Many have far more experience and knowledge than myself at this stuff as I have only been intimately associated with Airline Operations for the best part of 40 years, flying at a selection of Airlines around the world and I readily admit that the last 15 years I have spent Airline flying most of the "Heavy" Airbus types gives me very limited credibility to make any comment, therefore it is with much intrepidation that I dare to even comment. Nonetheless with much humility.......
It's my understanding that Airbus has, in its own interminable way, tried for several years now to address the issue of unnecessary IFS and "enlighten" us as to its real intentions through its OEBs and more in particular the FCOM Bulletins, both of which, like it or not, do form a part of the operating FCOM procedures and therefore a good working knowledge and understanding of them is
assumed .
With this slightly obscure method in mind the FCOM bulletins have for a long time tried to emphasize, particularly regarding IFS, that the prevailing circumstances and all available clues should be considered
prior to ECAM actions.
Implicit in this is, and I quote FCOM bulletins:
The procedures calling for a positive or conditional engine shutdown should be clearly individually understood.
In other words we are meant to clearly and individually understand the italic additions and notes inserted within the FCOM 3 procedures, at least the operationally important ones as far as possible.
MOST of the time following ECAM actions should deal with the "detected" failure appropriately and safely however more background knowledge may often be required to optimize your decision making process.
Is this convoluted methodolgy
Have a nice day and good luck.
