WGU, I may not have made myself clear. It's not one word instead of another which irritates, it's the company insistence on adherence to SOPs while allowing a regular divergence from them in practice. Do we need to do everything to the letter or not? Why chip people in ALCs but no one takes any notice when on the line? Anyone who holds up the standard is "uptight", etc. You've quoted the OM-A but who decides which SOP in the FCOM or OM-A is okay to ignore or do incorrectly and which isn't?

On that topic, it says in your quote "Consider". My beef is, as I said, that in broad daylight when lights are not blinding and when no one else is around anyway, guys switch them off for no particular reason because they seem to think this is the SOP. If its done for a reason, then fine, but sometimes I ask (nicely) and there is no reason. This is not something that keeps me up at night, just an example.

"Live and let live" - does that mean we can ignore ANY of the SOPs? if so, please let the checkers know so they back off! :ok:

The reason for turning off taxi lights is to indicate that you are not moving. Back on indicates you will/may be moving. Standard in many parts of the world and within many airlines.

What's the deal with the fuel synoptic? Why do so many people get bent out of shape if you don't watch it like a hawk when switching off the centre tank pumps? I don't see any requirement from Boeing to do so.

Yes, another good example of what I'm talking about, Al. No idea where it came from but it seems to be an "SOP".

Trader you're way off track. Try reading the above posts again including the OMA quote.

I think Trader is spot on.
Do it, if you think it makes sense. If it doesn't, don't. For me it makes sense even in daylight for said reasons. Same as offsetting from center line on T/O roll (not for you 380 guys ;) ). You don't have to, but you should consider.

You're right, no procedure, no requirement. But is it wrong to watch the switch?

It's no requirement to do a greaser... most of us still try to do a smooth landing...

With what I do agree is... Those things may be worth a discussion but should never reflect in the grading.

Agreed. I don't care if people want to do it. What I don't like is being shot a glance like I'm mentally backward for not doing it. As far as I am concerned, the important part of the procedure is going on on the overhead panel, the actual switch positions and indications. The synoptic, interesting as it may be, isn't telling you much of use, unless you can put me right on that? Some people have tried to tell me that you could have a flameout because you have to make sure the wing tank pumps are running before switching the second pump off... :ugh:

:D :D Back to tech groundschool with them.. ;)

"Now this isn't NOP bit it is a good TECHNIQUE.."

The above is a good example of how I was helped on the line recently. Captain just said to me whenever you are messing about with the fuel panel always make sure you turn something on before you turn something off. Simple, helpful advice and delivered in a very nice way. I know I wont ever forget that.

outatowner
 

My thoughts exactly mate

Or chipsy greasy mike

Back to the standard deviation - many use a different call out or a different technique because they truly believe is system enhancement

Because airbus and Boeing spent so much time building aircraft that they missed on refining their callous .. No matter - the boys had that covered

And please stop switching off the inner radar knob behind the ND's or the alts knob on ATC

Basic SOPs and - I don't blame any airline that's becomes frustrated after sometime

Emirates CCQ onto the Boeing-
:O

I can't believe you are not incorporating all useful techniques from the Dawn of flying. Pre-EFIS and pre-jet are the most important ideas to fit in when you get a chance.

When a knowledgeable gentleman was spouting his up to date techniques at me I responded with "Needle left, ball right, numbers decreasing, horizons steady!" This was met with "why would you do that; it's not relevant" to which I replied "exactly!":ugh:

Airmanship and common sense seems to be missing completely from this discussion.

Seriously?

What airline are we talking about here anyway......?

...the usual one...

Figured as much but just wanted to beat Mana to the obvious statement

No need to worry about me, the ME forum is a nice and tidy place these days.
Now, if I only could get my original handle back, I would be really happy.
It's not fair to lock me out because I said I was sorry for being an @rse, but I promise I will never do it again.
Please?:ouch:

Outatowner and Neektu

Like your style. I could be described as one of the more senior trainers and have long been trying to gently polish exactly some if the rough edges (need to retain the big picture though)you describe in routine checks/training...you are going to be mistaken for me by anyone who knows me and quietly been asked to justify all thei extra little technique foibles!

I also have a particular beef about greasy fingers on the screen and recently left a TRI I was checking in no doubt about my thoughts on the matter!

Trimotor

Pardon my ignorance...but which manual and section did you reference in your debrief on screen policy to said TRI?

Fascinated.

f.

I reckon it was the one that said....this is not and Ipad, so no matter how much you tap the screen it ain't gonna move! Or the one with the white out.....yada yada... Oh right! It's not written down, so it must not be true!:confused:

Nothing worse than when the sun shines on the screen and all you see are some previous numptys prints all over it.... Why I ask...why!:ugh: