Gas Bags, I have to disagree...
If you screw up so badly in the RHS the Captain should take over. If the Captain does not do that then both pilots have screwed up royally.
Yes, and equally, if the Captain screws up the F.O should take over....
Training and in particular repetitive action dictates so. The QRH determines what to do in most if not all circumstances and if not followed verbatim that then leaves the pilots in for tea and bickies. Follow the training and the manuals and you would be a very unlucky RPT pilot to experience anything close to a fatality, which does not compare to a medical professional who holds life and death in their hands every day, if not every hour of every shift.
Training and particular repetitive action only accounts for a small amount of managing a non-normal situation overall.
You could say the same of medical professionals, a patient isn't breathing, A primary assessment is done, Airways, Breathing, Circulation, CPR and resuscitation procedures are started automatically as a response. A secondary assessment is then carried out once the primary is complete.
A engine fails at over the Pacific, the nearest landfall is 2 hours away and your in a 737 NG. Calls are made, failures are identified and non-normal checklists reference items (sorry memory items now) are conducted.
The patient is now breathing however not conscious. Agreed, there is no QRH for the human body. However we can take B.P, pulse, S02, medical history if one exists for the patient, etc. Yes, the doctor then has to determine what has happened for the patient to end up in this state if the reason isn't obvious and whether this will heal normally and continuing monitoring or further medical intervention is required. Decisions have to be made.
The QRH reference items are complete. The aircraft is in a steady state, all drills and checklists have been completed. The QRH states what the condition is that the checklist is for. As aircrew you have to ensure that the correct checklist is followed for the state the aircraft is in. We have oil pressure, N1, N2, oil temperature, fuel temperature, the tech log etc. what caused the engine to fail and should we attempt a restart? Where should we divert to? The nearest airfield has a short 1500 m runway however 30 minutes on from that is a 2000 m runway.. The QRH states, "Land at the nearest suitable airport".. however that is a loaded statement and calls for judgement on part of the flight crew. Decisions have to be made.
QRHs only take you so far. Once they are completed, they leave it up to the judgement of the aircrew and ultimately the captain to determine the safest course of action.
While every attempt is made to supply needed non-normal checklists, it is not possible to develop checklists for all conceivable situations.
Boeing Non-Normal Checklist Operation CI.2.1 B737NG
In multiple failure situations, the flight crew may need to combine the elements of more than one checklist. In all situations, the captain must assess the situation and use good judgement to determine the safest course of action.
Boeing Non-Normal Checklist Operation CI.2.1 B737NG
Doctors have drugs, aircrew have QRHs. Both drugs and QRHs you could say address a symptom/condition and treat it.
It is up to the doctor to monitor the patient to ensure that the drug is having the desired effect and addressing the symptom. And if it is not working or making the situation worse, discontinue the treatment and determine alternative action.
It is up to the aircrew to monitor the situation and ensure the QRH is having the desired effect and addressing the situation at hand. And if it is not working or making the situation worse, discontinue the checklist and determine alternative action.
It is up to the individual human, be in Doctor or Pilot to use his judgement and experience to decide how to return a non-normal situation to a normal state and choose the correct tool (drug/QRH) to achieve an outcome which achieves that. Then to continue monitoring the situation to ensure that it does not get worse until the desired outcome is achieved, an alive and happy patient, or a safe landing.
I would say that similar skills of deduction, judgement, reasoning and research are needed in both professions.
Checklists are not followed verbatim, they are combined, and used in conjunction with previous crew experience, resources from the ground, cabin and crew judgement. They are not a blind stab in the dark, fix it all. In fact use of the inappropriate checklist will make a bad situation worse.
Manuals just give you the information to use in which to make your judgement. The captain at any time can override any regulation or rule if in his/her judgement that is warranted to ensure a safe outcome.
Again the training that goes on does not allow things to go wrong unless the pilot does something he is trained not to do (And this should never happen in RPT). Light comes on, open book, follow instructions. Not rocket science. When everything goes pair shaped that is when the money is earned, and as far as fatalities go that is very rare. For example with the right training my mum could listen and obey a TCAS warning (provided she had the prerequrisite flying skills) and she would avoid what could be called a potential disaster)....This is what training and procedures are all about.
What if something outside the QRH occurs?
Again the training that goes on does not allow things to go wrong unless the pilot does something he is trained not to do (And this should never happen in RPT).
United 232 was a DC-10 that had the centre engine fan disk disintegrate leaving the aircraft with no hydraulics and no means to fly the aircraft. No QRH checklist was written for that situation because it was determined that such a situation was impossible. They had to relearn to fly the aircraft in order to make an attempt at landing. It was unfortunate that there were fatalities, however people survived thanks to the judgement and actions of the crew.
Lights came on, open book, no checklist found.
Do not make the profession out to be something it is not.
I never did. I used Doctors as an example of an professional. I never said pilots are doctors, doctors are pilots or pilot/doctors. I asked "How many doctors just do it because they "love it"....?"
My argument is that pilots are professionals, and doctors are professionals.
Infact it appears you agree with the statement.