits the ET this is worth one or two out of ten for me. If they say "guys it's all standard today except if we get an engine failure it's vital we fly this (unique) ET which is blah blah" that's worth about nine out of ten for me.

And how about briefing on what you really think is going to happen? Doing command training going down to Faro on a sunny day and we can see 200 miles as we cross the Pyrenees and we know destination is CAVU and he gives the full briefing for the VOR approach. At the end I ask "What type of approach do you really think we will be doing?" "Ah yes a visual!" Ok so how about saying "Expecting a visual, this is how we expect to fly it - any doubts and we'll revert to the VOR approach as per the plate?"

But there again I'm old school now!

[Piltdown Man]

A briefing with a structure has a value. Our structure is Aircraft, Notams, Weather - Brief. The rest is up to you. Furthermore, our aircraft manufacturer states that "Briefings should be conducted with casual language and personal style to prevent the repetitious use of sentences and terms". Presumably because they have no value. I think any lump of text that has to regurgitated has no value - except maybe in a theatre. Furthemore, it is proof that you are working for a below standard, badly managed company with no understanding whatsoever of how people really work. Your company's crash (it won't be an accident), when it comes, will be expensive and rightly so. And one of the causes will be the muppet in the office thinks verbatim briefings have a value. It certainly will not get him off the hook, because you have already spilled the beans.

I'd get out quick if I were you. Either the w**k**s in the office will get you or you will be turned into one of them.

PM

[Stone_cold]

The FCTM also states that the briefing should be " relevant , concise and chronological " . Reading the Airbus briefing checklist verbatim is a management "Tool" . Pun intended .

[MD83FO]

Have you guys seen how the Blue Angels brief, they do it with their eyes closed.

I would like to know if there is any science behind recitating what you plan to do from your brain, rather than regurjitating replies from a briefing checklist in fear of missing something if you don't read it.

[+TSRA]

I abhor regurgitated briefings. All you do is sit, hear (not listen), and wonder why the other pilot can't do it faster so you can get out and go. The Blue Angels brief with eyes closed is slightly different in that their pilots are visualizing in their mind what they are going to be doing in their own ship. I've seen lots of guys and gals I fly with have their eyes closed during a briefing, but I doubt they're visualizing anything pertinent.

That's why my company moved to this structure: Aircraft, Charts, Terrain, Threats, Weather, Operational, and Fuel. I'm not sure where we got it from - some say a larger middle eastern airline while others say it was developed in house. In any event we strongly discourage "canned" briefings, instead wanting it to be a conversation about what you are actually going to do and the differences that could result in problems.

Because its flexible, a VMC arrival briefing takes less than a minute, while a full IMC briefing into a new airport can take up to five. Very flexible and gets way more input from the other pilot.

[TypeIV]

Briefings are a powerful tool for improving CRM, checking configuration/setups, gaining SA and highlighting things that aren't standard.

To be honest, when someone starts to exaggerate or talk too much irrelevant rubbish, I tend to find it more annoying than contributory, this is a commonly re-occurring problem among my british colleagues.

[Rwy in Sight]

Few years ago, in this great forum, one member which his name escapes so I can't give credit, used to say that a briefing should be like a skirt: long enough to cover everything, short enough to be interesting.

[chimbu warrior]

Briefings should be brief.

[RAT 5]

Briefings should be brief.

Indeed. I once flew for an outfit that had this in Ops Part A, and reiterated it in a memo, as they added a paragraph to the departure brief and added a couple of extras to the arrival brief. Hm? But then the Ops A 'said' lots of things when they 'did' somethings slightly different.

[FullWings]

Briefings are a powerful tool for improving CRM, checking configuration/setups, gaining SA and highlighting things that aren't standard.
Couldn’t agree more, especially about the non-standard stuff. I’ve had enough of “it’s a 3deg ILS, the outer marker is 1720, the QDM is 190 blah blah blah...” to last me a lifetime. Starting a brief with “we’ll be using standard drills and procedures” is another one. No sh*t Sherlock! So that wasn’t an Aresti sequence clipped to your control column then?

As mentioned by others, a briefing needs to to as brief as you can make it but most importantly, must leave the participants with greater knowledge and a shared mental model, otherwise what’s the point? Ad-nauseam recital of basic but unlikely stuff while not covering less usual but more likely occurrences is, unfortunately, quite common. It’s almost like a briefing is something to be endured, rather than embraced to enhance crew performance.

I can understand going in detail through things like RTOs, where deliberate actions have to be performed correctly in a limited time span and the cost of failure can be high: running through actions as a crew builds confidence and increases the likelihood of a successful outcome. Most other occurrences can be dealt with better with a bit less rigidity and a bit more thought. I was part of a brief the other day during which the PF said that if we had an engine problem, he’d rotate slower to a lower pitch attitude. I replied that although I had every confidence in his ability to do what was necessary in this event, would he be following his own brief if we had an engine fire warning but no other indications? This triggered a discussion on the various modes of failure we might realistically expect and what we might do if they occurred sometime other than V1, unlike the sim. So pretty useful, really.

Do many organisations actually teach people how to brief effectively? I must admit I received little or no training in this regard when entering the business and had to pick up bits and pieces from those who were obviously good at it. Even now at my outfit, a recent training module on briefings had a “how not to do it” video, which was pretty funny but made me wonder if those resources would have been better spent demonstrating ways in which briefings could be made better, rather than worse...

[Piltdown Man]

Here is a classic example (https://youtu.be/9HL_SryMBMM) of how not to brief. This is 4:53 of absolute drivel. Why? Who was the pilot flying? Why was the expected short taxi route so hazardous? In case of an engine failure were they really going to climb to 12,000' single engine on heading 330? They pointlessly mentioned the fact the cabin wouldn't bother them unless it was an emergency but felt it unnecessary to discuss the weather or the aircraft status. I was also unaware of how the SID, whichever it was, would be flown. Maybe this clip was a spoof? But it is a superb example of a wasted effort that added nothing to this crew's understanding of how they were going to fly together that day.

PM

[Mansfield]

I use this as a guide to build a briefing, which means if the glide slope angle is standard, I don't brief it...you get the idea. But you do need a template of some sort to work from.

Thunderstorms?
Windshear?
Tailwind?
Icing?
Required Runway Length?
Ref Speeds?
NOTAMS?

Chart dates agree
DA height above touchdown
Final fix crossing altitude
Glide slope angle – standard?
Localizer unusable zones?
Type of approach lighting
PAPI/VASI
Runway width (non standard produces height illusions)
Displaced threshold
Missed approach first two steps
Missed approach in FMC?
Special procedures for engine-out go-around

The difficult part for those of us trapped in a “hub-and-spoke” system is that every other briefing is nearly absurd, yet wide, wide open to complacency. NOTAMs, for example. Having a guide or checklist makes it easier to mentally review and be sure you have not overlooked something, without mindlessly blabbing.

[Leo45]

I could not agree more FullWings and Piltdown Man.

Unfortunately lots of operators insist on formatted briefings laden with trivia, which are sleep-inducing, ineffective and far from enhancing flight safety. The mental rigidity of this industry is baffling ...