Aircrew Manuals
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 71
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircrew Manuals
To all of my aviator buddies out there, what are your perceptions of not having a QRH (FRCs for military operators) but having to solely rely upon the sourcing of information from a very large volume of the Operations Manual? I refer to "legacy" aircraft types, i.e. B747, B707, L1011, which still has a Flight Engineer as part of the operating crew complement. If you didn't have a QRH (FRCs), how might you respond to having to source the information from two different volumes which contained conflicting information? Also, how might you feel about the grouping of WARNINGS and CAUTIONS at the beginning of any particular checklist, as opposed to placing the WARNINGS or CAUTIONS within the appropriate step of the checklist? I ask this question from a professional viewpoint and NOT from any online Flt Sim gamers! Please... no crass responses!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The clue to the QRH is the "Q". Large manuals are as good as useless when a reasonably quick response is required. In my head, the order of events after a malfunction is as follows:
Fly the plane
Confirm the emergency
Action any memory items
Pull out the QRH
Take action in accordance with QRH
Gather further information (weather, big manual, MEL, etc.)
Long term plan
Execute
Confirm that the correct course of action is still being taken.
Now if I find conflicting information in the manuals or find the manual's design prevents a timely execution of emergency procedures then I'd start some additional paperwork. If no luck with the employer then you go directly to the national oversight authority. If have flown with well written manuals where information is reasonably easy to find for years. I do not see any reason why any crew should have to put up with less.
PM
Fly the plane
Confirm the emergency
Action any memory items
Pull out the QRH
Take action in accordance with QRH
Gather further information (weather, big manual, MEL, etc.)
Long term plan
Execute
Confirm that the correct course of action is still being taken.
Now if I find conflicting information in the manuals or find the manual's design prevents a timely execution of emergency procedures then I'd start some additional paperwork. If no luck with the employer then you go directly to the national oversight authority. If have flown with well written manuals where information is reasonably easy to find for years. I do not see any reason why any crew should have to put up with less.
PM
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nirvana South
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the majority of recent aircraft have an EICAS, ECAM or equivalent, I wonder how relevant a QRH is now. Having been involved with the development of the EICAS logic for several aircraft, the next Pilot Action after any particular failure was the first critical question that drove the level of the alert, the exact message wording & audio alert (if any) and any required system delay or inhibition. Memory Items are necessary but a well crafted Alert can trigger the correct timely response.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 71
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICT_SLB, I cannot disagree with you on today's score of modern technology but I was referencing my question towards "legacy" aircraft types... the old steam driven types which don't have EICAS/ECAM.
