Changing SOP's

[Night Flight]

Hi All,

I have experienced it many times in the past where new guys start with a company and they want to change the SOP's to what they had elsewhere. I don't think it usually has anything to do with safety or an efficiency as much as they might preach that line but rather just not liking change. In airlines its a matter of the new guys having to adjust, however in smaller GA and corporate companies oversight and enforcement can be more difficult. You hear things like "we do that when we fly with the chief but when we fly we prefer to do it this way".

Is anyone familiar with any studies or research that may have been conducted about this?

[Zaphod Beblebrox]

Where I work it is simple. Go through a merger. I a now on my 5th merger and each one has involved changes in SOP. It keeps you fresh. If you don't like the ones you have wait. It will change.

I will retire as a very trainable monkey.

[Journey Man]

Night Flight,

Influx of experience and fresh faces helps with ensuring procedures are optimal. We all get attached to a set of procedures, and I'm sure there is also an element of discounting the fresh input as it may trigger change. This is common.

No procedure should be changed purely on a whim, so I would be surprised if pilots joining your company are given free reign to make changes. They may offer feedback via the appropriate channels and then that feedback should be considered on merit.

Any proposed changes should be accompanied by a convincing argument as to why it would improve the operation. If this is the case, then it's likely the existing flight crew are resistant to change. SOPs are just SOPs. They don't define us and we shouldn't become defensive of them.

[+TSRA]

Often the changes which Night Flight is referring to just happen. A new pilot who decides the new company SOP's are junk and decides to use the ones from their previous company. Many times this goes unnoticed because of a lack of training (pencil time) or a lack of quality control. This is not typically an issue for international or regional airlines, but more often a problem for smaller mom-and-pop operations. I spend an inordinate amount of my training trying to dissuade new pilots from using their old SOP's.

Journey Man and Zaphod Beblebrox are right: change is good. New SOP's give a fresh perspective. However, undocumented change is not good and I believe that is what Night Flight is probably more looking at.

I did a quick search on the online library of Embry-Riddle and could not find any related, peer-reviewed studies. One or two articles (not studies) on SOP creep, but that's about it.

[Mach E Avelli]

In smaller companies here in Aus it is not unusual to see SOPs change 'by stealth'. The regulator, CASA, is partly to blame for this. The regulations require all checklists to be approved and of course they charge vast sums of money to have their 'type expert' do this. Often the type expert has never flown the aircraft operationally, but will add layers of bull...t to the submission. I see checklists that tell you to fasten your seatbelt, switch on the lights, obtain a clearance etc etc.
So the way it is dealt with is you do whatever it takes to get the CASA 'tick' then get to work with subtle changes that you hope they never pick up on audit. It is rare that they do because the type expert gets promoted to yet another type he knows nothing about and you never see him again.
It's not a desirable situation, but for as long as they charge so much and fail to demonstrate a practical approach, it will go on.

[Piltdown Man]

In the past I was taught a totally "new" method of flying a Fokker 50; an aircraft I had already been flying for three of four years. I found it more difficult than learning to fly a new type. Years after I still went "native" every now and again. So my heart goes out to all of you who have to go through this process. But on completion of my "re-adjustment" I was disappointed to see the sky still above me, that houses got bigger when you pushed the stick forwards etc. I often wondered what had been achieved.

Our lives are now easier though. We now stick to the manufacturer's SOPs and checklists. They designed the aircraft, test flew it and are presumably aware of its attributes as much as its foibles. This also helps makes it easier for the regulator to approve your own checklists (which are copies of the manufacturer's) and generally keeps the numpties off our backs. They now have to be very brave to make changes (and take the responsibility), something which most government types lack.

When changes now come through, they are typically trivial in nature and relatively easy to follow.

[Journey Man]

SOPs and check lists can always evolve; the issue is when some sort of standard is discarded.

Who hasn't heard their FO bemoan that every captain likes things done differently? Whilst this fails to realise that every FO is different and needs to be managed in subtlety different ways, it does highlight that SOPs exist to allow a crew to operate cohesively with a fair expectation of what each other will do at a given point.

To the OP, insiduous changes should be guarded against and hence it may be worth advising your new colleagues that there input has merit but needs to be assessed and incorporated correctly.

[Mach E Avelli]

That is one disadvantage of hiring direct entry captains. However sometimes an airline has no choice e.g. during rapid expansion or when first officer experience does not meet the command criteria.
Many years ago, when I already had considerable experience on type, I was hired by Iran Air. This was before the revolution. The selection procedure was great. I was asked to outline how I was accustomed to flying the F27 and was allowed to use my own SOP for the evaluation. Off we went with the Fleet Captain in the RHS. He did enough to satisfy himself that I had some idea of how to operate, then offered me the job. On one clear understanding. I was to ditch all my old ways and learn their way, which was quite different. And as I soon realised, was actually far better and far more suited to the local environment.
Much of their SOP stayed with me in later years when it was my turn to develop procedures.
When hiring pilots, they always got the "my way or the highway" speech as well.
To temper such a seemingly dictatorial attitude from on high, all operators should have a formalised system to allow pilots to suggest SOP change and if suggestions are discarded, chief pilots should provide feedback as to why.