Mixtures, Masters, Mags and Cowl Flaps Not applicable. WTF?

[Centaurus]

I can understand the reason to check the mixture control in the required setting as part of the before landing drills in a Cessna 172. But why do flying schools also include Hatches and Masters and Mags as well? One grade 3 instructor informed me it was because these items started with "M" and for that reason may as well include them with M for Mixture. I thought he was kidding but he was serious:ugh:

Strange logic to me. In any case if the Master switch was off when discovered on the Before landing check wouldn't that mean electrical items such as fuel gauges, radios and flaps wouldn't work and the pilot would have discovered that lot much earlier in the flight?

And if the M for Mags was off the engine would be dead? And if under "Hatches" a door was found to be already open wouldn't that have been felt and discovered a lot earlier in the flight?

One Cessna 172 flying school in the Melbourne area also adds "Cowl Flaps not applicable" to its before take off and landing checklist. And all flying schools add "Undercarriage down and locked" when the aircraft in a fixed gear type.. for consistency should not they say Undercarriage up and locked" as the after take off check?

I thought this sort of check would be covered in the Special Design Features course required for more advanced types. Seems to me many of these unnecessary drills are superfluous and even counter-productive by teaching students fictitious drills not applicable to the type they are currently flying. I don't see Boeing pilots learning Air Bus drills just in case one day they might fly an Airbus. So why teach this fallacious nonsense to student pilots?

[training wheels]

So why teach this fallacious nonsense to student pilots?

Totally agree, it's not so much a checklist but a ritual that's been handed down from instructor to student going back tens of years. There are actually more items on a C172 checklist than there are on the RPT turbo-prop I'm flying, many of which are superfluous. And what's the bet this ritual will continue well in to the future.

[eocvictim]

The grade 3 is an idiot.

Mags can be knocked or vibrate to a single mag. Most pilots with more than a few hours will have seen this happen.

Masters can also be knocked off/alternators left off etc. Again, most pilots will have experienced this first hand or second hand when they go to fire up a dead battery.

Many passengers release the sash to take photos, grab something from the back etc and need to be reminded, no different to flicking on the seat belt signs if you ask me.

I'm sure a few guys can attest to having a door/window pop open on touch down because someone fiddled with the door in flight or leaned against the latch etc. Hence, hatches.

I've not seen PUF checks taught to guys prior to flying a CSU/retract or cowl flaps. These checks are as needless as 737 circuits or always positioning for a strait in approach despite being outside 25degrees from centreline, but you can't convince some people.

As for the rest, common sense, not all 172's or PA28s look the same but the checklists should.

[Clearedtoreenter]

I agree. The average fixed gear, fixed pitch checklist should be rationalized considerably. The danger of these lengthy, highly sophisticated complex lists is that some don't differentiate between the essential and the fluff thats just been put there to make them feel like they really are an A380 captain. The on-screen G1000 checklists on the 172 are an absolute classic.

[AmarokGTI]

Mixture Mags and Master form part of the "BUSH" checks we teach in a forced landing.

Brakes
Undercarriage
Shutdown (Mixture Mags and Master off)
Hatches & Harnesses


I wonder if he is confusing the two.

[Aimpoint]

Don't just blame the instructor, the CFI needs a kick up the backside as well. Either the CFI is allowing this rubbish to be taught, or there is no standardization amongst the instructors allowing crap like this to make it through the cracks.

Also, what role did the school that trained the candidate toward the instructor rating play? The G3 had to pick it up somewhere.

[WannaBeBiggles]

The checks are generic but work for most aircraft. If you move between types then you do need to have common checks and actually think about what the checks mean.

Fuel - sure the engine is turning so you've got fuel... but are you on the fullest tank, is the fuel pump on/off, is the primer locked or has it vibrated free?

Flap - sure you're flap selector is set, but have you checked out the window to see if the picture out the window agrees with your setting?

Undercarriage - well I guess the guy in this video also flies a 172 and is used to just brushing over the undercarriage check.
Whats that beeping sound? - YouTube


Mags, Hatches and harnesses has been covered by another poster.

[rutan around]

Read an article years ago about a die hard ex-military instructor who had moved on to civy instructing in c172's who absolutely insisted that "Bomb doors closed" be included in his check list. Probably was the same bloke who used to call "Clear 1 " as he started his C150. With blokes like that still in the aviation business it's little wonder LOP operation is taking a while to be universally understood.
Cheers RA

[The Green Goblin]

Master - because you may not have the alternator/generator selected. Better to find out now than when trying to restart.

Mags - checking they are both on.

Hatches & Harnesses - making sure everyone is belted in and the ship is secure.

Fuel - making sure your selector is on the main tank, both or the fullest depending on the type you are flying. You would cry when you see the amount of accidents from PA31s and fuel starvation issues landing on outer wing tanks.

Undercarriage - I used to check the tyre making sure it was inflated etc. because I always checked, I never had a gear up landing. I bet the guys who think its a waste of time in a non retractable aircraft will go back to prelearned behaviour under pressure and have a gear up landing.

Anyway, do what your instructor, chief pilot, check captain says. It's their train set and when you get to make the rules, you can get people to play with it as you see fit.

[Horatio Leafblower]

It's probably worth mentioning that the majority of pre-landing checks are more to do with being set up for a Go-around than for a landing.

You could get away with landing most aircraft with mixture at cruise setting, fuel on vapours or Aux tanks with the pumps off, CHT and Oil temp peaking, each engine only running on one mag.

A go-around might be a different story, but. :eek:

[Captain Sand Dune]

At 2FTS when flying the Macchi flaps were not deployed on down wind for a normal circuit, although they were for a low level circuit. Same for the PC9 until a couple of years ago. Why? Coz the Mirage doesn't have flaps, son!
When the RAAF got the squirrel the engine condition lever (I think that's what it was called) was replaced by twist grip throttle. Why? Coz the Iroquois has got a twist grip throttle, son!

[T28D]

Whatever happened to PUFF Propellor-Undercarraige- flaps- fuel

[Homesick-Angel]

This does sound like overkill, but as I've gone on and flown different types I'd have to say the extended checks haven't been totally useless.

Of course no need to say pitch in fixed, or undercarriage down and locked in a fixed, but I've always been taught a checklist that will be useable in most things up to light twins, and I can't see too much wrong with it. It's practical and gets you thinking about things you will be using regularly down the track ..

Where it gets a bit full of sh1t in my opinion is when you have bored CFI,s who think they are training "airline" pilots ( as if their not gonna do their time elsewhere like everyone else) , and you have people pre PPL with two-three sided checklists ripped off from airlines a crapload of call and answer SOP,s and more waffly sh1t than you can imagine in the air that distracts from the actual practical art of flying an airplane from A-B safely. Sure SOPs are designed to save lives and create order, but when they do the opposite surely someone has to wake up?

[Jabawocky]

Master: If that is OFF you know your panel is dead, you cant talk to anyone, :ugh:

Mags: Never seen one vibrated off before but someone probably has, but if you were tought to do a proper mag check you could not accidently leave it on one or none, because you would have done it at cruise power and LOP.....because that is the only proper mag check you can do.....END OF STORY!

Harnesses and hatches (in a lighty that really means glove boxes and items in the cabin put away and not easy projectiles.

Fuel on the fullest tank makes lots of sense. Pump on or as required for a/c type.

Undercarriage...used on downwind to get speed down to flap extension.....two solved at once.

Prop, leave it where it was in the cruise, no need for extra noise, and if you need it for braking, well you cocked up your descent profile, so only use it if you really have to.


You could get away with landing most aircraft with mixture at cruise setting


You SHOULD BE landing most aircraft with mixture at cruise setting. Or only the tiniest of increments of enrichening on descent, and often no more than half a turn. End of Story.

And in the extremely rare event of a missed approach, you are still flying at Vs x 1.3, you think to yourself, hmmmmissed approach = red knob in, blue knob in, and gently increased throttle while retrimming and considering flap retraction at the appropriate time, and all the while increasing the MP to effect a smooth safe GA without violent pitches up, loss of vision etc etc.

It is not a complicated game, but most if not all flying schools seem to make it so, and have no idea on why when challenged! :rolleyes:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Mags: Never seen one vibrated off before

Just one example: blokes with long legs in the 55 Baron often find they have bumped the RH mag switch back to one mag. THere are several aircraft types that use toggle switches (the same as all the other switches) for mags/CDIs, easy to knock one off while intending to turn something else on/off.

I once watched a Cheiftain hot shot with fast hands all over the cockpit reach up after take-off to turn off the High pumps. Hit both switches at once, but of course he had put his hand on the right mag switches, hadn't he? Turned them back on real quick too :eek:

...different scenario to pre-landing but to err is human (to Arrr is...) and these same types of errors can be made at any stage of flight. Good check systems will catch human errors/slips/mistakes. They should also be designed for the operational environment the aircraft lives in.

An airline or large charter op (or even the RAAF I imagine), with pilots assigned to one aircraft type only, is the ideal situation for ensuring the crews learn ONE way to do things one ONE type. It is the perfect setup for ensuring the quality of cockpit procedures - but it is not relevant to everyone.

Flying school/Aero Club operations need to have a system that is applicable to all pilots using a varied fleet of aircraft, regardless of the pilot's experience level and recency.

For example in my operation the line pilots could be flying any one, or several, of 4 single-engine types (152 up to C210) and 4 multi engine types (Baron thru to C421) in any given day. The options are either have a common set of procedures and checks (with some obsolesence) that can apply to all types, or have a different written checklist - or "do"-list - for each and mandate the pilots have it pulled out for every stage of every flight. :ugh:

I'd be happy to hear any other suggestions for the multiple aircraft-type operation, cos I'm pretty sure I haven't got it perfect yet :D

[TOUCH-AND-GO]

B-Brakes off and operating
O-Oils, Temps, Pressures in the green
U-Undercarriage Down (Despite being fixed landing gear)
M-Mixture, Master, Mags
F-Flaps, Fuel
A-Auto pilot disengage
H-Hatches and harness

T-Trim Set
M-Mixture, Master, Mags
P-Pitch fully fine
F-Flaps, Fuel
I-Instruments check
S-Switches mag check
C-Controls, COWL FLAPS open/closed
H-Hatches and harness

Also FMOST, CFMS, PUFF checks, I know some of them are not applicable to aircraft type, but they are there to help you and be beneficial in some way :confused:.

Good check systems will catch human errors/slips/mistakes. :D That's what my instructor tolled me. :}

[Brian Abraham]

Checklists seem to be one of those things sure to generate a discussion with much argy bargy between participants.

Learnt the following pre take off as a 14YO from a charter pilot who used to give a young boy a bit of stick time. It's about the only thing I can recite at the drop of a hat all these years later.

Hatches
Harness
Trim
Mixture
Pitch
Panel
Fuel
Flaps
Gills
Gyros
Switches
Controls
Lookout

A few things there seemed superfluous at the time, seeing as we were flying Tigers, Austers and Dragons. There was no such thing as retractable gear in GA at the time.

Can understand why "gear" might appear on a fixed gear type where the fleet consists of say 182, 182RG, 172, 172RG, 206, 210. Would be shameful at the end of a long and tiring day to forget that you're in a 210, and not the 206 you flew on the trip immediately after lunch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs5ChcYbaNU

[Ixixly]

Strange logic to me. In any case if the Master switch was off when discovered on the Before landing check wouldn't that mean electrical items such as fuel gauges, radios and flaps wouldn't work and the pilot would have discovered that lot much earlier in the flight?

Yeah, fair point, but I personally like to look anyways, takes an extra half a second


And if the M for Mags was off the engine would be dead? And if under "Hatches" a door was found to be already open wouldn't that have been felt and discovered a lot earlier in the flight?


Not all Mags are the same, C310 for example has toggle switches, a set for each engine, I can't imagine too many situations where you could accidently switch one off, but it could be possible and not really notice depending on your individual aircrafts setups in regards to extra mods, such as Door Seals.

And the doors might not have been noticed, wouldn't be the first time i've noticed a passenger has knocked/pulled the damned door out of the locked position, so very carefully making sure everything that could go flying around the cabin has been stowed and briefing yourself on what to do if it happens could be a lifesaver one day.

One Cessna 172 flying school in the Melbourne area also adds "Cowl Flaps not applicable" to its before take off and landing checklist. And all flying schools add "Undercarriage down and locked" when the aircraft in a fixed gear type.. for consistency should not they say Undercarriage up and locked" as the after take off check?

Personally the cowl flaps part seems fair enough, its meant to get it in your head so you remember despite what aircraft you're in. The phrase "Undercarriage Down and Locked" and being taught to say specifically that is in my opinion a trap, i've found myself earlier in my first job reciting that but not really thinking about it, now its always "Undercarriage, checked, three greens or down and welded", helps me to remember to not just recite checklists but actually check the bloody thing. And on take off in the fixed wings thats part of my check at 300feet, usually "Flaps retracted and checked, gears non-retractable".

Alot of these checks whilst seeming superflous for the aircraft your flying, will come in handy. If you're in a company where you could easily swap between 2 aircraft types 2 or 3 times, whilst these checks might not all apply on one of them they might apply to the other, its easier to go through them all than jump into Type B for the first time after flying Type A all day and forget something simple.

[Ixixly]

Wouldn't it also be fair to say that most Flying Schools don't know what aircraft type/s you're going to be flying when you finish your training and are therefore trying to get you into as many good habits as they can to try and save your bacon down the track?

[43Inches]

Master: If that is OFF you know your panel is dead, you cant talk to anyone,


The check of the master includes the alternator switch is in the on position, most singles have the old split switch. Not too much trouble if just landing as the battery will last, but on circuits or a T & G during a navex could run the battery dry. Running a battery out on retractable aircraft can be interesting, i know of two aircraft that had gear collapses during roll out because the alternators were never switched on. With a flat battery a manual extention was required and no indicators were available to confimirm the down and locked indication. Had some sort of checklist been adhered to properly both occurances would never have happened.

Mags: Never seen one vibrated off before but someone probably has, but if you were tought to do a proper mag check you could not accidently leave it on one or none, because you would have done it at cruise power and LOP.....because that is the only proper mag check you can do.....END OF STORY!


I have seen individual mags switched off instead of pumps or lights in certain twins when hands were operating without looking. Also had a student switch the mags both off doing this check on downwind (in a single), when it went silent it did not even occur to him why.

I also know of at least one accident where a student turned the fuel off on downwind instead of changing tanks and another where the park brake was set instead of checked off.

Have to agree with the mixture setting for descent and landing, most turbocharged models recommend leaning the mixture to keep a minimum egt during this phase.


Good check systems will catch human errors/slips/mistakes.


As long as the checks are carried out as intended.

[RadioSaigon]

...don't know what aircraft type/s you're going to be flying when you finish your training...

Wouldn't it be fairer to expect your training organization to train you appropriately for what you have strapped to your arse now and form a good solid basis upon which later training in more complex types will build???

Far too much of that attitude prevalent these days, easily evidenced by people flying 747 circuits in their Navajo's and 402's. Ridiculous IMO.

[Clare Prop]

I think some of the OWTs in Aus can be attributed to when the POHs were replaced with the Great Australian Flight Manual and all the "normal operations" sections were no longer there so people made it up as they went along.

When I first came out here from overseas and found people turning off electric fuel pumps on PA28s at 300 feet, using carb heat in the approach in Tomahawks and opening cowl flaps on short final in Mooneys "because that's the way we do it in Australia" I was amazed that none of the people who did these things stopped to think why it was a Bad Idea and the POH said not to.

Similarly with generic checklists, I think the stude really does need to be aware what aeroplane they are flying and use the SOP checklist for that aircraft, and told WHY. There are differences between different types of even lightys. One size doesn't fit all.

[mcgrath50]

I was always taught to check the gear in my C150, but never 'cowl flaps not applicable'

I found I was better at remembering to check the gear than the cowl flaps at appropriate moments when upgrading to those design features.

Either way though by the time I was 'trained' on the aircraft both checks were being done, so whether the teaching method is worthwhile I don't know.

[43Inches]

Either way though by the time I was 'trained' on the aircraft both checks
were being done, so whether the teaching method is worthwhile I don't know.


Adding undercarriage to the downwind check early on does help students convert later on, it also adds the extra benefit of primacy when the student is in an extreme situation later in their flying life.

Adding things such as cowl flaps or fuel pumps when there are none in the aircraft is a waste of time. If you land and forgot to open a cowl flap or turn a pump on 99% of the time there will be little consequence. Landing having Forgotten to lower the gear and there is 100% chance of a memorable experience.

The downwind checks such as BUMPFOC and pre takeoff such as TMPFISCH are good when used as a memory aid in addition to a checklist based on the POH. The items could be carried out efficiently from memory and then actions confirmed via a checklist afterwards. The process is a lot faster than having one hand holding a checklist whilst the other wonders around the cockpit. In larger aircraft these basic checks are replaced by cockpit flows etc. You can do the flow checks in training aircraft and it works well however it takes a longer time to learn for each aircraft type. Flows can also lead to errors if jumping between a lot of different types and layouts.

I prefered SUMPFHB, speed (below Vloe and appropriate for circuit), undercarriage (down and locked), mixture (set), pumps (set) primers (locked/off), fuel (mains/fullest tank and quantity verified) harnesses(secure) and brakes checked for pressure last after the gear had extended. All done then do checklist.

[Tee Emm]

Wouldn't it be fairer to expect your training organization to train you appropriately for what you have strapped to your arse now and form a good solid basis upon which later training in more complex types will build???That is the only sensible reply I have seen so far in the original thoughtful post by Centaurus.

Clearly the subject has exposed a widely differing number of personal opinions on the subject of standardisation common in the general aviation industry.

Few have mentioned the desirability of the student/pilot being thoroughly famiilar with the manufacturer's POH and staying with its published drills. I like the term Vital Actions published in former RAF and RAAF flying manuals in the 1950's. These were concise and to the point. For example the Pilots Notes (1944) RAAF Publication No. 416 for Tiger Moth Aircraft published the following under the heading Vital Actions for take off;

(i) Elevator Trim neutral.
(ii) Throttle Friction Nut tight
(iii) Mixture control right back to fully rich position,
(iv) Fuel cock on, tank contents sufficient for flight
(v) Slots Unlocked.
(vi) Flying Controls tested for freedom of movement.

Obviously the Vital Actions that I was used to a long time ago differ markedly from what are considered Vital Actions now where the more items included, the merrier. In fact it all depends on the particular instructor's whimsey and his own instructor before that, ad nauseum

I knew an instructor who taught the so called "PPUFF" drill on final in a C150. It was P for Pitch Control not applicable. P for Power Poles watch out for. U for Undercarriage not applicable. F for Flaps as required. F for feathered friends (birds) watch out for. With that as a fairly typical example of what is taught as "professional" in the GA world, then heaven help the poor students who has this rubbish drilled into them. But then he does an instructors course and goes on to spout the same crap.

[T28D]

Tee Emm,
That check list is really similar to my T 28 T/O check just change slats for supercharger in low blower and you are good to go !!

And the pre landing check is even shorter, U/C down indicating locked, propellor 2400 RPM, flaps as required, land straight ahead.

So why would you have a foot long list for a C150 ??? the maintenance manual would be a smaller document.

[TheMist]

How about checking the Fuel Shutoff lever in a C152 before lining up on the runway? :ouch:

...apparantly your naughty passenger can reach down and turn it off after you checked it before start up :suspect:

[A37575]

[QUOTEHow about checking the Fuel Shutoff lever in a C152 before lining up on the runway?

...apparantly your naughty passenger can reach down and turn it off after you checked it before start up QUOTE]

Thread drift, I know but funny you should mention the Fuel on/off cock in the Cessna 150/152. Most of the fuel cocks on those aircraft jammed solid with time and yet few pilots ever bothered to snag the defect in the maintenance release. Why not? Answer - they were told by the flying school instructors not to worry about it.

The fact that the POH stated the fuel cock must be turned off during a forced landing or fire, seemed to escape the attention of those pilots including instructors. Years ago I snagged a C150 fuel cock for severe binding and the aircraft owner got all indignant saying it had been like that for years and no one else had mentioned it. Several female students did not have the finger strength to turn the fuel valve which is why it was always left on after shut down. What does that tell you about the integrity of those that flew it?

Similar fuel valve defects were common in the Partenavia where in UK a jammed fuel valve was the primary cause of a fatal ditching. The pilot was unable to move the crossfeed valve but it was locked solid. The pilot drowned.

At the time, there were three Essendon based Partenavias with totally jammed fuel valves and their pilots never snagged them. An LAME showed me one of these aircraft, and I was surprised he did not advise CASA of the defect which was widely known among the owners. Even the report on the Partenavia ditching did not convince him this was a long standing serious defect in valve design. His excuse for not contacting the CASA Airworthiness people was the aircraft owner might not give him more maintenance work if it was known the LAME would contact CASA on possibly allied defects.

In the case of the Point Cook based C150 and the Essendon based Partenavias, it took a CAIR report to ATSB to force the operators owners to fix the problem. These guys were then heartily pissed off because it cost them money. Isn't general aviation wonderful...

I understand the jammed fuel valve defect still exists in some C150/152's but pilots ignore it for fear of making waves. Next time you fly a Partenavia it might be a good idea to ensure each engine cockpit fuel valves move easily between selections. Chances are they will be so stiff to turn that you may needs two hands.

Now back to the original post. You don't need printed checklists in flying school or other light aircraft. Your local CASA FOI might insist but that's his problem. Let's face it. If you can remember your Twelve Times table by heart or the names of the months of the year without Googling it, then it takes little effort to remember the checks by heart. Providing the checks are short and concise. If you have to Google the tables and the names of the months then you are definitely going need a written checklist to start your car and in an aeroplane.

Too often, written checklists are used as a crutch for those who cannot be bothered to learn the drills. These are not complex aircraft and students need to be given short concise drills applicable only to the aircraft type they fly. Anything else added to these checks are a waste of the student's time and money.

Catchy mnemonics are fun to invent; but pity the student who is forced to learn these mnemonics from different instructors who invent them. Strange that mnemonics are not used in jet transports which after all are far more complex than your average light aircraft at Moorabbin or Bankstown..

[poteroo]

If it's not fitted - we don't teach it !

This make believe stuff is what every experienced instructor should give FOI's and ATO's a bloody good serve about on every contact

happy days,

[Checkboard]

I don't see Boeing pilots learning Air Bus drills just in case one day they might fly an Airbus.
You've never worked for an airline flying both types then - it is REALLY common for one type's checks to bleed into the other for "airline commonality".

As to generic checklists - you have one endorsement for single engine less than 5700kg. The school knows that your licence means you can fly any of these types, so teaching a generic "one check fits all" system makes sense.

Sure, if you're flying only one aircraft, feel free to use a manufacturer's POH type-specific checklist, but I know I was happy to use the same memorised checks for warrior, C150, C210, Navajo, Baron etc etc.

... and I was happy to teach the same as an instructor for that very reason.

[Horatio Leafblower]

So Centaurus, A3.... and Tee Emm

Can you gents show me the trail of destruction and the piles of bodies resulting from these practices?

I get the feeling it offends your ex-RAAF sensibilities but I honestly wonder if I will find it somewhere amongst the deadly sins.

One of the reasons these generic acronyms have had so much traction over the years is that they work in the environment they were designed for. Its not the RAAF. It's not an Airline. It's an environment where memorising the manufacturer's checklists for the 10 different types you could fly any day is simply impossible.

The other issues raised - instructor standardisation and the technical understanding of those supposedly 'teaching' new pilots - are very valid and, frankly, a disgrace to those (un-named) organisations. :=

Best of luck with your crusade.

[NOSIGN]

Although the aircraft checklist has long been regarded as the foundation of pilot standardization and
cockpit safety, it has escaped the scrutiny of the human factors profession. The improper use, or the
non-use, of the normal checklist by flight crews is often cited as the probable cause or at least a
contributing factor to aircraft accidents.

http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/m/profile/adegani/Flight-Deck_Checklists.pdf

In all honesty I feel that the checklist has been a detriment to all aircraft types that I have flown so far. In each GA commercial operation that I have had the privledge to be involved in, the CASA approved checklist has been a variation of the manufacturers checklist by the CP at the time.

Most recently, the checklist format of a complex aeroplane has been applied to a basic type within our company. What rubbish! **** like this, discourages checklist use because it is superflous.

Why does CASA approve variations of the manufacturers normal checklist to the extent that it does?

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Gear down and welded........:confused:

Sounds like someone's joke that's become the norm. The gear assembly is normally bolted to the airframe anyway....:}

"Gear Fixed" is a much better term. Allows the item to be included in the checks while not promoting a call without an associated action. ie, Danger being the pilot could get used to saying "Gear Down" without actioning something.

[snoop doggy dog]

Hi Centaurus,

I will try and give you an explaination of why this may occur mate ;)

You may not see a Boeing pilot conducting Airbus procedures, but where I work, we have conducted Boeing procedures as Airbus pilots. Whatever.... It's all about safety and standard operation.

Safety starts by adhering to procedures to deliver the best outcomes :ok: If there is procedures that seem a little obscure, as in your case Centaurus, you may want to look at the entire operation and see what they are trying to achieve with the equipment they have. It is called 'standardisation.' Standardisation reduces costs (training etc) whilst minimising the impact on safety. Sorry to say mate, most MBA's (CEO'S) are of accounting nature :mad:

For Airbus, as long as there is no blue for take-off and landing, everything is golden. So why do pilot's do a lot of other checks? Pilot's can just take-off or land the plane as long as there is no blue lines on the upper ECAM display right? Sure.... but what happens when there is a problem that needs to be resolved, like an engine fire? If pilot's have not been used to following procedures, pilot's may decide without proper advise, an alternative outcome that s detrimental to safety without good advise (ie Airbus). No no! :=

Follow the procedure mate, as long as they are safe and are generally what needs to be done. It has been no skin off my workmate's nose in the past sitting in an Airbus saying, 'switching panel normal,' as one would in a classic. It's the bigger picture stuff :ok:

Definately put your feedback to your organisation in a positive and constructive manner Centaurus. You may find that you are listened to and procedures refined and better suited to the operation.

It's all about safety mate :ok:

[Wally Mk2]

I think a few here are hanging on too tight with all this.As mentioned it's all about safety at the end of the day. Common sense seems to go out the window these days also.Humans will make mistakes despite the best chk list ever devised.Know yr POH.
When I was taught it was the usual checks as per what others have mentioned here,TMPFISCH, BUMPH Etc. Didn't do me any harm to use those basic checks (at times in modified form) for ALL the subsequent types I flew & that inc from C172 right up to LR35 & with many press twin jobs in between.
I flew freelance for years, jumping from one plane to another like women !:E One day a PA44 next day PA42. I was my own boss so I needed to have it ingrained in my head to think on my own two feet outside the box many a time,over 30 yrs driving planes & am still here alive with no accidents:ok:

Do what YOU feel is correct,do whatever it takes to avoid a visit to the following places/people. CASA office, Undertaker, Bosses office for tea & bickies & getting up close & personal with the ground !!!:ok:

Wmk2


Wmk2


Wmk2

[Stationair8]

The old gentleman(ex RAF Spitfire) that taught me used TTMMMPFISCHH and BUMFHH.

B -Brakes check for pedal pressue, big bloody feet moved to heals on the floor and ensure park brake is off.

U -undercarriage down and locked, yes it is C150 but hopefully one day you will flying something bigger and faster that has dangling Dunlops

M-Mixture rich

F-Fuel contents, selection and pumps on if required

H-Hatches secure and ensure seat is locked into position

H- Harness secure.

The old guy had a stellar career in the RAF and survived in GA for many years before doing an instructor rating to see out his final days of flying.
But in nearly 50 years of flying he had seen RAF guys land with feet on brakes, run tanks dry in the circuit area and dunlops not down and locked. While a CP for a charter company a guy succesfully landed a C310 with the park brake . Another pilot who returned to base in the C180 after doing aerial photography to arrive in the flare with the pilot and seat sliding gracefully aft.

[RR69]

BUMFOH and PUF in my opinion are the 2 best "any piston aircraft" checks a pilok could have with obvious additions depending on a/c type.

I always have little home made clipboard with notes added when required to the BUMFOH and PUF checks, however regardless if in a fixed gear vs retrac, or csu vs the one that doesn't make the cool sounds, or single vs twin, that the basics are the same and would recommend sticking to the ones that make sense and work for the individual as long as they're stuck to and done every time ones in command of an aircraft as long as the same outcome is achieved and operating requirements met.

I also like the Green Goblins remarks as all those scenarios have come up over the years and the 2 little checks have saved me from buying multiple beers at the bar!

[A37575]

Best of luck with your crusade.

Forget it. The subject has been done to death over decades of Pprune and not worth pursuing anymore.:ugh:

[jas24zzk]

The standardised checks do have a place, but some of the teaching/reasoning that people use justify them just sucks eggs.

Learning it by rote, has no place.
For every word you utter in the check, there must be an action, even if it is simply a touch check.

The downwind checks get me giggling the best.

Mags. Yep seems dumb till you knock the mag switch when tidying up your nav crap for the circuit entry. (BE95)

Undercarriage. This one comes into its own for me. Without the generic check, i might just get into trouble. I get to fly a P32A and a P32R (amongst other types). I could use the POH checklists. No prizes for guessing the differences there...damm short list.
Both aircraft have almost identical panels, identically laid out except for the Gear lever/lights, Tape player vs cd, Narco vs king VOR.
Better for me to operate on the generic checklist and check my legs are down EVERY time.

Written checklists are good, but I'm a lil unsure that I am comfortable using them single pilot at a busy strip.

[kimwestt]

Works for me every time! With tmpfisch ingrained into your subconciousness, (big word, that) it wil work for you in everything up to and including a Metro, even tho it would not be the "äpproved" checklist. Especially, especially if you find yourself in any "Oh - sh1t"situations. Doesn't matter what phase of flight you are in, maybe you've dropped the checklist and it is 10 feet away.
So what if the item isn't fitted, the next aircraft you fly might well have.
Or you think to yourself, have I checked everything? (You should have - - - but)
If you apply TMPFISCH logic to your checks, there is not much you will miss!
As an earlier post said - show me the trail of bodies and destruction because an item not fitted was included on a generic check list.

Keep the shiny side up!!
Cheers :)

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Works for me every time! With tmpfisch ingrained into your subconciousness, (big word, that) it wil work for you in everything up to and including a Metro, even tho it would not be the "äpproved" checklist.

Ditto! I have used a slight variation - T M P F F I H C L - on everything up to PA31/C402 for the last 38 years.

Dr :8

[Checkboard]

How can you possibly put the C after the H.

Don't you know how dangerous that is? :p





P.S. ... thanks for all the lifts to the Charleville airport, BTW :)

[A37575]

One You Tube sent to me the other day there is a classic photo of a single engine float equipped amphibian coming in to landed on water. The problem is his wheels are down. He floats, touches down and digs in going inverted in a huge splash. Pilot and passengers got out and were rescued by a nearby small boat.

Rumour has it the pilot had been trained to fly using the before landing checks in a fixed gear aircraft where he called Undercarriage down and locked even though it was a Cessna fixed gear. Seems that bad habit caught up him since his pre-landing in the float plane should have been undercarriage UP and locked.:E

[43Inches]

Can you gents show me the trail of destruction and the piles of bodies
resulting from these practices?


Quite simply pretty much every time an aircraft has crashed due to being in the wrong configuration on take-off or landing it is due to the pilot(s) not following a checklist appropriately. This in many cases is due to forgetting items because they are committed to memory rather than critical items on a paper checklist or beleiving an item was completed without checking it appropriately (still comes back to a slip of the mind/memory). The common PA31 issue of taking off on outboards should never happen if a paper checklist is used for the before take-off checklist. Why does this problem still occur untill today, because of rushed memory recalled checks not backed up with an appropriate checklist carried out with care.


Written checklists are good, but I'm a lil unsure that I am comfortable using them single pilot at a busy strip.


High workload situations are where memory based checks are most likely to break down. The written checklist should be short and to the point. You can use a generic BUMP, flow or whatever checklist to carry out items from memory then have a short critical items written list to confirm the critical items.

An simple written before landing / downwind checklist for an arrow would be something like;

Fuel Selector - FULLEST TANK
Fuel pump - ON
Mixture - RICH
Propeller - FULL INCREASE
Landing Gear - DOWN 3 GREENS INDICATED

If you preformed all these items from memory (doesn't matter what you use to recall it) first then the paper check should only take a few seconds to verify your work.

If you are really worried about how busy a circuit is, carry out the checks earlier rather than later.

[The Green Goblin]

There is a lot more to flying a Metro than TIMPFISH or BUMPFISH :eek:

In fact it's probably one of the busier aircraft when flown multi crew due to the nature of the ergonomics of the thing and the fact one of you are hand flying on raw data.

Love them or hate them, most folk who have metro time are all the better for it!