BUT
I have to say “excuse me safetypee not having given due attention and consideration to your post at the very first glance”.
If I had kept such an attitude I would have committed a serious offense against you, me, and all of our colleagues.
You state:
Knowing that something is dangerous is an essential starting point,…
And this is the reason why prior to each flight we consult the flight dispatcher who informs us about the flight plan (route, time, distance, fuel consumption), Notams concerning more or less temporary changes on maps of the airport of departure , route, destination and alternate airports.
We are also informed about the significant weather conditions & forecasts and when necessary we are also given satellite photos.
…but it is the personal knowing…
If you mean that each of us has the bounden duty to know by heart systems, limitations, Emergency & abnormal procedures of his airplane, you're breaking through an open door.
It’s not with no reason that we are subjected to checks of all kinds every six months.
Because:
…at the time that the hazard which determines the threat – it has to be recognised and action chosen. …
And the process of:
- Perception
- Identification
- Evaluation
- Intervention
Takes some time and attention, we have to divide the tasks between pilots: Crew coordination (SOPs are subtly emerging)
...The choice (the forbidding) does not come from someone else...
In the FOHB of all Carriers I flew for, for instance, is written, in capital letters, that it is forbidden to take off and land if there is a thunderstorm over the field. And so on…
…– SOP dependency, it’s you who has to consider the circumstances and apply personal rules – the ‘forbidding’ is guidance –..
Let me disagree.
Where do the SOPs come from?
Once upon a time we, young copilots, were forced to keep a small notebook in the pocket with the annotation of all the foibles of the various commanders..
With the advent of SOPs not any more.
I like to remember that nowadays we have also a procedure “Subtle Pilot Incapacitation.
" If a crew member does not respond after two calls, or one call during a deviation from the SOPs ... He can deduce the incapacitation of the other member and declare the ‘Emergency Authority’".
And:
During flight activity risky or dangerous situations may occur that need to be addressed and resolved.
Easy is the solution if the problem is covered in the QRH and / or manuals
The problem is by no means different is if it’s entirely new.
In this case, investigators will be forced to intervene after the event with:
- Engineering solution
Radical solution that substantially change the technical detail. Effective but very expensive.
-Control Solution
The danger or inconvenience is monitored using physical protection of Guarding a switch etc., Or changing STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES.
Therefore, we must adhere to the SOPs if only for a debt of gratitude to those who have written them in blood.
Is it possible to deviate from SOPs?
Certainly! When it is necessary to reach a higher degree of safety.
So Long