Capt Claret, the prelim report (link in John's post) staes that the captain was the PF & gives description of his actions. While I concede that I wasn't there & don't know what was going through his mind, the report is a little damning.
That being said, correct use of the altitude selector on whatever panel you have in your aircraft (MCP in theBoeing) & adequate cross-checking of selections by the PM is one of the fundamental building blocks of safe operations. If that is was taken seriously in this case, the captain would not have just changed the setting because it disagreed with the altitude in the MCDU. He would have addressed the discrepancy by discussing the situation with the F/O & confirming the cleared altitude with ATC. Maybe I am being too harsh, but simply changing the altitude, as indicated in the report, is inexcusable.
I agree that a lot of problems are generated by the 'gotchas' of systemic failures & constant study & improvement in this area is essential. However, one must recognize that they will always exist & try to develop traps for these issues in order to prevent them leading to an incident or accident.
Professionalism is a mindset & although it can be developed by outside influences, it has to start with a commitment to excellence by the individual from the very beginning.
The sim example you give highlights the situation. We are all aware that sim exercises are very task focused & time limited. The normal briefing techniques & FMC or MCDU cross-checking are glossed over or completely ignored to save time. However, one should have the insight to realize that this does not mean that we can do the same on the line. Application of professional discipline should ensure that the procedure is performed to a high standard in the reality of line operations. The same would apply to highly repetitive actions such as actioning normal checklists on a multi sector day. It is easy to call 'down - 3 greens' without positively checking for 3 greens when you have done it a thousand times & it is 'always' 3 greens.
waren9, i agree with you regarding the briefing of taxi routes. In fact, most of the time it is negative reinforcement as you don't know what route you will get &/or don't get what you expect. If I had my way I would never brief it unless there were specific traps to be aware of on a possible taxi route such as hotspots or notamed works. Unfortunately my current company expects it as part of their SOP's & therefore I comply.
Last edited by Oakape; 7th Jul 2011 at 08:13.