SOPs are important and need to be applied, but there is an advantage in knowing a bit more than the assumed minimum competence level.
Absolutely with you there.
I think there is a big difference between a UAS exercise in the sim when it’s expected and something that creeps up on you in real life. Pitot/static blockages or leaks are a good example, as initially everything works and there can be a slow degradation which is difficult to pick up considering the tolerances. When you add in temperature, weight, wind component changes, temperature inversions, turbulence, etc. it can be hard to diagnose. Consider the effect of flying in/out of a jet stream: you get performance attitudes that are well outside what happens in a steady state but accept that because, well jet stream. Symptoms not unlike kinds of UAS but we accept them as normal.
One of the clues that all may not be well is that on FMC aircraft the calculated wind starts changing but this happens when everything is working as designed but the w/v is actually changing.
What I’m trying to say in a very long-winded way is that yes, a working knowledge of performance attitudes is useful and good airmanship, plus will probably help you diagnose a fault condition earlier than someone who just follows the flight director to wherever it goes, but it’s not a panacea. By the time you’ve twigged that things really aren’t what they should be, especially in a time of high workload, you may not be quite where you think you are, like when the GPWS goes off. The checklist assumes that you’ve lost some SA and need a bit of time to rebuild it, which is what it gives you.
Also, given that pretty much all manufacturers publish a UAS checklist, you would be putting yourself well out on a limb if you decided not to follow the first vital actions and roll your own. Assuming you survived, that is...
