Procedures and Checklist usage within GA

[Globalstream]

I didn't want to hijack Hawker750's thread on the value for money that Netjets provide (I think they do as a fractional service provider), but during the course of that thread there were some comments made regarding the virtues of airline style procedures and their applicability in the biz jet world. It's a bit of a hobby horse of mine and I wanted to discuss that further and make clear my points because I think it's such an important discussion.

I have an airline and biz jet background with a good part of that time spent as a FI, TRI/TRE AND SFI/SFE. I have trained and tested dozens of students, clients and colleagues, probably several hundred in all.

In my opinion, the most pressing safety issues for business aviation specifically are poor procedures and operational practices. Technical (eg aircraft) and systemic (eg ATC) improvements are generating consistently successful outcomes in routine flying that mask the lack of ability/procedural effectiveness of the backstop- the crew. Ironically, this can foster a false sense of competence in many operations.

Why do I think this? Because in the simulator we can generate those unfortunate circumstances that seem to align when an accident occurs and that often highlights flaws in procedure and discipline. This is especially unfortunate since SOPs are even more important for GA crews given their exposure to highly variable operating environments and conditions.

Consider a complete electrical loss after an instrument night departure from an airport in mountainous terrain. Jackson Hole Wy comes to mind

My experience in the simulator shows that even a relatively straight forward failure (a single failure for which a checklist exists) can overload a disturbing number of crews when realistic elements are added and it clearly shows procedural weakness.

Some commentators, confirming what I've seen on the line and in the sim, said they brief the initials and express a contemptuous attitude to further briefing. I can assure you that failure of the the electrical system or another event that requires hand flying part of the procedure at an inopportune moment, often results in a good deal of humility because despite the cursory briefing, crucial information was omitted or not understood.

Notes need to be read AND UNDERSTOOD, as does the routing, altitudes and speeds.

My experience training has only reinforced my belief in the effectiveness of "airline" style flows, checks and procedural discipline. When the chips are down, our perceptual field narrow tremendously and good procedures, drilled to become second nature (especially the processes for handling emergencies) make all the difference. They also facilitate speed and safety in normal ops.

Whenever I've encountered reluctance to discuss or implement SOPs, it usually seems to stem from ignorance (not having trained and operated with strict, but effective SOPs) and/or inappropriate defensiveness.

To be honest, applying the acid test as a trainer or examiner- would I let my friends and family fly with this guy? I find lazy, poor checklist usage infuriating. I have to blame generally weak biz jet training, but excuses for lack of them after "crashing" and a fair critique I just find appalling.

Now, getting biz jet manufacturers to produce airline style checklists and establishing reasonable methods to have check lists and SOPS approved by local authorities is another topic. I should also say my extolling of airline style procedures is in no way an endorsement of all airlines, many of whom, IMHO, have deep flaws of their own related to a broader decline in pilot development.