Emergency Checklists
In the course of discussions with colleagues on the subject of ECL's we constantly come up against the requirements of the RFM.
Now, of course the RFM is a certification document and so reflects the philosophies embraced by the certification criteria. So, for example the engine bay must be capable of containing a fire for a prescribed period of time. This apparently negates the need for any 'immediate action' should a fire warning appear.
My problem is that where the RFM philosophy is technically correct I am not sure it reflects what we would consider to be 'industry best practice'.
It seems that the RFM limits it's scope to the needs of the certification process without recognising that fire warnings, when they are genuine, may well be caused by something more complex than a simple, contained, engine fire. An uncontained turbine burst for example.
Another example is a BATT HOT warning. It may be technically correct to 'continue flight (which is advised by my RFM) but would you, really. I've had three HOT BATTs in other types and landed asap each time. As for a double BATT HOT (AW139) I most certainly wouldn't think twice about continuing flight (advised by RFM) but would find some terra firma as soon as poss.
So my question is 'Do we slavishly follow the RFM or use our experience and airmanship where appropriate when designing our company ECL?'
G.
Last edited by Geoffersincornwall; 4th March 2016 at 07:11.