Originally Posted by
BugSmasher1960
For what little it's worth, in my limited time at the sharp end, in any non-normal situation I was happy enough to use SOP but - having done that - it was never a case of then just sitting back "fat, dumb, and happy".
The last item of any NNCL for me was always "think think think and then think some more".
Originally Posted by
vilas
BugSmasher1960 and RAT 5
In your dislike for procedures or over confidence in your own innovations you don't notice how ridiculous and dangerous the above statement is. When engine fails on take off if you sit on your hands and think then rest of the work will be only at your funeral. When Engine fails you don't think, you instantly react and maintain control the aircraft. Identifying the correct engine before shutting down is very much part of the SOP you don't need to think for that. Somebody smarter than you has put it in the SOP. Rat come on! Can there be a suitable SOP for a person who has visceral hatred for any procedures except his own irrelevant innovations? I think manufacturer's test pilots deserve more respect than that.
Not sure if you're including me in that, but I started by saying that I have no problem with SOPs - my question is - in essence - "are pilots still actively thinking once they've run the NNCL / SOP"? Or are they too trusting of the SOP / automation to handle events? (case-in-point go-arounds after pressing the TOGA button).