EK SOP Effectivity Dates
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Middle East
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK SOP Effectivity Dates
All...
The recent changes to how we calculate Takeoff Performance came as a result of what occured in Melbourne in April. The changes were issued shortly afterwards, first via FCI then to FCOM Revision. For the Boeing fleet, the date on that page, NP.21.26, is December 15, 2008, well before the accident. (I don't know the date of change for Airbus fleet)
Why?.. Several TRE's/TRI's don't seem to know the answer.
During our wonderful little lectures earlier this year, TCAS, The Horse, and M 'n M made statements to the effect that The Ozz safety board thought our preflite SOP's with respect to performance were very strong. I wonder which ones were submitted for audit?
Jinglie'd
The recent changes to how we calculate Takeoff Performance came as a result of what occured in Melbourne in April. The changes were issued shortly afterwards, first via FCI then to FCOM Revision. For the Boeing fleet, the date on that page, NP.21.26, is December 15, 2008, well before the accident. (I don't know the date of change for Airbus fleet)
Why?.. Several TRE's/TRI's don't seem to know the answer.
During our wonderful little lectures earlier this year, TCAS, The Horse, and M 'n M made statements to the effect that The Ozz safety board thought our preflite SOP's with respect to performance were very strong. I wonder which ones were submitted for audit?
Jinglie'd
jinglied,
I noticed also in that revision that there are many other pages of that same date that replace TR's that were issued with a later date! Guessing that the revision 36 was planned for issue in Dec but held up. This may have been due to the issue of revision 35a. Tech pubs would have the reason if it's keeping you awake at night. (sure it isn't!!)
I noticed also in that revision that there are many other pages of that same date that replace TR's that were issued with a later date! Guessing that the revision 36 was planned for issue in Dec but held up. This may have been due to the issue of revision 35a. Tech pubs would have the reason if it's keeping you awake at night. (sure it isn't!!)
