Airbus Procedures and callouts [Archive]

FlyingStone

10th Jun 2016, 11:51

I'm fairly new to the type, but wish Airbus would drop the FMA callouts. I don't see how it accomplishes much.

FMA is one of the most important things when flying Airbus FBW aircraft, that's why is also included in the "golden rules".

Reading FMA aloud accomplishes three things:

1. Forces you to actually read the FMA as opposed to just taking a glance over it.
2. You get two sensoric inputs: visual and audio (by listening to yourself speaking), so chances of getting the correct message to your brain are better.
3. It helps your PM to stay in the loop if he's temporarily heads down (reading a checklist, making MCDU entries, etc.).

eckhard

10th Jun 2016, 11:53

Most companies on this side of the pond do not call out the FMA. I don't gain anything from calling out the FMA that simply reading it doesn't give me.

I would suggest some advantages of reading the FMA out loud include:

1. You have to read the FMA to be able to enunciate it, so having to say it it means you have to read it;
2. Your colleague knows that you have read it;
3. You and/or your colleague may pick up an error in your read-out which could be caused by a genuine misreading or the correct reading of an incorrect FCU input;
4. Your colleague may not realise that the FMA has changed until he/she hears you say it. This will help to increase his/her SA;
5. Any standard call also serves as an incapacitation monitor. If you fail to read the FMA changes, your colleague can challenge you and maybe start the incapacitation process.

Capn Bloggs

10th Jun 2016, 12:58

Eckhard, you have been seduced. No 4 is the only one of those that may have merit.

dream747

10th Jun 2016, 13:38

Probably it's because it's part of the Airbus Golden Rules. "Understand the FMA at all times".

Denti

10th Jun 2016, 16:12

Probably it's because it's part of the Airbus Golden Rules. "Understand the FMA at all times".

That golden rule is fine, and actually the same on other types as well, for example boeings as long as you use the FD or AP. The need to call it out is simply an ass-covering exercise though. Although there is some bonus to it, it assures a regular wake up call when fatigued, except if your colleague decided to go raw data which does away with the FMA callouts.

Check Airman

10th Jun 2016, 17:40

Everything that you guys have said is theoretically right, except that in the real world, it doesn't really matter. Any airplane with an AP has some sort of FMA. How us is that Boeing pilots seem to do fine without reading it aloud?

My pet peeve is when the other guy reads the FMA during a radio transmission or checklist. Now I've misheard what ATC said, and need clarification. How's that for safety?

FlightDetent

10th Jun 2016, 19:37

Speedwinner:

1) I call "AP2", since that's what the FMA says. "ON" and "OFF" have their specific meanings.ON/OFF
The simple ON or OFF command is used for the autopilot, flight directors, autothrust and the bird (flight path vector). e.g.: BIRD ON (The HDG-V/S / TRK-FPA pb is pushed.)

2) We do.

vilas

10th Jun 2016, 20:06

Check Airman
If you are new to the bus then what you say about FMA is nothing short of blasphemy. Don't get Boeing in when flying airbus they are different design philosophies. With AP off when you pull thrust levers back what happens to Boeing doesn't happen to Airbus. Jet star Australia decided that during a go around FMA to be checked only after gear up. In poor visibility approach in Melbourne during GA pilot accidently stopped short of TOGA. PNF waited for +ve climb, PF waited to order gear up before calling FMA and the aircraft came to 40feet. Another airline with same SOP went to 14feet in IMC before ignoring FD and pulling up then following FD and again going down because FDs didn't transition to GA. They were incidents which could have been accidents and all those airlines changed back original SOPs. You may have put the switch on but you got to confirm the bulb has lit up. Unless seen on FMA it hasn't happened. Sometimes AP doesn't engage when you press so you need to check on FMA. And there is no need to set an altitude when not ready to descend.

Check Airman

10th Jun 2016, 23:23

Appreciate your input Vilas. I'm familiar with the Jetstar incident. However, did their problem stem from not verbalising the FMA, or not reading it at all? Had they read it, they'd notice MCT | GS | LOC wouldn't end well.

A Boeing will also behave unexpectedly if you don't confirm inputs via the FMA. As far as I know, only two US operators verbalise the FMA. Add that to the other CRJ, ERJ, Boeing and Douglas cockpits where nobody reads the FMA, I'm curious why Airbus still insists on this policy.

Their golden rule says to understand the FMA. I needn't say it out loud to understand it. Everything you've said about input vs output is true, but that applies to just about every AP system out there, which is why they all have some sort of FMA.

Speedwinner

11th Jun 2016, 04:58

Speedwinner:

1) I call "AP2", since that's what the FMA says. "ON" and "OFF" have their specific meanings.

2) We do.

Ok. But as it says the simple commands on and off are used for AP and ATHR etc. so the command ON is related to the ap. So I think "AP 1 ON" is the appropriate command isn't it? Sure we read what the fma says. But according to the book the it is the ON command. Or do they mean if I fly manually?

FlightDetent

11th Jun 2016, 05:29

:) what do you say after arming the approach mode and engaging the other AP?

Speedwinner

11th Jun 2016, 05:39

:) what do you say after arming the approach mode and engaging the other AP?

You're absolutely right mate! Thanks!

vilas

11th Jun 2016, 11:52

Check Airman
All the three incidents were avoidable by following manufacturer's recommendations. What one airline does or Boeing does has no priority over the design philosophy of the manufacturer. Air Blue fatal accident in Islamabad is another example of not checking FMA the captain kept dialling heading in NAV mode and when the heading went past 180 degrees he realised NAV mode and pulled to change to HDG aircraft turned shorter way into the hill.Off course there were host of other deviations but checking FMA would have prevented the last fatal blow. There is simply no point going over this. Calling FMA is not a may be item. Below is an extract of Airbus Performance and operations Conference 2011.

QUESTION6 – BRITISH AIRWAYS
Prioritizationof FMA calls versus “positive climb” and “gear up”?
AIRBUSANSWER
TheFMA is the “heart and soul” of the aircraft and should be checked first whenchanges of guidance are done. If a go- around is performed with AP ON, it isthe only way to check that the guidance will perform a go-around with specificguidance (SRS). The call “positive climb and gear up” is to check that theaircraft is climbing and thus drag can be reduced to increase the climbperformance.

vilas

11th Jun 2016, 14:53

Check airman
When you observe silently there is also a possibility that you haven't seen when you say loud it is a confirmation that you have seen also brings the other guy in to see you are not just rattling out by habit. When under pressure a lot of things can be missed. Air Blue accident weather was bad and was a circling approach, the captain had 21000 hrs.

Cak

11th Jun 2016, 16:21

Lufthansa was flying without reading the FMA until 2 or 3 years ago and they were fine like many other companies. If you fly Airbus for some time, you can even call FMA without actualy reading it.
Problem is not reading it or not. Problems start when the things are done automatically, no matter if you read it aloud

FullWings

11th Jun 2016, 20:28

I’ve flown the same aircraft with and without FMA calling. It can’t catch everything, in that if you have the wrong mode engaged somewhere but it hasn’t changed, it still might get missed. Overall, it can’t hurt too much (Disclaimer: as a LH pilot I don’t get as much as I would on multi-sector days. I give the FO 10 mode changes on the approach and then that’s it. ;))

Problem is not reading it or not. Problems start when the things are done automatically, no matter if you read it aloud
Absolutely. How many times have you caught yourself saying what you expected to see and 99.9% of the time will see...? The human mind works in interesting ways, especially in situations like these.

Check Airman

12th Jun 2016, 11:53

You mention rattling off FMA's out of habbit. Eventually, that gets drowned into the background noise, and you may not even be paying attention to what the other guy is saying.

To be clear, I think we all agree that it's absolutely imperative to read the FMA, but I just can't find any value in verbalising it. It doesn't help me in any way, and the other pilot has his own FMA, so it's not helping him either.

vilas

12th Jun 2016, 12:53

Check airman and Cak
Problem is not reading it or not. Problems start when the things are done automatically, no matter if you read it aloud
It is known as conditioned reflex. Airbus does not say FMA is a recall. You read the FMA as you see it. If you read aloud wrongly the PNF can correct it. Anything will work as long as you see the change happening on FMA, verbalisation is for confirmation by the other guy. Even if you didn't observe it at all nothing may happen to you but multiply that by number of pilots flying the airbus and something will happen and has happened. When repeatedly a way of operating gives rise to accidents/incidents it is a serious matter. A lot of thought and much more qualified people than line pilots make airplanes and procedures to fly them. A line pilot armed with only FCOM simply in no position to make changes to SOPs. The Flt Ops should consult with the manufacturer and only then make changes. If every pilot is allowed to bring in changes to SOP it will lead to anarchy. For a line pilot as Col Jessop says in A Few Good Men " We follow orders(SOP) or people die. it's that simple."

FlyingStone

12th Jun 2016, 14:29

To be clear, I think we all agree that it's absolutely imperative to read the FMA, but I just can't find any value in verbalising it. It doesn't help me in any way, and the other pilot has his own FMA, so it's not helping him either.

Makes sense, until you consider that maybe FMA indications are not the same on both sides. And this is something that can and did happen on Airbus...

http://s33.postimg.org/oaz2e0ogf/erroneus_ra.jpg

J.L.Seagull

12th Jun 2016, 14:41

...and not just on the rare occasion that you do an autoland AND have a RA fault.

What about independent FMS operation?

I'm with Vilas and FlyingStone on this one.

FlightDetent

12th Jun 2016, 15:12

It would be interesting to know any details behind the case of DLH changing from silent to reading out loud (is that so?).

I was trained and until today operated in line with the OEM's procedures. During my 2 or three jumpseat rides in Lufthansa cockpit (fully approved i.a.w. all the books by the way) I was, however, rather impressed with the - then silent - way of doing things.

Vilas' comment about the inadequacy of FCOM, FCTM and one's personal experience as a basis for "improving" SOPs is words of gospel!

Cak

12th Jun 2016, 16:19

@ vilas
Conditioned reflex is much more obvious with PM response CHECKED. I bet that most pilots respond with CHECKED totaly automatically, unfortunately.
I am not saying that reading aloud FMA is not good or vice versa. There is no best practice. And I am sure that AIRBUS procedures makers are not the smartest guys in the world, as also BOEING or EMBRAER guys are not. Airbus just chose that philosophy.
And since Lufthansa switched to Airbus procedures, they put some of their guys into the Airbus' team for procedure design. As I ' ve been flying for years according Luftica rules, some modifications much closer to 'old' Luftica procedures are already visible. We will see what future brings.
But I can tell you that Luftica procedures were way more precise then the Airbus' procedures.

@FlightDetent
Regarding the change in procedures, some Lufthansa instructors told us that it has something to do with the insurance but probably somebody has some more accurate info

Denti

12th Jun 2016, 16:33

details behind the case of DLH changing from silent to reading out loud (is that so?).

Not having flown for lufthansa, but with a similar set of silent SOPs in another airline in germany, i heard, and believe it too, that the main reason was the same as for us, cost, not safety. It costs quite a lot to update each and every manual with your own SOP, airbus charges a very high amount for that kind of work, and especially with airbus apps like the flysmart-suite you have to buy the airbus service, there is no way around it. From what i heard LH had a standards department that developed their SOPs which employed around 120 persons, which could be let go by the switching to OEM procedures.

A lot of thought and much more qualified people than line pilots make airplanes and procedures to fly them. Well, talk to the airbus test pilots and you come to the conclusion that mainly lawyers write their SOPs. And yes, they have to consider the worst possible trained pilot on the line as well, which means of course that their set of SOPs is aimed at the worst possible pilot on the line.

Now, each carrier has a slightly different operational culture and company philosophy, SOPs should represent those. Using SOPs that everyone, from the top down to the last cadet, thinks as stupid, makes them pretty bad as nobody really gives a rats ass how you follow them. Currently i follow the flight managements advice to simply fly every approach in every condition below FL200 as raw data, as it saves a ****load of nuisance calls.

vilas

12th Jun 2016, 18:17

Cak
If you buy a car and you use it against the manufacturer's recommendation you have paid the cash so you can say hell with all that. Sure! but when there is a break down or an accident do you expect insurance company to bail you out? Airbus as a manufacturer will be happy from business point of view if you have your own procedures because it lets them off the hook. About lawyers writing procedures is a load of bull****. It's like a pilot writing as a constitutional expert. Can he?

Cak

13th Jun 2016, 06:31

vilas

13th Jun 2016, 09:07

@ vilas
I am not saying that somebody should act against procedures. I am just saying that Airbus chose that principle and it's not neccessary the best one. If somebody has a team of people doing procedures based on some other philosophy, I cannot see why not.what is the qualification of those people that is lacking in the manufacturer? Procedures are based on design philosophy of the aircraft.Nobody has access to that without consultation with the manufacturer.The incident of JetStar had it been an accident relatives of passengers would be justified in dragging the airline to a court of law.

Denti

13th Jun 2016, 10:10

Airbus designs the aircraft, however, they do not operate them (except their fleet of Belugas). And even with the best reporting culture in each airline that operates them, and we all know that especially in Asia nearly no reports are filed, they have only second hand knowledge of its operation.

Interestingly enough, airbus never audited us, not even when we had vastly different SOPs (which had no negative influence on safety level). Unlike boeing, who audited us at least every two years, quite often more frequently. Apparently airbus is not really interested in getting first hand experience in normal line operation from their operators.

And in every accident relatives will drag the airline into court for every reason available. That is the reality they have to face anyway. Be it for a difference in SOPs, but usually for bad training and not following the SOPs that were in force and justified by the airline (which has to justify it, the OEM doesn't have any economical risk in that point) and approved by the authority. If a pilot isn't aware of the FMA he is a risk, no matter if he just (automatically) said "checked" or not.

There is one time where the FMA calls are a great help, and that is during initial training, both in flight school and during initial type rating. Later on they just become automated "nuisance" calls, which the aircraft could do by itself if they are that important.

ACMS

14th Jun 2016, 09:07

Rubbish:----it's called Airmanship from Professional Aviators, cross checking and monitoring to keep us ALL safe.

It's also to helps make sure BOTH Pilots are in the same loop going the same direction the same way...... Don't you want the PM awake, watching and keeping you safe? He might just save your butt one day.....in fact it sounds like it will happen soon enough.

Just do it and stop being so precious...

Pakehaboy

14th Jun 2016, 10:46

FMA is one of the most important things when flying Airbus FBW aircraft, that's why is also included in the "golden rules".

Reading FMA aloud accomplishes three things:

1. Forces you to actually read the FMA as opposed to just taking a glance over it.
2. You get two sensoric inputs: visual and audio (by listening to yourself speaking), so chances of getting the correct message to your brain are better.
3. It helps your PM to stay in the loop if he's temporarily heads down (reading a checklist, making MCDU entries, etc.).
Not totally so,I've done it both ways,Airbus and the butchered style in other countries and seen failings in both.In Asia ,total Airbus procedures,constant talking to where call outs were made without even looking.The butchered versions,similar in that calls were missed.Im in agreement with CHK Airmen,too many needless calls,resulting in way too much chatter.Calls need to be made for what is" not" there.Bottom line,do it the way your SOPs are written,that's what your paid to do.The Airbus can be successfully flown both, and various ways,depending on how the SOPs are written.Some SOPs are written and initiated better then others,been there,done that.The Airbus "standard" SOPs are nothing but a starting point for any operator.

Check Airman

14th Jun 2016, 10:58

Makes sense, until you consider that maybe FMA indications are not the same on both sides. And this is something that can and did happen on Airbus...

http://s33.postimg.org/oaz2e0ogf/erroneus_ra.jpg

This can happen in any airplane. Doesn't seem to be worth the extra blabbering that Airbus recommends. I'd like to believe that I'd notice and start diagnosing the problem before I've had time to waste calling the FMA out.

It'd be interesting to see what would happen on a line flight if one guy called out flare at 600ft. Would the other person notice, or just reflexively say "check"?

Check Airman

14th Jun 2016, 11:15

Calls need to be made for what is" not" there.

Completely agree. In my mind, it actually goes against Airbus philosophy to make the calls. Think about the cockpit design. If everything works as it should, there are no indications- all lights, ECAM messages etc are off. The lack of an indication is good. Your attention is drawn to a positive indication, to alert you that something is amiss. The sudden positive indication gets your attention. It'd be much harder to spot a FAULT light if every button had an ON light illuminated all the time.

Same thing with callouts. Better to remain silent, and raise the alarm when something goes wrong, instead of making an announcement every time the airplane does as it's told.

Uplinker

14th Jun 2016, 12:40

Hi Check Airman.

I have been flying Airbus for 11 years now, and before that, four different conventional (i.e. non computerised) turbo prop and jet aircraft types.

What I find with Airbus is that sometimes the procedures might seem superfluous, but then one dark and stormy night, something bad nearly happens and you go Ah, THAT is why we have to do that. For example; what does LAND (green) on the FMA tell you?

You say you are new to the Airbus, and my guess is that you have probably never seen anything go wrong with one. So your mindset is 'why call it, it is never wrong?'. Well, calling the FMA is for a number of reasons.

1. You are verbally confirming a mode change.
2. You are communicating with the other pilot. (who is supposed to then read his/her FMA and say 'checked' if it agrees)
3. The FMA is the output of the aircraft systems, and should confirm the input(s) that have been made.
4. Unless you read the FMA out loud and the other pilot reads theirs and says checked, how do either of you know that each FMA says the same thing?
5. You are also confirming that the other pilot is aware of what is going on and has not for example become fatigued or incapacitated.

Trust me, reading the FMA out loud is a very sensible thing to do. By NOT doing so you are

1. Ignoring Airbus SOPs
2. Not keeping the other pilot in the loop. Unless you read the FMA out loud, and the other pilot reads theirs and says checked, how does the other pilot know you have read it correctly. And how do you know the other pilot has read it?
3. Possibly not reading it yourself
4. Confirming the aircraft will do what you have asked it to do and confirming the selections you have made. (I still see some pilots look at the flap lever instead of the E/WD to confirm the flap setting).

One day, something might happen to you - or not happen that should have - and you will get that cold sweat feeling of 'bloody hell that could have ended badly', and you will realise why Airbus are flown the way they are. Don't assume - always check.

Don't resist the Airbus, fly with it. It is a wonderful machine.

PS beware of saying what you expect to see rather than what is displayed in front of you. The other day during a control check, the other guy said "full left" as I was holding full right rudder. I said "are you sure?" he said "yes full left" Then I pointed to the rudder position read out on the F/CTL page. He looked for a moment, confused, and eventually said "....Oh err sorry, full right."

vilas

14th Jun 2016, 19:19

Check Airman and Pakehaboy
The only point you both are harping on is pilots calling without checking and that is as wrong as can get. It is not a call you read it, Check airman you are new to the bus and yet you are assigning the manufacturer recommendations, the evidence of accidents and opinions of experienced pilots to dust bin just because you are unnecessarily uncomfortable with some thing that is routinely done by thousands of pilots across the globe. If pilot can call FMA mechanically without actually reading it then this pilot will never check it doing silently. In the first case there is chance of other guy noticing the error but when done silently the other guy is not even in the loop. And a neophyte saying airbus procedure goes against airbus philosophy I don't find anything more ridiculous than that. You are not immune to committing mistake made by other experienced pilots. Flight control check you are supposed to check full up aileron with spoilers but since spoilers are not called the pilots failed to notice that spoilers were not moving and that caused the incident in Luft Hansa where maintenance had cross connected the wires and captains side stick banked the aircraft to opposite side. The co-pilot landed the plane.

Pakehaboy

14th Jun 2016, 22:08

Villas,uplinker,thanks for the lesson in nothing.Been on the A/C 20 yrs,as an instructor and CHK airmen.If your SOPs work that way for you,use them,the experience base in many of these airlines is low,therefore use the airbus training manual,other airlines have much deeper experience bases not requiring the mundane FMA call outs.It works either way!!

Check Airman

15th Jun 2016, 08:31

Pakehaboy

15th Jun 2016, 12:54

CHK Airmen,great point.Always amazes me how many Asian airlines are hiring Western Trained pilots etc,and yet the transition from minimum call outs per their company SOPs is an easy transition to the Airbus standard SOP,with some study and practice.It clearly is not a big issue but a mindset.

oicur12.again

15th Jun 2016, 14:17

My thoughts on 23 years of Bus flying: Yes, it happens where you make an FMA call based on what you expect as apposed to what you actually did. Calling open descent when you didnt actually pull the knob far enough for example may give evidence that calling the FMA serves no purpose.

But more often than not the reverse happens where the FMA call is exactly what picks up the oversight. Forgetting to arm the approach then going to read the FMA and finding it aint correct saves me more than the first scenario.

Its not going to catch your errors every time but it does help.

I have just joined my 7th airline where FMA calls are SOP however often not done and the number of errors is significantly higher than previous carriers.

Another call my new carrier does differently is the rad alt alive. Previous SOP for years was 2500 "rad alt alive" but my new carrier is 2500 "checked". Throw in that checked with several other "checked" calls down the approach and its easy to overlook the fact that the ground is coming into play. In this day and age of CFIT awareness I am surprised that there is such little attention paid to the rad alt????

Check Airman

16th Jun 2016, 12:10

If people in your company are in the habit of trusting that their FMA input is sufficient, then yes, I understand why the verbal call may make sense in that case.

On my first jet, you HAD to read the FMA- there was simply no way of getting around it. That's probably why I'm having such a hard time understanding why it's necessary to call it out. It's something that i just do reflexively. It feels a lot like having to call out "trim" every time I move the trim switch in a conventional airplane.

Never heard of an airline doing a call of "RA alive". Why not just enable the automatic 2500ft call?

On a tangent, did anyone here fly the A300/310? Did Airbus recommend FMA callouts on those airplanes as well?

vilas

16th Jun 2016, 13:13

On A310 yes. Automatic Radio altimeter call is also acknowledged like any other call. Why there are any calls at all? Why not every one does his job quietly? Because sometimes somebody doesn't and if the other guy also doesn't then something happens.

pilot18

16th Jun 2016, 13:34

Something that most airbuses don't have, unlike most? other airliners we are comparing fma's with, are moving control columns or thrust levers.

If you turn the heading knob in a Boeing to the left, the control column will probably turn to the left. If not, you would have another look at the FMA. In The fbw airbuses, the only way to know if the airplane is going to to as you intended, is to read the FMA.

it might be that important that airbus decided that it actually should be read out loud in order to minimize the risk of anything being left out.

Check airman: yes, the FMA has to be read. But how do I know that my cadet in the right seat have read it unless I hear it. Let alone understand it?

Pakehaboy

16th Jun 2016, 14:28

vilas quote...

"On A310 yes. Automatic Radio altimeter call is also acknowledged like any other call. Why there are any calls at all? Why not every one does his job quietly? Because sometimes somebody doesn't and if the other guy also doesn't then something happens."

You've lost the plot and direction mate!!!No one at any time is saying call outs and procedure are not required.Depending on the phase of flight we must and have sufficient callous required to keep our attention to the job at hand,ridiculous not to.I certainly don't want to get into a pissing match as to what are the best and worst SOP call outs just because AIRBUS has said so,they wrote their own ops specs to satisfy what "they" regard as the "Standard".

So be it, their procedures (Airbus) are the baseline for an operator to start with,you either use it to the nth degree or you butcher it to suit ones operation.As I've said I've seen it (as many here have )done many ways,some have refined it,some have spit the dummy,and no doubt we have witnessed its failings and excellent sides.

I have witnessed two very new pilots in the same cockpit,and if it wasn't for all the call outs required they would have very quickly met their makers or a disciplinary board.Whereas I have checked two very experienced pilots in the same situation,who,because of their experience,scan,airplane knowledge ,use the minimum of call outs and do a fabulous job.One has to cater Airbuses SOPs to ones operation,and what fits,it is not a system of one fits all.

Vilas,in defence of your point,I would agree that the current situation of pending and actual pilot shortages,perceived or otherwise,the lack of rudder,stick skills,abnitio programmes and the lack of real flight time,the use of Aisbus SOPs for Airbus Aircraft is the best starting point for all.I have seen it,witnessed and flown it,it works

oicur12.again

16th Jun 2016, 14:40

"Never heard of an airline doing a call of "RA alive". Why not just enable the automatic 2500ft call?"

The "Rad Alt Alive" call by the PNF is in response to the auto callout of "twenty five hundred". Standard AI SOP from FCOM.

vilas

16th Jun 2016, 18:01

CA is highly allergic to anything that is standard and especially from Airbus. Any call auto or by a crew member is to be acknowledged because it also shows that you are still part of the team and not passed out. I am surprised he still hasn't quoted the line "SOPs are for guidance of the wise and compliance by idiots" famous, though last words in many accidents.

Check Airman

17th Jun 2016, 03:18

Quite the contrary, actually. I do the callouts prescribed by my SOP. We're not required to make any RA callouts. The company has determined that the auto callout suffices.

This discussion about the differences in SOP is likely a cultural issue. For example, we tend to approach things like briefings, automation and FO limitations differently. I assume the FMA thing is just another difference. We operate the same airplanes differently, and with consistently safe results- which is what matters in the end.

MD83FO

17th Jun 2016, 12:57

If you don't call FMAs and ATC says "descend five thousand",
what do you say internally in the cockpit?

Check Airman

17th Jun 2016, 19:13

Set 5000, and read "5000 blue" off the PFD. Some guys will point to the altitude until the other pilot confirms the clearance.

Pakehaboy

18th Jun 2016, 16:41

Charming.

I wasn't even talking to you mate...........since you obviously know more about the Airbus than the company who makes them.
Please accept my apologies,a typo on my part and directed at the wrong individual,

As part of your compensation package,I shall take hammer to left toe as a reminder not to do that again,and brews are on me if our paths ever cross....my apologies ...

Uplinker

20th Jun 2016, 10:38

Accepted and my post deleted.

StrIA

16th Oct 2016, 11:40

Hello guys!
I've question by SOP->STANDARD CALLOUTS (PRO-NOR-SOP-90 P 1/)
->ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF.
Is it when PF give the command to PM for change a guidance mode or actions are performed by self?
For ex.:
I'm PF, AP - ON. To change FL340 to FL320 I should announce: FL320 SET, FL320 PULL, after that FMA THR IDLE-OP DES or I should read and announce only FMA FL320 BLUE, THR IDLE-OP DES

vilas

16th Oct 2016, 14:19

You will have to specify which guys and whose SOP otherwise an unnecessary lengthy argument will ensue.

AB335

16th Oct 2016, 15:07

If AP is on then our SOP allows PF to set FL320 and pull/push on FCU, then announce "thrust idle, (open) descent, alt blue FL320", PM response "checked, FL320"

If AP is off then PF order PM to set FCU "ALT FL320 pull/push", then PF announce the FMA mode as per above

StrIA

16th Oct 2016, 16:15

I mean FCOM Airbus
Are actions announced on FCU by PF: FL320 SET, PULL, SPEED PULL, SELECT, etc.?
Or will be correct only announce FMA on PFD?

StrIA

16th Oct 2016, 16:20

http://savepic.net/8492230m.jpg (http://savepic.net/8492230.htm)
http://savepic.net/8481990m.jpg (http://savepic.net/8481990.htm)

FlightDetent

16th Oct 2016, 21:58

Hi, the original AB logic is that with AP on:

The PF will perform all necessary selections, and after the modes become active, read out loud the FMA.

So the answer to your question is: NO (as per Airbus).

The callout "SET" is in use whenever PF will ask the other guy to do something for him/her.

Šťastlivo, FD.

EDITED: the clue you may have missed is in the headline of the page provided: actions COMMANDED by PF. In this sense, COMMANDED means whenever the PF requests somebody else to perform a selection / adjustment / action.

vilas

17th Oct 2016, 04:25

StrIA
The basic principle of handling FCU is to look at FCU to select the appropriate knob but check the value on PFD with or without guidance mode change.The title ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF is incomplete because it doesn't mention that PF commands actions when he is manually flying. With AP on PF takes the actions himself.

StrIA

22nd Oct 2016, 10:31

vilas
With AP on PF takes the actions himself.
Did I rightly know? That if PF is want to change FL320 to FL340, he announces own's actions: FL340-"SET", "PULL", afterthat reads FMA: FL340 BLUE, THR IDLE, OP CLB.
Or so PF doesn't announce the actions on FCU, only FMA
It's very important for me.
Thank's

Chris Scott

22nd Oct 2016, 11:11

Quote from vilas:
"The basic principle of handling FCU is to look at FCU to select the appropriate knob but check the value on PFD with or without guidance mode change.The title ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF is incomplete because it doesn't mention that PF commands actions when he is manually flying. With AP on PF takes the actions himself."

YES! Spot-on.

And if you current Airbus-flyers will permit me to intrude briefly into your conversation, the other VITAL discipline is that the person who has made the mode-change on the FCU (as described by vilas) does NOT call the result on the FMAs. If the call is to have any monitoring value it MUST be made by the OTHER pilot.

If - due to inattention, high workload or R/T operations - the other pilot fails to call an FMA change that is required by the airline's FCOM, the pilot who has made the FCU selection can choose a suitable moment to ask him/her to "Check FMAs?" In a continuing high workload situation, of course, that may not be practicable. In that case, wait for the next required FMA call. If that is not forthcoming, it may indicate that the other pilot is overloaded (or possibly incapacitated).

I-2021

22nd Oct 2016, 11:16

Actions Commanded by the PF. Translation from french "Actions commandées par le PF" where commandées is a synonym of "ordered"

Capn Bloggs

22nd Oct 2016, 13:55

And if you current Airbus-flyers will permit me to intrude briefly into your conversation, the other VITAL discipline is that the person who has made the mode-change on the FCU (as described by vilas) does NOT call the result on the FMAs. If the call is to have any monitoring value it MUST be made by the OTHER pilot.

If - due to inattention, high workload or R/T operations - the other pilot fails to call an FMA change that is required by the airline's FCOM, the pilot who has made the FCU selection can choose a suitable moment to ask him/her to "Check FMAs?" In a continuing high workload situation, of course, that may not be practicable. In that case, wait for the next required FMA call. If that is not forthcoming, it may indicate that the other pilot is overloaded (or possibly incapacitated).

Or just have the discipline to, as PF, only call something that is already on the FMA and as PNF, not call "checked" without looking at the FMA first... Pretty simple really.

Chris Scott

22nd Oct 2016, 14:37

Quote from Capn Bloggs:
"Or just have the discipline to, as PF, only call something that is already on the FMA and as PNF, not call "checked" without looking at the FMA first... Pretty simple really."

With respect, although you are right to emphasise that it's vital for a call not to be made until the new FMA combination has been verified, there's rather more to it than that. Let me explain.

Firstly, as others have pointed out, the PF only makes the FCU selections when the AP is engaged. If it isn't, the PF theoretically orders what he/she wants and the FCU selection is made by the PNF (PM). That's why I avoided mention of PF and PNF in my post.

Secondly, it's unnecessary and counter-productive for both pilots to speak following the FMA change. The only one who should announce the FMA change is the pilot who did NOT make the selection.

The pilot who made the selection carefully verifies that the FMA change on his/her PFD is in accordance with what (s)he wants, but there is no need for him/her to make a call. There are two reasons for this:
(1) otherwise it discourages the other pilot from taking time to check it properly on his/her PFD;
(2) both pilots calling adds to the plethora of noise in the cockpit (and the brief expression "checked" is so ambiguous as to be of little value).

Remember, as you imply in your post, the pilot who has made the selection is always, by definition, content that (s)he has got it right. Putting the responsibility on the other pilot to make the call:
(a) gives an independent verification (a second opinion);
(b) forces the other pilot to remain "in the loop".

Lantirn

22nd Oct 2016, 15:33

You will have to specify which guys and whose SOP otherwise an unnecessary lengthy argument will ensue.

Haha!

My opinion regarding FMA and cockpit monitoring..

1) Reading FMA has obvious advantages, well analyzed above.
2) Reading and generally challenging the SOP callouts force you to stay in the loop. Autocallouts simply isn't the solution. One day remove them and we all know the results. E.g remove ALT Alert together with ALT ACQ in the boeings (or whatever aircraft with altitude alert), distract them and here you are with a nice flown level bust. Called Primary-Backup inversion. Saying thousand to go is there to enchance your and your colleague's SA. Not for confirming that the altitude alert sounded. This was actually done in a Boeing simulator in a research.
3) SOPs are designed for a standard pilot. This ranges from the younger one to the older, with excellent, average, unsatisfactory performance (at times for gods sake) or whatever and with different personalities, interests. Simply saying that "two good pilots fly nice paired together" is not the everyday norm. One can stay in the loop easily, others can't. This is reality...SOP's are for everyone.

I dont say that calling anything loudly is the best practice, however, for sure, it is safe. If it's too loud I don't know. Checklists and procedures today are so summarized that I don't even find it boring to do so.

It is a personal opinion only.

FlightDetent

24th Oct 2016, 14:58

StrIA: as per Airbus doctrine:

PF with autopilot engaged
- will make all selections silently
- afterwards read out loud the FMA
- PNF then confirms from his side with a verbal confirmation (check)

PF with autopilot NOT engaged
- will request the other pilot to do the required actions using standard callout "SET .. " / "... MANAGE" / " ... PULL"
- the other pilot will make all selections silently and then read out loud his respective FMA-
- PF then confirms from his own side with a verbal confirmation (check).

Chris Scott: I wonder when they did change? The above is valid since 2004 min.

Chris Scott

24th Oct 2016, 19:57

Hi FlightDetent,

Thanks for the heads-up on the manufacturer's SOP. The philosophy detailed in my two posts above predates 2004, and was not from Airbus's FCOM. In the airline that employed me it was SOP from 1988 until 2002, at least, and AFAIK it still applies there. I'm not familiar with other airlines' current SOPs, but I would be surprised if all of them conform precisely to the manufacturer's FCOM.

The task-allocation of FMA calls I described evolved in the months following the introduction into service of the A320 during 1988. We were a launch customer and had experience of previous types with FMAs, such as the DC-10 and A310. On the DC-10 they were comparatively few, and IIRC both pilots would call all FMA changes. That was tolerable but, when we had acquired a couple of A310s in 1984, the type's greater number and complexity of FMAs led to a lot of criticism of the resulting plethora of calls.

Many of us initial pilots on the A320, including the chief training captain, had earlier been on the A310 and had done our type conversions at Toulouse on both types. Airbus's own SOPs for the A320 were not fully defined, however, and the type had/has even more FMAs than the A310. (A handful more were added as improvements were made in the first few years.) So it was up to our fleet management to define our policy for FMA calls.

The two issues for consideration were which FMA changes needed to be called and who to make the calls. The former were pruned to a fairly modest list; the latter designed to be in accordance with good CRM. Clearly the latter must ensure that the two pilots share responsibility for any current or projected changes in the flight-path commanded via the AFS.

The FCU is complex and easily mishandled but, as previously noted, the pilot who has manipulated it will by definition think (s)he has got what (s)he wanted. One of the easiest mistakes, IIRC, is to call the armed altitude just before removing finger and thumb from the ALT selector knob. During removal, as you know, it's possible to shift the knob unintentionally - particularly in turbulence. So, in general, it's vital not to spoon-feed the other pilot into a false sense of security. In both high and low workload situations, it's all too tempting for him/her to call "checked!" without really doing so. (S)he must be made to look AND think. Giving him/her the task of making the call should achieve that.

The SOP I have described in these three posts served us well during the 14 years I spent on my airline's A320 fleet. If in the last 28 years Airbus may not have fully addressed the CRM aspects of FMA calls, I would admit to being disappointed. Routine airline operations with qualified line-pilots are, of course, different from an Airbus line-training environment where, typically, the Airbus training captain would be teaching a pilot or embryonic crew from scratch.

Chris

Amadis of Gaul

25th Oct 2016, 12:06

:) what do you say after arming the approach mode and engaging the other AP?

Either "here goes nothing" or "time to land this pig, I guess..."

vilas

25th Oct 2016, 16:43

I didn't understand what is the confusion about FD's original post "What do you say after arming the approach mode and engaging the other AP? It has always been GLIDE SLOPE BLUE, LOC BLUE, CAT3 DUAL, AP 1+2

FlightDetent

25th Oct 2016, 16:59

That post was done 5 months ago as a gentle push to Speedwinner in the right direction. The smiley face is the hint. Judging by his response then (http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/580185-airbus-procedures-callouts.html#post9405234), it worked.

Nothing to see here, move along ...

Escape Path

27th Oct 2016, 17:13

I simply find it amazing that the easier thing to do is usually the hardest. Mate, with all due to respect to everyone: you're flying a 77 ton aircraft that can carry 170+ people at 700+ kmh and you're one of only two guys preventing the thing from making a hole in the ground. Every action done or not can lead to something unexpected and potentially dangerous, even fatal and you know you can make a mistake so easily. Are you telling me that knowing all this, you can't spare a second or two to confirm that you (or your colleague) are not heading to a potentially hazardous situation and call "checked" by mere reflex? Someone said it before, it's called being professional about your job. Simple as that.

We do call out the FMA (Latin American operator), though I'm fairly recent to the type, I came from a turbo prop aircraft on which we also called the FMA. It may be a bit loud and noisy at times, but there comes this flight at night in bad weather where it becomes important to read and call the FMA

divyanancy

8th Feb 2017, 08:35

Hello team,

I have a query regarding the FCU Handling.

If The instruction given by ATC is to turn left heading180deg and reduce speed to 180kts. As PF What is the correct way for handling FCU apart from The point given above:
a) first turn heading/speed knob to 180Deg and then pull or,
b) first pull the respective knob and then set.

Thank you.

JosuaNkomo

8th Feb 2017, 08:48

a. Correct either or. Make sure does not turn wrong way.
b. Reducing speed is dependent on GW and selected/managed speed and S speed and F speed. To many variations.

I prefer the PF to call FMA's as it implies they are not incapacitated. One particular First officer in mind.

Goldenrivett

8th Feb 2017, 08:57

a) Possible for the aircraft to turn in the wrong direction if the new heading selected is more than 180 degrees away.
b) Better way as you can see on the FMA that you have pulled the correct knob (avoids speed / heading mix up) and will always generate the turn in the correct sense.

divyanancy

8th Feb 2017, 09:16

So correct way would be pull and then turn the knob? And not vice versa

AviatoR21

12th Aug 2018, 11:32

Seeking some feedback on other Airbus operators around the globe to FMA callouts regarding Alt/FL.

If below TA and cleared to climb FL370, PF sets 37000 in the FCU window however the PFD still shows 37000 in blue. Only once, above TA and altimeters switch to STD will it change to FL370.

My question is do you guys call 37000 blue or FL370 blue? As per FCOM and our OMB requirements we call what is displayed from the PFD.

akindofmagic

12th Aug 2018, 12:07

We set standard as soon as cleared to a FL, and QNH as soon as cleared to an altitude.

FlightDetent

12th Aug 2018, 21:12

AviatoR21

I call 3-7 thousand blue because it is expected of me. In the previous company, for 8 years straight, we said FL370. Neither of the two bosses felt the need to have a SOP on this, BTW.

pineteam

13th Aug 2018, 09:25

akindofmagic

I saw a couple of guys mentioning that; I guess it's a company or European standard rule? Cause in the Airbus FCOM says to set Standard '' At Transition altitude'' Not before. And '' To set QNH'' When approaching the transition level in the descent.

FCOM-PRO-NOR-SOP- Descent Adjustment.

AviatoR21

9th Sep 2018, 14:27

Before Takeoff Checklist - Flap Setting

Does your operator call Config 1? Or Config 1+F?

I believe as per FCTM you call what the aircraft displays which is 1+F, there is no such thing as Config 1 for takeoff yet I see some pilots respond incorrectly.

CW247

9th Sep 2018, 16:25

True story.

I was jump seating (safety pilot). Obnoxious old fool with traditional Southern American Machismo running through his veins (the trainer) in the left and a new cadet in the right seat. We're starting descent when cadet accidentally trips the autopilot (I still think it was the trainer - known for this sort of thing). Cadet re-engages and announces "AUTOPILOT 2". Trainer berates him "WHERE AUTOPILOT TWO???, IT SAYS AYY PEE TWO!". Cadet, with a lump in his throat, repeats.

Ten seconds later, the Thrust Idle FMA is displayed, cadet calls out ""TEE HAYCH ARR, AYE DEE EL EE". The look on the trainers face after that. :O

FlightDetent

9th Sep 2018, 21:01

AviatoR21: I wish, but the FCOM says otherwise :{ for a long time.

FCOM edition 2008
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/793x230/nk7q_1972b80f46231a98201e4f84203e1f9826e4fdb4.png

AviatoR21

10th Sep 2018, 00:56

That’s a configuration change call out not a response to a checklist item. Have a look at FCTM Normal Checkist.

Uplinker

12th Sep 2018, 05:25

[Originally Posted by Check Airman images/buttons/viewpost.gif (questions/580185-airbus-procedures-callouts-post9404386.html#post9404386)
I'm fairly new to the type, but wish Airbus would drop the FMA callouts. I don't see how it accomplishes much.[/QUOTE]

The point is, what is displayed on the FMA is what the computers are actually doing - an output. What is on the FCP is what they have been asked to do - an input. The two are not necessarily the same. Calling and confirming the FMA is a way of ensuring the aircraft will do what you have asked and also of keeping the other pilot in the loop and catching errors and incapacitation.

Uplinker

12th Sep 2018, 05:33

The thread is not allowing me to edit my post #88 but I meant FCU, not FCP.

Check Airman

12th Sep 2018, 05:44

TPE Flyer

A moot point, as my company does not make FMA calls.

Check Airman

12th Sep 2018, 05:54

Uplinker, I agree with everything you've said. My only point is that it's not necessary to say it out loud, to understand what's about to happen. We can use our inside voices.As I said to the previous poster, my airline (and if I'm not mistaken, at least the five largest operators in the US) does not make FMA calls. Several hundred Airbus airplanes flying around every day with no FMA calls.In fairness, we do a lot of things that are not Airbus SOP (don't get me started on our checklists). At the end of the day, I'm going to follow my SOP. If that means calling out the FMA, so be it. Right now, we're not required to make any FMA calls, so we don't.