Grifted, In my airline (Part 135) we are already required to brief the folowing memory items at least on the first flight of the sequence:
REJECTED T/O ENG FIRE OR FAILURE- TAKE OFF CONTINUED PRESSURIZATION PROBLEMS.
ANY OTHER THE COMMANDER DEEMS NECESSARY.
I've seen guys handle the first three with no probls but stutter when the capt throws in the initial actions of UNRELIABLE AIRSPEED. I therefore have no probs with this kind of brief, this way I know we are on the same page in those situations where we cant immediately get guidance from the QRH.
Our FOD recently made the comment that any pilot who appears on the flight deck and who doesn't know his/her recall (memory) items is guilty of criminal negligence. I agree with him.
For years now I have been part of the cabin crew briefing where the No.1 ask's saftey questions to the cabin crew. I always thought this would be a good Idea for the flight deck too.
Not to catch anyone out but to refresh the memory.
Indeed before leaving the flight deck for my inflight rest, I always ask the gys left upfront to show me touch drills for engine failure and depressurisation failure.
And when on the Atlantic a quick refresher on Slop,WX Diversion off track, ect, again not to catch any one out, just to refresh the mind.
Firstly agree that as professional pilots we should know our Recall/Memory items.
But "questions" during flight preparation then please NO! We have sim checks, line checks and there is enough to think about at the flight planning stage without using the precious time to regurgitate stuff parrot fashion. In short we have ALREADY demonstrated competence in this area during recurrent checks!
Yes quite right to review emergencies in accordance with SOP in take off brief. On a normal line flight if time permits I find it useful to pull the QRH out for a review but don't believe in cross-examining my crew in an exam like style to test their knowledge. Better to have some fun doing it and then more is learned!
The only way to validate correct execution of recall items is actually to DO them - usually in the simulator! Saying what you would do is NOT the same as doing it!
Why not just brief ALL of the memory items? What's so special about pressurization? What about engine fire drills or go-around procedures? Must I brief the procedure for a wake turbulence or windshear encounter too, or is it okay to just rely on the checklist? While we're at it, we might as well recite the entire limitations section of the AFM. Maybe conduct a full checkride prior to each flight day. Where does it stop?
Maybe it would be a better idea to concentrate our energies and attention to the task at hand. You know, departure particulars, special procedures, where we'll go if we have a problem, that kind of thing... Let's leave the memory items to our training and perhaps the occasional self-study session.
I'd like to see the official notice from the FAA outlining this new mandate. Until I do, I have difficulty believing that even they could be so obtusely reactionary as to require such nonsensical whimsy. Long, drawn out briefings are not the way to go. Clear, concise and focused is a much more productive use of valuable mental focus. If each recurrent training event is not often enough to remember abnormal and emergency drills, then increase the frequency of recurrent training until it is!
Best regards,
Westhawk
Last edited by westhawk : 5th August 2008 at 10:39.
If they were really concerned about this, then perhaps they should mandate more frequent sim checks. I understand that these are only mandatory once every 12 months in the US. At the other end of the spectrum (equally ridiculous), I am required to do 8 sim sessions per year by my carrier.
While we are reciting all this stuff, why not say the Lord's Prayer and sing God Save the Queen as well?
that's like some collegues saying at the end of the briefing
" Otherwise standard call outs"....yep man, I wanted just to say chewing gum instead of engine fire n°1 today...
Anyway, lets brief for what we seem to be special of the day, bad WX, emergency return if high ground around, any items that are relevant. But for God sake, don't always brief for the same stuff, what can we do if a concentration of birds is around the airfield? Maybe do a barrel roll right after take off to avoid it?!
What's the point of briefing Memory Items for say, Eng Fire drills before take-off, if subsequently when you do take-off you turn R instead of L and fly into a mountain?
Keep briefings succinct and relevant to the current circumstances!
Very good point. Terrain is part of the briefing with and without engine failure together with cleanup, emg. turn etc. Depressurisation? Get on oxygen take a couple of seconds to assess the situation - don't descend onto traffic, terrain - the escape route is open next to you - isn't it? The next bits are secondary.
When does the FAA want the depressurisation briefing to be carried out? Waste of valuable time before departure - how about during the climb?
Briefings -- please note the root word "brief" -- provide a window of about 30 seconds. Certainly less than a minute. After that people start to tune it out. This is human nature.
They should be meaningful. Short, to the point and meaningful.
And in this case my bet is that the "FAA" is just some fed trying to make a name for himself. "The FAA" speaks in text, and as others I would like to see the hard copy of this new policy; not to mention what FAR they would use to enforce it.
I do run through the reject and "go" scenerios before each takeoff within my own mind, but there is no need to share SOP reviews unless there is something out of the ordinary.
chimbu warrior, I disagree, this is not just some mindless parrot-like recital. It is a drill in response to a serious inflite failure and as such needs to be performed/rehearsed precisely.
Jw411, I agree with the "......criminal negligence." part of your post but I would prefer to discover this negligence during a brief rather than in the middle of an emergency descent for example.
The guy seated next to me has demonstrated repeatedly through simulators, line checks etc that he can fly an approach to minimums. But I'm going to watch his every approach with a critical eye (as I expect him to do mine). Not because I dont trust him but because this is an important measure in enhancing airline safety.
I view briefing memory items this way.... I know what they are but how do I know what's in the other person's MEMORY unless he tells me!!!
Remember also that there are airlines where the first time you lay eyes on your other crewmember(s) might have been when you checked in for the flight.
During a brief for a rejected take off leading to an evacuation I remember a newish F/O reciting ‘Pressurisation Manual – SHUT’ It was meant to be ‘Manual – OPEN’ So at the end of the brief I queried his slip to 1) Find out if it was a genuine mistake 2) To ensure that in the event of an evacuation, possibly 20 minutes later, he would not spoil our day.
I can’t even remember whether it was a genuine mistake or not but at the time I thought that it was a worthwhile learning point for both of us and made the chances of a successful evacuation more likely.
A briefless flight must by definition, raise the stakes unnecessarily?
I think maybe this thread has drifted a little. Yes take off/approach briefings make sense and indeed are required in most company SOPs. This is not the same as an interrogation at flight despatch on memory items.
Actually there is only one reason to have memory items, they are tasks which must be actioned without delay in circumstances that do not allow time for a checklist to be consulted. They should be strictly limited to the "do or die" items such as initial actions for stopping, engine failure, decompression and unreliable airspeed, can't think of anything else that needs them really, evacuation should certainly not be performed from memory, plenty of time to set the park brake and get the QRH out.
Would you not think it is such an important item (how much useful consciousness do you have left once the masks drop?) that it merits a briefing? In Europe so many low-cost carriers are using secondary airfields with short runways and executing bleeds off take-offs to nurse a few extra pounds of thrust out of the engines, then forgetting to switch it on again, that pressurisation warnings are more common that one would like to think. I know of one incident involvng a well known airline where cabin crew thought some pax were showing the early signs of hypoxia.
Would you not think it is such an important item (how much useful consciousness do you have left once the masks drop?) that it merits a briefing? In Europe so many low-cost carriers are using secondary airfields with short runways and executing bleeds off take-offs to nurse a few extra pounds of thrust out of the engines, then forgetting to switch it on again, that pressurisation warnings are more common that one would like to think. I know of one incident involvng a well known airline where cabin crew thought some pax were showing the early signs of hypoxia.
What's new about Bleeds Off take offs? - we did them for years on a regular basis when I was on the B737-200 and -300.
On the a/c I am on with a loco in Europe I have yet to do a Bleeds Off take off in 2 years of operation!! That said of course we should know how to do same and reconfigure when airborne etc.
talent, I am not quite sure what point you are making - I would have thought all professional flight deck crew on jet a/c are aware of the average times of useful consciousness at 35/38,000 ft - what's the big deal?
Similar Threads 
The next bits are secondary.
Linear Mode
