Thanks SLT, I think your company SOP's are eminently sensible in each of the respects you mention. I just wish our lot would give serious consideration to adopting the same methods.
The CCM evac thing came in after the Saudi L-1011 incident years ago (you know the one?) and it has caused several false evacs over the years (including one where the aircraft was still in motion while a slide was deployed!). It's been slightly 'qualified' since then, but still prone to trigger happiness by some CCM's.
As to the QRH's, they claim it's impractical to maintain a different QRH for each version, so one fits all. Pity the bugger who may have to read a tiny MSN in thick smoke some day!
[This message has been edited by CaptSensible (edited 01 November 2000).]