Aborted take off AFM actions.
With regard to the aborted take off handling for the B737. If the order of actions for a rejected take off procedure is mandated in the AFM, then why would some airlines differ in opinion as to the order of actions, and require their crews to operate to the Company Operations Manual procedure rather than the AFM mandated procedure?
Example being, that Boeing require manual speed brake extension before actuation of reverse thrust. Correct application of reverse thrust will also extend the speed brake providing the automatic function of the speed brake works. However, some companies direct that reverse thrust should be used as the first means of actuating the speed brakes.
In practice there is very little time difference between manual speed brake actuation and use of reverse to actuate the speed brake. But there must be a very good reason why Boeing recommend manual speed brake first and not rely on the reverse levers to actuate the speed brakes.
If the Boeing action for rejected take off is published in the AFM, then is it illegal for companies to mandate otherwise in the company operations manual?
I do not have a copy of a 737 AFM, and I was wondering if anyone can tell me if the actions for an abort are specified in the typical 737 AFM?