|
So, if I understand you correctly, the best option (considering "normal" operators, set of conditions, "decent" design of the procedures) would be to follow the procedure...
Providing that the procedure is competent. Unfortunately, there are operators who don't do the "right" thing and there are many operators where the engineering folk do the thing with an engineering hat on but without any useful operational input.
The ideal arrangement is to have a competent engineering group with some operational folk involved or, where it sometimes happens, to have folk who wear both hats .. which includes such folk as OS, mutt, and me ...
Those who spend time in the sharp end tend have a healthier respect for the realities of operations.
This is not to say that the work is difficult .. on the contrary it is straightforward .. requiring, in the main, only a modest technical competence and a good attention to housekeeping and detail.
If the procedure is not competent then you start to head toward no-mans-land. It helps if the pilot has a basic competence in the discipline (ie something along the lines of the old Performance A training).
Main thing is to get the message across that running on a wing and a prayer is not a good life strategy when it comes to engine failures during takeoff.
I guess we can summarise it with 'Caveat Emptor'?
you betcha, good sir.
|
Linear Mode
