Check List Design in GA aircraft - often superfluous

[sheppey]

The Australian newspaper Tuesday September 25 page 2 has a headline Crash Pilot boasted he did not need pre-flight checks. This was in reference to the ATSB report on the King Air crash at Essendon. On the same page, contributor Byron Bailey under the headline Checklists indispensable to safety describes why checklists are important. He makes an important point, stating "There is a widespread opinion among general aviation pilots that checklist are too long winded, thus increasing the likelihood of missing an item, but this incident shows how vital it is for pilots to take time to action checklists and undergo takeoff emergencies simulator training."
His point is valid especially with regard to current checklist design trends.

Dr Google says: After the crash of the Model 299 on October 30, 1935, the Checklist was introduced by Boeing, as a permanent and mandatory tool, to be used by all pilots in the Boeing fleet.

The original checklists were designed thus as a written before take off drill. There was also a Before Landing drill. The RAF during WW2 emphasized the importance of the before takeoff checks calling them VITAL ACTIONS. Since then checklists have not only been extended to cover before starting engines, but for almost every conceivable situation. To top it all off many flying schools now require their students to even conduct the walk-around inspection using a checklist. Some CASA FOI may even demand additional checklist items to be added even though this is their personal opinion and not a manufacturer's recommendation. This Ppune contributor once saw a roller blind checklist designed by the civilian owner of a former RAAF Winjeel. He had installed a home made roller blind type checklist that had no less than 137 individual checklist items. The first item started with "Good Day" I noticed after a while he dispensed with the checklist altogether.

This writer took over a student for dual instruction whose previous instructor was on holidays. After strapping in, the student apologised by saying he had left his checklist in his car. Asked to start the engine without the crutch of a checklist he was unable to do so. After the flight he was also unable to remember how to close down the engine without reference to a written checklist. He had flown twelve hours in the Cessna 152 yet had no idea how to fly without a checklist to read. The blame fell squarely on his flying instructor.

Most of us learned to fly at flying schools. We are prone to carry over bad habits learned from our instructors. Heavy reliance on checklists that are superfluous can eventually lead to skipping checklists altogether. The philosophy behind the term VITAL ACTIONS Before Take Off needs to be considered and a red pen run through the rest. That way pilots will be less inclined to skip checklists altogether and maybe avoid another disaster like the King Air crash.

[mattyj]

Only 12 hours..I’m not surprised! Had he/she flown any other type? When I had 12 hours total tome I had only started the aircraft myself 2 or 3 times! Prior to that my instructor was doing the starts..I didn’t even taxi until we were clear of the flight line for the first 5 hours

[drpixie]

Absolutely agree Sheppy - I'm going through this with CASA at the moment. Between the manufacturer + the FOI + CASA's type specialist, the result is not a checklist but an instruction manual. The vital stuff completely lost amongst the dross that has no or little impact on the flight. I'm brave enough to drop the dross, but as all "flight check systems" have to be approved, I see no chance of getting a genuine checklist approved :ugh:

[Lapon]

My ab-initio single engine training required me to have all check commited to memory before going solo (I can still remember them all these years later).
From the point of GA multi engine training I have always used checklists however. Most of the GA and smaller turboprop checklists where so long that there was no room for common sense, and addressed items which were seldom of any importance.
The smallest checklist I have ever used is on the largest type I have flown (high capacity jet) 🤔

[Capn Bloggs]

They aren't checklists, they are Do lists...

[BuzzBox]

Heavy reliance on checklists that are superfluous can eventually lead to skipping checklists altogether. The philosophy behind the term VITAL ACTIONS Before Take Off needs to be considered and a red pen run through the rest.

As Lapon mentioned, the normal checklists used on high capacity aircraft are quite short. For example, on Airbus and Boeing types, the normal procedures are all performed by memory. The checklist simply confirms that the vital actions have been completed.

[megan]

Only 12 hours..I’m not surprised! Had he/she flown any other type? When I had 12 hours total tome I had only started the aircraft myself 2 or 3 times! Prior to that my instructor was doing the starts..I didn’t even taxi until we were clear of the flight line for the first 5 hours If that is the case mattyj it's a sad indictment on the school, in that they were screwing you and your wallet. In my time the average student was solo after eight hours. I do read on these pages of students who have done twenty five hours and still not soloed - something's wrong with the industry. To top it all off many flying schools now require their students to even conduct the walk-around inspection using a checklist. Checklists and their content has always been a bone of contention. It might be offered that had the Essendon pilot conscientiously used one during his walk round he would have noticed the trim tab position. Item five on the aircrafts cockpit preflight checklist is set trims to "0", then later calls for a check of the tab during the walk round. Two missed occasions before he has cranked, once strapped in a check of the trim is called for in the prestart, runup and pretake off, making a total of five missed opportunities.

The accident report mentions a checklist paper that I have often referenced, and given the link to here on Pprune. It's the first in the following list, the other links may be of interest, particularly the second in which human performance issues are addressed. The mere fact that you use a checklist may be no saviour, it's how you use it that counts. Failure to use them properly has lead to any number of fatals, DC-9 no flap take off that didn't make it, Helios 737 that failed to pressurise and crashed with the loss of all. Fly safe.

https://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/flightcognition/Publications/NASA-TM-2010-216396.pdf

https://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/flightcognition/people/kd.html

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19910017830.pdf

https://ti.arc.nasa.gov/m/profile/adegani/Cockpit%20Checklists.pdf

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170005594.pdf

[Wiggley]

Absolutely agree Sheppy - I'm going through this with CASA at the moment. Between the manufacturer + the FOI + CASA's type specialist, the result is not a checklist but an instruction manual. The vital stuff completely lost amongst the dross that has no or little impact on the flight. I'm brave enough to drop the dross, but as all "flight check systems" have to be approved, I see no chance of getting a genuine checklist approved :ugh:

Quite poor when the operational checklist for an airliner from startup to shutdown literally fits on a single-sided A4 page. The expanded checklist is of course within easy reach, but is only used for abnormal procedures.

[sheppey]

A bit of aviation history in checklist design. RAAF Publication No. 416 February 1944 Pilot's Notes for Tiger Moth Aircraft. By Command of the Air Board. Air Force Head-Quarters, Melbourne, S.C.1
Vital Actions before take off:
Elevator Trim neutral.
Throttle Friction nut tight
Mixture control right back to fully rich position.
Fuel cock fully on. Contents sufficient for flight.
Slots unlocked.
Flying controls tested for freedom of movement.

Contrast those items for simplicity with the checklist for the Cessna 172 and Cessna 150 used by one Melbourne flying school.
Trims...set for takeoff.
Throttle friction nut ...set firm
Mixture...rich
Magnetos...on both
Master...On
Primer...in and locked
Fuel...On both
Flaps...Set 0 degrees or 10 degrees for take off.
Instruments...Checked and Set.
Engine instruments...in the green
Switches...Lights etc
Controls..Full, free, correct sense
Hatches & Harness ...secure.

Note one vital check is missing in the flying school checklist. Seats...Secure. That item is listed in the manufacturers Cessna Pilot Information Manual

[Seabreeze]

In the early seventies I did my multi instrument rating training at Correll Advanced Flying Training (YMMB). Instructors were mostly ex RAAF or ex airline. They required a check list which was only on two sides of an A4 page.. Actually it was a To Do list, and was used in the same format for every light twin GA type, with info drawn from the AFM. This was common practice then. It was required that all be committed to memory.

On the Normal Procedures side, there was pre start and start, pre takeoff, line up, on take off, after take off, top of climb, cruise, top of descent, preaid, prelanding, PPUFF., and after landing. Under each subsection there were only a few key ToDo items. There was also a small table of key speeds (usually for MTOW at ISA at sealevel), and a short table of fuel capacities, endurances and weights
On the Emergency procedures there was a summary of most key actions that might be needed: EFOTO, EF in cruise, EF during an IF procedure or circuit, securing actions, SE approach, manual gear extension, crossfeed, and a longer list of speeds.

Put into a clear plastic sleeve and left on the aircraft dash, you could very quickly find any key info that you needed on either the Normal or Emergency procedures side. In the sleeve between the two outer pages was a more detailed W&B table, fuel consumption rates at various altitudes and power settings to facilitate quick flight planning, necessary for charter work out in the bush.

I recently looked at a (CASA approved) QRH for a very light training aircraft, and found it was over 60pages long! It included literally hundreds of items, many not even related to operating an aeroplane ( e.g. adjust the seat belt neatly after flight). This new world may create in trainees the idea that it is more important to be able to complete this ridiculously long list of actions (many of which are at best marginally relevant), rather than to focus on the actions and checks needed to operate the aircraft safely and efficiently, and on flying ability. IMO, the present QRH system actually detracts from effective and safe airmanship through distraction via this unnecessary complication. This needs some serious research...

Seabreeze

[megan]

This needs some serious research... The serious research has been done, see some of my links above, a google will provide far, far more. In a career spanning 44 years the only time I ever used a printed checklist was while training with the USN, with all other operators it was memory and flow. many not even related to operating an aeroplane You could start an argument about the wisdom of a pre landing gear check on a fixed gear aircraft, everyone will have an opinion one way or the other as to yes or no.

[roundsounds]

As mentioned above, most so called checklists used by Flying schools are amplified operating procedures. By far the safest way to operate most aircraft is to accomplish normal procedures from memory, then use a checklist to “check” you have completed the procedure. Flows and / or mnemonics can be used to help with completing the procedure and the checklist should only be use when you think a procedure has been completed. The checklist should only contain items likely to embarrass or kill you! Including stuff like fastening harnesses, setting radio frequencies or detailed engine run-ups have no place in a checklist.
Its painful flying with pilots of simple aeroplanes who cannot operate without a do list.

[industry insider]

Wiggley

Quite poor when the operational checklist for an airliner from startup to shutdown literally fits on a single-sided A4 page. The expanded checklist is of course within easy reach, but is only used for abnormal procedures.

Spot on, I spent many years flying single pilot IFR Ops, always used a flip out checklist, but it was a list, not a novel. I think we are at risk of over striving to "protect" ourselves by including every possible item into a check list. I was always taught that they are for the guidance of wise men and the obeyance of fools.

[sheppey]

You could start an argument about the wisdom of a pre landing gear check on a fixed gear aircraft,

Ask any instructor why check the landing gear down on a fixed gear type and he will say because one day you will fly a retractable gear aircraft and it gets you in the habit of checking gear down and locked.

Now ask him if that is the reason, then how come you don't say "Gear up" as part of the after take off check in a Cessna 172? Talk about negative "training". Typical GA.

[Ascend Charlie]

A simple Flow Check will suffice - top to bottom, left to right. Arrange all the knobs and switches in a pleasing and eye-catching manner.

Then go flying.

[ACMS]

Sheppy, when I fly a fixed gear fixed prop such as a PA28 I still mention in my checks on the ground and in the air: Cowl flaps, Pitch and Gear. What’s the harm in saying them? After nearly 40 years of safe flying it’s served me very well in all GA types up to the PA31.
Muscle memory and good habits forged over a life time.

[ShyTorque]

All a load of BUMFFCH.

[Sunfish]

flying a mix of fixed and retractable you are stupid if you do not include gear in your mental checklist, likewise propeller.

My response to the mental challenge on fixed gear is "down and welded".

[Ascend Charlie]

Muscle memory and good habits forged over a life time.

That could bring you embarrassment when you switch from a Navajo/Chieftain into a Baron - the gear and flap switches are interposed.

[AerocatS2A]

flying a mix of fixed and retractable you are stupid if you do not include gear in your mental checklist, likewise propeller.

My response to the mental challenge on fixed gear is "down and welded".

I never included it in fixed undercarriage aircraft. Didn't see the point.

The more I see of checklist use, the more I believe, particularly in single pilot ops, that if you have forgotten a critical item such as GEAR, you will probably also forget to do whatever checklist is supposed to trap that error.

[triadic]

Perhaps a little bit of thread drift, however it has been mentioned above, so here goes!

The lack of airmanship training these days is amazing when compared to that of 30 or 40 plus years ago.
The airmanship net was very large and when I learnt to fly. It covered such things as placing the chocks, dressing the prop, crossing the seat belts and cleaning out any rubbish (including ashtrays back then) from the aircraft for the next flyer. Of course it goes much further than that to such things as keeping a good look out and other tasks that some consider essential. Do you really need a check list for that? I suggest in many cases it is both common sense (which is not that common) and good instructing that is lacking? I know CFI's these days that would not make a lower grade instructor in years gone by. This standard drift (down) is easy for us older folk to observer but it is difficult to impossible to pass this message on, even to younger instructors and even to some FOIs that think they know it all....

On a similar subject also mentioned above, the time to go solo is often used as a benchmark for both individuals and flying schools, both of which are obviously a factor. I recall at the school that I learnt at, all students had a senior instructor check at 10 hours so as to assess progress but mainly to product check the instructor. I might add that most students at that time went sold within 10 +/- 2 or 3 hrs. In fact back then it was not uncommon for some full time students to go solo at 4.5 hrs (RAAF AIRTC cadets).
I recall doing my restricted PPL at around 33 hours which I recall was about average at that time. I just wonder what has changed when we see some students not progressing in much the same timeline. Is the air different? No, I suspect it is the culture that now exists in the flying schools and within the instructor fraternity.

As for check lists.... TMPFISCH and BUMFH has served me well in the smaller GA aircraft that I have flown. More complex types often had a roller blind or other type on the glare shield which I felt was quite appropriate.

[thorn bird]

"I recall doing my restricted PPL at around 33 hours which I recall was about average at that time. I just wonder what has changed when we see some students not progressing in much the same timeline. Is the air different? No, I suspect it is the culture that now exists in the flying schools and within the instructor fraternity."

Aww Triadic lets be fair here. Back then the focus was on teaching, today its focused on Box Ticking. I think the ratio is somewhere around 50:50 today.
Half hour of teaching followed by a half hour of box ticking. A bit of consideration for the poor instructors, RSI is a very common malady for instructors, writers cramp even more so. First item on the checklist:

1. Mentholatum Deep heat tube...............................STOWED.

I believe a lot of the angst regarding checklists is driven by the legal implications. Liability, and everything that goes with it.
On the commercial side of things checklists must be approved by CAsA which puts them in the gun should anything go wrong. "Safety" as we all know comes a very poor second to liability.
Pity the poor FOI's who have to Vet proposed Checklists. Many of them with no background or experience have to approve checklists for some fairly complex types. Their guidance comes from the AOCM section 7. It gives a lot of detail about how and what should be incorporated in a checklist but fails to give any leeway against what is contained in the AFM. I know of one company charged for sixteen hours of an FOI's time to "Check" the manufacturer supplied FAA approved QRH conformed with the AFM
Here's where the confusion comes.
For a lot of the more complex aircraft the AFM's lists are "Normal Operating Procedures". Procedures being the key word because that's what they are.
They are presented in a checklist kind of way, which our intrepid FOI's interpret as "if it looks like a checklist sounds like a checklist" its a checklist.
With no background or exposure in the real world who could blame them for insisting that checklists must match the AFM procedures lists, liability then falls on the manufacturer not on them or CAsA.
I have been told of 56 item taxi checklists for a light jet, which included advancing thrust to 80% for a couple of minutes, while trying to taxi, both pilots heads in when they should be heads out. A rather classic way of setting up an excursion somewhere, for which the pilots would ultimately be blamed.
CAR 242 calls for a "Check System" Which could be a procedural system of scan flow, complying with the AFM procedures, followed by a simple kill item checklist much the same as Boeing and Airbus does. The question is who takes responsibility for it?
One also has to consider that the content of AFM's for older aircraft was written thirty even 40 years ago and does not reflect modern research based design.
At the end of the day, no matter how checklists are presented or actioned or what their content is, the safety benefit of diligently using them far outweighs risks of not.

[Hamley]

I think it’s important to integrate checklist use into the flow of tasks in the cockpit.

According to the ATSB report the Kingair pilot at Essendon had a similar attitude to people in this thread (checklists are over the top, waste of time, don’t need em). It must feel good to be so wise.

But then he took off with the rudder trim mis-set and everyone died. The checklist could have prevented this.

[Mach E Avelli]

Equally, diligent application of TMPFISCH (where T is Trim and P is expanded to include Pressurisation, H for 5 Hots etc) could work just as well as using a checklist that has about 20 ‘final’ items to be checked at or approaching the take off point. Beech checklist is an example of how NOT to do a checklist.
Years ago I did a MU 2 rating with a Swiss operator. There were checklists for before and after start and shut down only. At all times when the aircraft was in motion checks were done by scan and flow, and had to be known.
The rationale was that a single pilot in a busy environment needed to be heads up the whole time. It worked, but required discipline.

[megan]

The checklist could have prevented this Having a checklist is no panacea in and of itself. It falls to how you use the checklistIn the course of sixty airline flights eight hundred ninety-nine deviations were observed (194 in checklist use, 391 in monitoring, and 314 in primary procedures). A link to the paper.

https://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/flightcognition/Publications/NASA-TM-2010-216396.pdf