Villas,uplinker,thanks for the lesson in nothing.Been on the A/C 20 yrs,as an instructor and CHK airmen.If your SOPs work that way for you,use them,the experience base in many of these airlines is low,therefore use the airbus training manual,other airlines have much deeper experience bases not requiring the mundane FMA call outs.It works either way!!

My point isn't about calling without checking. I'm simply questioning the efficacy of the callout.

I'm interested in this, because my company has flip flopped on calling out thr FMA. I do it whichever way the manual tells me to do it.

If anyone thinks there's anything unsafe about not calling out FMAs, don't travel on any of the hundreds of US registered Airbus planes, because cockpit callouts are the exception, not the norm.

CHK Airmen,great point.Always amazes me how many Asian airlines are hiring Western Trained pilots etc,and yet the transition from minimum call outs per their company SOPs is an easy transition to the Airbus standard SOP,with some study and practice.It clearly is not a big issue but a mindset.

My thoughts on 23 years of Bus flying: Yes, it happens where you make an FMA call based on what you expect as apposed to what you actually did. Calling open descent when you didnt actually pull the knob far enough for example may give evidence that calling the FMA serves no purpose.

But more often than not the reverse happens where the FMA call is exactly what picks up the oversight. Forgetting to arm the approach then going to read the FMA and finding it aint correct saves me more than the first scenario.

Its not going to catch your errors every time but it does help.

I have just joined my 7th airline where FMA calls are SOP however often not done and the number of errors is significantly higher than previous carriers.

Another call my new carrier does differently is the rad alt alive. Previous SOP for years was 2500 "rad alt alive" but my new carrier is 2500 "checked". Throw in that checked with several other "checked" calls down the approach and its easy to overlook the fact that the ground is coming into play. In this day and age of CFIT awareness I am surprised that there is such little attention paid to the rad alt????

If people in your company are in the habit of trusting that their FMA input is sufficient, then yes, I understand why the verbal call may make sense in that case.

On my first jet, you HAD to read the FMA- there was simply no way of getting around it. That's probably why I'm having such a hard time understanding why it's necessary to call it out. It's something that i just do reflexively. It feels a lot like having to call out "trim" every time I move the trim switch in a conventional airplane.

Never heard of an airline doing a call of "RA alive". Why not just enable the automatic 2500ft call?

On a tangent, did anyone here fly the A300/310? Did Airbus recommend FMA callouts on those airplanes as well?

On A310 yes. Automatic Radio altimeter call is also acknowledged like any other call. Why there are any calls at all? Why not every one does his job quietly? Because sometimes somebody doesn't and if the other guy also doesn't then something happens.

Something that most airbuses don't have, unlike most? other airliners we are comparing fma's with, are moving control columns or thrust levers.

If you turn the heading knob in a Boeing to the left, the control column will probably turn to the left. If not, you would have another look at the FMA. In The fbw airbuses, the only way to know if the airplane is going to to as you intended, is to read the FMA.

it might be that important that airbus decided that it actually should be read out loud in order to minimize the risk of anything being left out.

Check airman: yes, the FMA has to be read. But how do I know that my cadet in the right seat have read it unless I hear it. Let alone understand it?

vilas quote...

"On A310 yes. Automatic Radio altimeter call is also acknowledged like any other call. Why there are any calls at all? Why not every one does his job quietly? Because sometimes somebody doesn't and if the other guy also doesn't then something happens."

You've lost the plot and direction mate!!!No one at any time is saying call outs and procedure are not required.Depending on the phase of flight we must and have sufficient callous required to keep our attention to the job at hand,ridiculous not to.I certainly don't want to get into a pissing match as to what are the best and worst SOP call outs just because AIRBUS has said so,they wrote their own ops specs to satisfy what "they" regard as the "Standard".

So be it, their procedures (Airbus) are the baseline for an operator to start with,you either use it to the nth degree or you butcher it to suit ones operation.As I've said I've seen it (as many here have )done many ways,some have refined it,some have spit the dummy,and no doubt we have witnessed its failings and excellent sides.

I have witnessed two very new pilots in the same cockpit,and if it wasn't for all the call outs required they would have very quickly met their makers or a disciplinary board.Whereas I have checked two very experienced pilots in the same situation,who,because of their experience,scan,airplane knowledge ,use the minimum of call outs and do a fabulous job.One has to cater Airbuses SOPs to ones operation,and what fits,it is not a system of one fits all.

Vilas,in defence of your point,I would agree that the current situation of pending and actual pilot shortages,perceived or otherwise,the lack of rudder,stick skills,abnitio programmes and the lack of real flight time,the use of Aisbus SOPs for Airbus Aircraft is the best starting point for all.I have seen it,witnessed and flown it,it works

"Never heard of an airline doing a call of "RA alive". Why not just enable the automatic 2500ft call?"

The "Rad Alt Alive" call by the PNF is in response to the auto callout of "twenty five hundred". Standard AI SOP from FCOM.

CA is highly allergic to anything that is standard and especially from Airbus. Any call auto or by a crew member is to be acknowledged because it also shows that you are still part of the team and not passed out. I am surprised he still hasn't quoted the line "SOPs are for guidance of the wise and compliance by idiots" famous, though last words in many accidents.

Quite the contrary, actually. I do the callouts prescribed by my SOP. We're not required to make any RA callouts. The company has determined that the auto callout suffices.

This discussion about the differences in SOP is likely a cultural issue. For example, we tend to approach things like briefings, automation and FO limitations differently. I assume the FMA thing is just another difference. We operate the same airplanes differently, and with consistently safe results- which is what matters in the end.

If you don't call FMAs and ATC says "descend five thousand",
what do you say internally in the cockpit?

Set 5000, and read "5000 blue" off the PFD. Some guys will point to the altitude until the other pilot confirms the clearance.

Please accept my apologies,a typo on my part and directed at the wrong individual,

As part of your compensation package,I shall take hammer to left toe as a reminder not to do that again,and brews are on me if our paths ever cross....my apologies ...

Accepted and my post deleted.

Hello guys!
I've question by SOP->STANDARD CALLOUTS (PRO-NOR-SOP-90 P 1/)
->ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF.
Is it when PF give the command to PM for change a guidance mode or actions are performed by self?
For ex.:
I'm PF, AP - ON. To change FL340 to FL320 I should announce: FL320 SET, FL320 PULL, after that FMA THR IDLE-OP DES or I should read and announce only FMA FL320 BLUE, THR IDLE-OP DES

You will have to specify which guys and whose SOP otherwise an unnecessary lengthy argument will ensue.

If AP is on then our SOP allows PF to set FL320 and pull/push on FCU, then announce "thrust idle, (open) descent, alt blue FL320", PM response "checked, FL320"

If AP is off then PF order PM to set FCU "ALT FL320 pull/push", then PF announce the FMA mode as per above

I mean FCOM Airbus
Are actions announced on FCU by PF: FL320 SET, PULL, SPEED PULL, SELECT, etc.?
Or will be correct only announce FMA on PFD?

http://savepic.net/8492230m.jpg
http://savepic.net/8481990m.jpg

Hi, the original AB logic is that with AP on:

The PF will perform all necessary selections, and after the modes become active, read out loud the FMA.

So the answer to your question is: NO (as per Airbus).

The callout "SET" is in use whenever PF will ask the other guy to do something for him/her.

Šťastlivo, FD.

EDITED: the clue you may have missed is in the headline of the page provided: actions COMMANDED by PF. In this sense, COMMANDED means whenever the PF requests somebody else to perform a selection / adjustment / action.

StrIA
The basic principle of handling FCU is to look at FCU to select the appropriate knob but check the value on PFD with or without guidance mode change.The title ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF is incomplete because it doesn't mention that PF commands actions when he is manually flying. With AP on PF takes the actions himself.

vilas
Did I rightly know? That if PF is want to change FL320 to FL340, he announces own's actions: FL340-"SET", "PULL", afterthat reads FMA: FL340 BLUE, THR IDLE, OP CLB.
Or so PF doesn't announce the actions on FCU, only FMA
It's very important for me.
Thank's

Quote from vilas:
"The basic principle of handling FCU is to look at FCU to select the appropriate knob but check the value on PFD with or without guidance mode change.The title ACTIONS COMMANDED BY PF is incomplete because it doesn't mention that PF commands actions when he is manually flying. With AP on PF takes the actions himself."

YES! Spot-on.

And if you current Airbus-flyers will permit me to intrude briefly into your conversation, the other VITAL discipline is that the person who has made the mode-change on the FCU (as described by vilas) does NOT call the result on the FMAs. If the call is to have any monitoring value it MUST be made by the OTHER pilot.

If - due to inattention, high workload or R/T operations - the other pilot fails to call an FMA change that is required by the airline's FCOM, the pilot who has made the FCU selection can choose a suitable moment to ask him/her to "Check FMAs?" In a continuing high workload situation, of course, that may not be practicable. In that case, wait for the next required FMA call. If that is not forthcoming, it may indicate that the other pilot is overloaded (or possibly incapacitated).

Actions Commanded by the PF. Translation from french "Actions commandées par le PF" where commandées is a synonym of "ordered"

Or just have the discipline to, as PF, only call something that is already on the FMA and as PNF, not call "checked" without looking at the FMA first... Pretty simple really.

Quote from Capn Bloggs:
"Or just have the discipline to, as PF, only call something that is already on the FMA and as PNF, not call "checked" without looking at the FMA first... Pretty simple really."

With respect, although you are right to emphasise that it's vital for a call not to be made until the new FMA combination has been verified, there's rather more to it than that. Let me explain.

Firstly, as others have pointed out, the PF only makes the FCU selections when the AP is engaged. If it isn't, the PF theoretically orders what he/she wants and the FCU selection is made by the PNF (PM). That's why I avoided mention of PF and PNF in my post.

Secondly, it's unnecessary and counter-productive for both pilots to speak following the FMA change. The only one who should announce the FMA change is the pilot who did NOT make the selection.

The pilot who made the selection carefully verifies that the FMA change on his/her PFD is in accordance with what (s)he wants, but there is no need for him/her to make a call. There are two reasons for this:
(1) otherwise it discourages the other pilot from taking time to check it properly on his/her PFD;
(2) both pilots calling adds to the plethora of noise in the cockpit (and the brief expression "checked" is so ambiguous as to be of little value).

Remember, as you imply in your post, the pilot who has made the selection is always, by definition, content that (s)he has got it right. Putting the responsibility on the other pilot to make the call:
(a) gives an independent verification (a second opinion);
(b) forces the other pilot to remain "in the loop".

Haha!

My opinion regarding FMA and cockpit monitoring..

1) Reading FMA has obvious advantages, well analyzed above.
2) Reading and generally challenging the SOP callouts force you to stay in the loop. Autocallouts simply isn't the solution. One day remove them and we all know the results. E.g remove ALT Alert together with ALT ACQ in the boeings (or whatever aircraft with altitude alert), distract them and here you are with a nice flown level bust. Called Primary-Backup inversion. Saying thousand to go is there to enchance your and your colleague's SA. Not for confirming that the altitude alert sounded. This was actually done in a Boeing simulator in a research.
3) SOPs are designed for a standard pilot. This ranges from the younger one to the older, with excellent, average, unsatisfactory performance (at times for gods sake) or whatever and with different personalities, interests. Simply saying that "two good pilots fly nice paired together" is not the everyday norm. One can stay in the loop easily, others can't. This is reality...SOP's are for everyone.

I dont say that calling anything loudly is the best practice, however, for sure, it is safe. If it's too loud I don't know. Checklists and procedures today are so summarized that I don't even find it boring to do so.

It is a personal opinion only.

StrIA: as per Airbus doctrine:

PF with autopilot engaged
- will make all selections silently
- afterwards read out loud the FMA
- PNF then confirms from his side with a verbal confirmation (check)

PF with autopilot NOT engaged
- will request the other pilot to do the required actions using standard callout "SET .. " / "... MANAGE" / " ... PULL"
- the other pilot will make all selections silently and then read out loud his respective FMA-
- PF then confirms from his own side with a verbal confirmation (check).

Chris Scott: I wonder when they did change? The above is valid since 2004 min.

Hi FlightDetent,

Thanks for the heads-up on the manufacturer's SOP. The philosophy detailed in my two posts above predates 2004, and was not from Airbus's FCOM. In the airline that employed me it was SOP from 1988 until 2002, at least, and AFAIK it still applies there. I'm not familiar with other airlines' current SOPs, but I would be surprised if all of them conform precisely to the manufacturer's FCOM.

The task-allocation of FMA calls I described evolved in the months following the introduction into service of the A320 during 1988. We were a launch customer and had experience of previous types with FMAs, such as the DC-10 and A310. On the DC-10 they were comparatively few, and IIRC both pilots would call all FMA changes. That was tolerable but, when we had acquired a couple of A310s in 1984, the type's greater number and complexity of FMAs led to a lot of criticism of the resulting plethora of calls.

Many of us initial pilots on the A320, including the chief training captain, had earlier been on the A310 and had done our type conversions at Toulouse on both types. Airbus's own SOPs for the A320 were not fully defined, however, and the type had/has even more FMAs than the A310. (A handful more were added as improvements were made in the first few years.) So it was up to our fleet management to define our policy for FMA calls.

The two issues for consideration were which FMA changes needed to be called and who to make the calls. The former were pruned to a fairly modest list; the latter designed to be in accordance with good CRM. Clearly the latter must ensure that the two pilots share responsibility for any current or projected changes in the flight-path commanded via the AFS.

The FCU is complex and easily mishandled but, as previously noted, the pilot who has manipulated it will by definition think (s)he has got what (s)he wanted. One of the easiest mistakes, IIRC, is to call the armed altitude just before removing finger and thumb from the ALT selector knob. During removal, as you know, it's possible to shift the knob unintentionally - particularly in turbulence. So, in general, it's vital not to spoon-feed the other pilot into a false sense of security. In both high and low workload situations, it's all too tempting for him/her to call "checked!" without really doing so. (S)he must be made to look AND think. Giving him/her the task of making the call should achieve that.

The SOP I have described in these three posts served us well during the 14 years I spent on my airline's A320 fleet. If in the last 28 years Airbus may not have fully addressed the CRM aspects of FMA calls, I would admit to being disappointed. Routine airline operations with qualified line-pilots are, of course, different from an Airbus line-training environment where, typically, the Airbus training captain would be teaching a pilot or embryonic crew from scratch.

Chris

Either "here goes nothing" or "time to land this pig, I guess..."

I didn't understand what is the confusion about FD's original post "What do you say after arming the approach mode and engaging the other AP? It has always been GLIDE SLOPE BLUE, LOC BLUE, CAT3 DUAL, AP 1+2

That post was done 5 months ago as a gentle push to Speedwinner in the right direction. The smiley face is the hint. Judging by his response then, it worked.

Nothing to see here, move along ...

I simply find it amazing that the easier thing to do is usually the hardest. Mate, with all due to respect to everyone: you're flying a 77 ton aircraft that can carry 170+ people at 700+ kmh and you're one of only two guys preventing the thing from making a hole in the ground. Every action done or not can lead to something unexpected and potentially dangerous, even fatal and you know you can make a mistake so easily. Are you telling me that knowing all this, you can't spare a second or two to confirm that you (or your colleague) are not heading to a potentially hazardous situation and call "checked" by mere reflex? Someone said it before, it's called being professional about your job. Simple as that.

We do call out the FMA (Latin American operator), though I'm fairly recent to the type, I came from a turbo prop aircraft on which we also called the FMA. It may be a bit loud and noisy at times, but there comes this flight at night in bad weather where it becomes important to read and call the FMA

correct way for FCU handling
 

Hello team,

I have a query regarding the FCU Handling.

If The instruction given by ATC is to turn left heading180deg and reduce speed to 180kts. As PF What is the correct way for handling FCU apart from The point given above:
a) first turn heading/speed knob to 180Deg and then pull or,
b) first pull the respective knob and then set.

Thank you.

a. Correct either or. Make sure does not turn wrong way.
b. Reducing speed is dependent on GW and selected/managed speed and S speed and F speed. To many variations.

I prefer the PF to call FMA's as it implies they are not incapacitated. One particular First officer in mind.

a) Possible for the aircraft to turn in the wrong direction if the new heading selected is more than 180 degrees away.
b) Better way as you can see on the FMA that you have pulled the correct knob (avoids speed / heading mix up) and will always generate the turn in the correct sense.

So correct way would be pull and then turn the knobs?
 

So correct way would be pull and then turn the knob? And not vice versa

Seeking some feedback on other Airbus operators around the globe to FMA callouts regarding Alt/FL.

If below TA and cleared to climb FL370, PF sets 37000 in the FCU window however the PFD still shows 37000 in blue. Only once, above TA and altimeters switch to STD will it change to FL370.

My question is do you guys call 37000 blue or FL370 blue? As per FCOM and our OMB requirements we call what is displayed from the PFD.

We set standard as soon as cleared to a FL, and QNH as soon as cleared to an altitude.