C172 and check lists
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you banned for being a walt. And the there was over 100 years worth of instructional experience of the opinion that you were talking ****e and in all likely hood you were a walt living in a dream world.
http://www.pprune.org/flying-instruc...here-when.html
http://www.pprune.org/flying-instruc...here-when.html
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What because I said I watch a first solo and debrief afterwards? See if you can answer the question, here it is again:
You never did explain, how is a de brief after first solo pointless and why is taking enough interest to watch someone fly their first solo a 'dinsour' practice?
You never did explain, how is a de brief after first solo pointless and why is taking enough interest to watch someone fly their first solo a 'dinsour' practice?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJ, I do appreciate that a lot of your input seems to be to satisfy your need to insult and humiliate people, especially if they do not agree with you, but you may be better served by looking at your own posts before criticising others.
You mention ****e, so I have included one of your last posts below, perhaps you may see the connection?
If you want me to take your comments seriously it may help if you get someone else to write them out for you so I can understand what you are trying to say.
You mention ****e, so I have included one of your last posts below, perhaps you may see the connection?
Where have I stated that?, there is though don't put yourself in an increased risk position.
Sometimes there is an acceptable risk because of the gain ie instrument training or instrument approach in IMC. The learning of instrument flying and the added safety of the instrument approach in IMC outways not doing a normal SEP approach which is steeper than 3 deg
Alot of airports these days have significant built up areas with problematic places to do a forced landing in the under shoot. Flying a 4 mile 3 deg approach for no other reason than I want to pretend to be an airline pilot isn't showing good PIC risk assement..
Sometimes there is an acceptable risk because of the gain ie instrument training or instrument approach in IMC. The learning of instrument flying and the added safety of the instrument approach in IMC outways not doing a normal SEP approach which is steeper than 3 deg
Alot of airports these days have significant built up areas with problematic places to do a forced landing in the under shoot. Flying a 4 mile 3 deg approach for no other reason than I want to pretend to be an airline pilot isn't showing good PIC risk assement..
If you want me to take your comments seriously it may help if you get someone else to write them out for you so I can understand what you are trying to say.
Moderator
but there is really no necessity to do so. Pilot DAR's also shows this to be the case in Canada:
No person shall conduct a take-off in a power-driven aircraft, other than an ultra-light aeroplane, unless the following operational and emergency equipment is carried on board:
(a) a checklist or placards that enable the aircraft to be operated in accordance with the limitations specified in the aircraft flight manual
(a) a checklist or placards that enable the aircraft to be operated in accordance with the limitations specified in the aircraft flight manual
I find it surprising, and I suppose disappointing, that a group of pilots, whom generally I would expect to rise to the skill set of instructor, are so eager to abandon the required use of an approved document for an aircraft. Just to keep this all in context, my most recent modification project included a 24 page Flight Manual Supplement, whose changed performance section (only 5 pages) had a development cost exceeding $22,000. The FMS also has a changed checklist. If the pilot misses new steps on it, $5000 cost could be needlessly incurred, when the master is turned on.
What I see here is an apparent resistance to the use of such new documents, by the pilots who might fly the aircraft. Further to this, instructors insisting that they will train their students to attempt to memorize required documents, rather than referring to them hard copy, as required. It probably can work for a 172 (until it is flown on floats), but the plan will quickly fall apart for that poorly disciplined (trained) pilot, when he or she applies such careless habits to professional flying of more complex aircraft. Does this mean that in instrument training, the student is taught to memorize approach plates, 'cause they might have to be used during an approach?
Is the argument going on here about the use of a CHECKLIST or about the use of a PRINTED CHECKLIST.
Is anybody here really arguing that a CHECKLIST - that is, a list of checks (which might be placarded, printed, memorised, or recalled using a mnemonic) is unnecessary in any aeroplane?
The most vociferous pro-checklist poster on this thread is Pilot_DAR, who in his first post said:
He didn't say he needed that check written down anywhere, he said that it needs to be done. Presumably he'd agree that there are different ways to make sure you remember that.
Whilst somebody arguing against formal checklists is Pull What, who said:
Note, he said he does the checks, he just also said that he has them memorised.
Nor have I seen anybody argue that there's any good reason NOT to have a printed checklist on board in case somebody wants to refer to it (after all, most countries mandate the entire POH on board, which contains a checklist invariably).
This is feeling more and more like a non-argument to me.
G
Is anybody here really arguing that a CHECKLIST - that is, a list of checks (which might be placarded, printed, memorised, or recalled using a mnemonic) is unnecessary in any aeroplane?
The most vociferous pro-checklist poster on this thread is Pilot_DAR, who in his first post said:
If you're flying an amphibian with me aboard, I won't be letting you land, until you have spoken one the checklist items: "wheels are down for landing on land" or "wheels are up for landing on water", and make the appropriate visual check. EVERY amphibian landing I make will be preceded with those words out loud.
Whilst somebody arguing against formal checklists is Pull What, who said:
What you cannot commit that to memory!? I flew a Citation, Navajo, Aztec, Seneca, Apache, C421 all single crew with memory checks on finals even with the CAA on board!
Nor have I seen anybody argue that there's any good reason NOT to have a printed checklist on board in case somebody wants to refer to it (after all, most countries mandate the entire POH on board, which contains a checklist invariably).
This is feeling more and more like a non-argument to me.
G
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst somebody arguing against formal checklists is Pull What, who said:
Ah now, there's another issue altogether.
I have seen many light aeroplanes (including a few C172s which seem particularly prone) supplied by their clubs with checklists substantially more complex than the average transport or fast jet.
I think it's in many ways an exercise in self eggrandisement by those clubs, persuading themselves they're flying the next best thing to Concorde, rather than a reasonably straightforward SEP. It probably does little to help students learn in a sensible time, and probably is anti-safety as it stops pilots thinking for themselves as well - in the way that they might with a simple minimum checklist.
G
I have seen many light aeroplanes (including a few C172s which seem particularly prone) supplied by their clubs with checklists substantially more complex than the average transport or fast jet.
I think it's in many ways an exercise in self eggrandisement by those clubs, persuading themselves they're flying the next best thing to Concorde, rather than a reasonably straightforward SEP. It probably does little to help students learn in a sensible time, and probably is anti-safety as it stops pilots thinking for themselves as well - in the way that they might with a simple minimum checklist.
G
Moderator
my Airbus checklist was a lot simpler than ones Ive seen for Cessna 152s and 172s etc..
However, the dislike that a pilot may have for actually referring to written checklists should not be based upon that pilot's criticism of a checklist which they have seen, and don't like. That's like saying that you only watch TV, and no longer read books, because you once read a billboard you did not like.
A person acting in the capacity of "pilot" is not entitled to judge a checklist or Flight Manual for it's content, or decide if it should be followed. Though I suppose possible for a few people, I would be very unwilling to agree that most pilots could memorize the minimum (required) content of several different complex aircraft's checklists, to assure that required (by the design) steps were not overlooked.
Teaching students that this would be acceptable, or writing it here, to a generally unknown audience, is irresponsible. Yes, under some circumstances, pilots can remember the contents of a checklist effectively - I do - but very certainly not all circumstances, or all aircraft types. If a pilot would get in right seat to me, and sneer, because I choose to refer to the checklist, I would terminate the flight, and let them out. It is a part of my two crew pilot briefings for flight tests, that I will refer to the checklist, and no one has ever had a problem with that - why here?
Using PPRuNe to show off how much you do not need to follow common, harmonized practice, whose sole purpose is to reduce or prevent omissions and unsafe conditions, is irresponsible. What a pilot does while flying under his/her authority is between that pilot, the aircraft operator, and the client. As long as it results in a consistently safe outcome, it is beyond the scope of my comment here. Pilots who mentor or intimidate other pilots into complacent behaviou, should really rethink the image they wish to present.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think any of us are saying that checks don't have to be done.
The main response to the OP was that referring to a written checklist while on final approach in a single pilot aircraft could be distracting at such a critical time.
A simple SEP aircraft is just that - simple. No gear checks at all, no prop checks and possibly no fuel pump. This really doesn't leave much left to check.
What I hate to see is students using a checklist as a "how to fly" list.
Usually check 1:
"hatches/harness - secure" if you didn't secure you're harness and shut the door as soon as you were in and thinking about starting up, what hope is there. Do you need a checklist on the dashboard of your car to remind you to shut the door and fasten your seatbelt?
The main response to the OP was that referring to a written checklist while on final approach in a single pilot aircraft could be distracting at such a critical time.
A simple SEP aircraft is just that - simple. No gear checks at all, no prop checks and possibly no fuel pump. This really doesn't leave much left to check.
What I hate to see is students using a checklist as a "how to fly" list.
Usually check 1:
"hatches/harness - secure" if you didn't secure you're harness and shut the door as soon as you were in and thinking about starting up, what hope is there. Do you need a checklist on the dashboard of your car to remind you to shut the door and fasten your seatbelt?
In the training environment good written checklists are IMO essential. By good I mean short, only contain flight safety essential items and flow logically.
Like I said earlier I teach using the written checklist as a "do list" when the aircraft is stopped on the ground (prestart,taxi, pretakeoff, shutdown) and as a "check" when (appropriate to the phase of flight) for already accomplished checks which have been performed as a flow. So for example the prelanding is 4 items and I do not expect to see the student have to check the written checklist, as they should be looking out the window. The after landing "check list" however should be checked, again when safe and appropriate, after the actions have been carried out with the flow.
Like I said earlier I teach using the written checklist as a "do list" when the aircraft is stopped on the ground (prestart,taxi, pretakeoff, shutdown) and as a "check" when (appropriate to the phase of flight) for already accomplished checks which have been performed as a flow. So for example the prelanding is 4 items and I do not expect to see the student have to check the written checklist, as they should be looking out the window. The after landing "check list" however should be checked, again when safe and appropriate, after the actions have been carried out with the flow.
"hatches/harness - secure" if you didn't secure you're harness and shut the door as soon as you were in and thinking about starting up, what hope is there. Do you need a checklist on the dashboard of your car to remind you to shut the door and fasten your seatbelt?
G
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no justification for using a written checklist in the circuit in a single pilot aircraft. Time spent reading a checklist is time not spent looking out the window.
Simpe checks, committed to memory are all thats needed. As you become more familiar with type the more becomes committed to memory.
Wen I first started flying my Cessna as a PPL it felt quite busy. As did flying the twin turbine commercially. Now they feel like twist and go mopeds.
I don't think anyone is saying don't use a checklist which is an argument that has raged here for years, but use it appropriately and understand that a memorised one is perfectly acceptable. It is all about ensuring the ducks are all in a row!
Simpe checks, committed to memory are all thats needed. As you become more familiar with type the more becomes committed to memory.
Wen I first started flying my Cessna as a PPL it felt quite busy. As did flying the twin turbine commercially. Now they feel like twist and go mopeds.
I don't think anyone is saying don't use a checklist which is an argument that has raged here for years, but use it appropriately and understand that a memorised one is perfectly acceptable. It is all about ensuring the ducks are all in a row!
Moderator
There is no justification for using a written checklist in the circuit in a single pilot aircraft
Do you, Mr. pilot, want to risk wrecking a half million dollar survey system, or loosing all the data, because you were too proud to read a paper checklist in flight? When you have a hundred hours flying PIC on the modified Caravan, I agree that you'll probably have the checklist well memorized, and can recite it. Somewhere between 0 hours, and 100 hours, you will have to refer to the paper! (or I'm not going to sign off your training!)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are arguing at cross purposes and while your argument is perfectly valid it still does not justify arguing that a printed checklist is a must. There is nothing wrong with committing things to memory!!
As I have said a number of times there is nothing wrong with a printed checklist and if you feel you need it then use it. However I will not concede that a printed checklist is useful or even safe on final where your entire attention should be looking out of the window.
As I have said a number of times there is nothing wrong with a printed checklist and if you feel you need it then use it. However I will not concede that a printed checklist is useful or even safe on final where your entire attention should be looking out of the window.
Perhaps unless the modifications I have approved on the Caravan require extra steps to be accomplished at certain stages of flight, and the pilot does not remember these odd features, until he reads the checklist!
Do you, Mr. pilot, want to risk wrecking a half million dollar survey system, or loosing all the data, because you were too proud to read a paper checklist in flight? When you have a hundred hours flying PIC on the modified Caravan, I agree that you'll probably have the checklist well memorized, and can recite it. Somewhere between 0 hours, and 100 hours, you will have to refer to the paper! (or I'm not going to sign off your training!)
Do you, Mr. pilot, want to risk wrecking a half million dollar survey system, or loosing all the data, because you were too proud to read a paper checklist in flight? When you have a hundred hours flying PIC on the modified Caravan, I agree that you'll probably have the checklist well memorized, and can recite it. Somewhere between 0 hours, and 100 hours, you will have to refer to the paper! (or I'm not going to sign off your training!)
G
Moderator
useful or even safe on final where your entire attention should be looking out of the window.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here we go. This is just getting silly.
Firstly, VFR you need to be looking out the window for other traffic. Its nothing to do with workload, it is to do with safety.
Secondly when IFR the last time a look at the plate is prior to the FAF. After that I fly the damn aircraft. If you need to look at a plate when on final you really should not be there. I strip brief prior to the IAF. I confirm minima prior to the FAF and after that I get on with it.
So I will say again, anyone who has to use a written checklist on final is endangering themselves, the aircraft and others. Once you are established on final everything should already been in order to land. Final sanity checks such as props/mix and gear should be call out checks.
Firstly, VFR you need to be looking out the window for other traffic. Its nothing to do with workload, it is to do with safety.
Secondly when IFR the last time a look at the plate is prior to the FAF. After that I fly the damn aircraft. If you need to look at a plate when on final you really should not be there. I strip brief prior to the IAF. I confirm minima prior to the FAF and after that I get on with it.
So I will say again, anyone who has to use a written checklist on final is endangering themselves, the aircraft and others. Once you are established on final everything should already been in order to land. Final sanity checks such as props/mix and gear should be call out checks.
Subtle difference there bose - from not consulting a checklist in the circuit, to not consulting a checklist on finals.
Either way, when you're conducting a flight test, sometimes you need to use and consult with your notes (we usually call them test cards) which may well include some form of checklist.
I happen to agree that for normal GA operations, circuit checks should be delivered from memory - where a student insists on trying to use the checklist in the circuit, that bad habit needs (nicely!) beating out of them until they lean to memorise those checks. But, occasionally some of us do a job where that's not reasonably possible. In an ideal world, you fly 2 up so one can do the reading and writing, and one can look out; occasionally however that's not possible either.
G
Either way, when you're conducting a flight test, sometimes you need to use and consult with your notes (we usually call them test cards) which may well include some form of checklist.
I happen to agree that for normal GA operations, circuit checks should be delivered from memory - where a student insists on trying to use the checklist in the circuit, that bad habit needs (nicely!) beating out of them until they lean to memorise those checks. But, occasionally some of us do a job where that's not reasonably possible. In an ideal world, you fly 2 up so one can do the reading and writing, and one can look out; occasionally however that's not possible either.
G
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here we go. This is just getting silly.
Pilot DAR, are you seriously saying that on short finals, either VFR or IFR, your attention is on your lap on some piece of paper, be that a checklist or an approach plate?
In either case your full attention should either be looking out the window, or flying the instrument procedure with the MDA/DH memorised, possibly with a very quick glance down for any check heights on a non-precision approach.
Everyone should be able to retain a few simple checks or figures for a reasonable period of time, through correct pre flight planning, and self briefing before commencing any procedure (including pre-landing checks before commencing an approach).