Master caution protocol

[ben2012]

What is standard protocol for handling identification and canceling of a master caution? PF/PM roles?

[flyboyike]

Is there any chance you could specify aircraft type/kind of operation? That would be just super, thanks in advance.

[ben2012]

twin jet/prop
part 121/135

general SOP

appreciate any input

[eckhard]

1. Master Caution illuminates.
2. PM: “Master Caution, (adds which system it relates to)”.
3. PF: “Roger, cancel Master Caution please”.
4. PM cancels Master Caution.
5. PF checks flight path, thrust setting, autoflight status, general navigational trajectory.
6. PF: “Restate the specific failure please”.
7. PM: e.g. “Hydraulic low pressure, system A”.
8. PF confirms the failure.
9. PF: “QRH, Hydraulics, low pressure system A checklist please”.
Etc....

[RAT 5]

Ben: you seem to suggest your company does not offer guidance, or you disagree. For me, multi crew coordination in such a scenario is not so important.

a suggestion:

1. MC illuminates. 1st pilot who sees it calls "master Caution."
2. PF calls, "state malfunction."
3. PF remains concentrating on managing the flight. PM re-sets MC & analyses the problem
4. PM, after completing the analysis, informs PF of the problem.
5. PF then knows where to look and confirms the analysis.
6. If there are 'memory items' PF will call for the appropriate checklist memory items to be actioned.
7. PM will action the memory items under supervision of PF. Once complete, and when appropriate, the checklist will then be found and completed from the beginning.
8. If there are no memory items PF will call for the appropriate checklist when appropriate.
9. PM will find and action the checklist reading aloud under supervision of PF.
10. Once the checklists are completed the situation will be reviewed and a future plan of action discussed and decided upon.

This is a generalisation, but should help forming a foundation for an SOP.

[ben2012]

Thank you both for your input

[Journey Man]

Ben: you seem to suggest your company does not offer guidance, or you disagree. For me, multi crew coordination in such a scenario is not so important.

a suggestion:

1. MC illuminates. 1st pilot who sees it calls "master Caution."
2. PF calls, "state malfunction."
3. PF remains concentrating on managing the flight. PM re-sets MC & analyses the problem
4. PM, after completing the analysis, informs PF of the problem.
5. PF then knows where to look and confirms the analysis.
6. If there are 'memory items' PF will call for the appropriate checklist memory items to be actioned.
7. PM will action the memory items under supervision of PF. Once complete, and when appropriate, the checklist will then be found and completed from the beginning.
8. If there are no memory items PF will call for the appropriate checklist when appropriate.
9. PM will find and action the checklist reading aloud under supervision of PF.
10. Once the checklists are completed the situation will be reviewed and a future plan of action discussed and decided upon.

This is a generalisation, but should help forming a foundation for an SOP.

Generally agree with this process, with one query. By the nature of an abnormal situation alerted by a Master Caution, would there be any memory items? Master Warning would be more appropriate to indicate an Emergency situation which would require immediate action and memory items.