Aviate, SOP, Navigate, Communicate
Thread Starter
Aviate, SOP, Navigate, Communicate
Rostov, Singapore and Dubai (along with many less recent examples) lead me to propose an amendment to our major priority list.
It appears to me that SA and flying the airplane have become eroded by SOP doctrines such that attention to aircraft control in the x y z axes has become compromised at critical times.
SIA deserves inclusion because it seems (pending AAIB report) attention to checklists overtook cockpit attention to a major fire threat – that most thankfully remained under control.
Normally Tech Log would be the proper forum, but the recent occurrences and active discussion of them lead me to start this discussion in R&N
It appears to me that SA and flying the airplane have become eroded by SOP doctrines such that attention to aircraft control in the x y z axes has become compromised at critical times.
SIA deserves inclusion because it seems (pending AAIB report) attention to checklists overtook cockpit attention to a major fire threat – that most thankfully remained under control.
Normally Tech Log would be the proper forum, but the recent occurrences and active discussion of them lead me to start this discussion in R&N
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: _
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't that also where the guys on Swissair 111 came unstuck faced with a serious airborne fire? A desire to get checklists completed at the expense of sticking the jet on the ground at the earliest opportunity - and at least one of the crew was a fairly senior instructor at the airline too. RIP, there but for the grace of ... etc.
Don't let them bully you into it.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. If the SOP isn't written to support that priority, then the SOP is part of the problem.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. If the SOP isn't written to support that priority, then the SOP is part of the problem.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The navigational element has always been continue, divert or return. To my knowledge, no checklist has ever said "Do not land now". The problem that pilots face is which bits of the checklist do we ignore due to lack of time. Too many want to achieve perfect checklist execution. My preference is to land and complain about the rubbish in the checklists and the fact it could not be completed before landing.
PM
PM
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: BRS/GVA
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not forget that Capt Sullenberger forgot some checklist items when landing (Outflow valves). Personally i would rather fly with him than a SOP obsessed captain who continues to circle in a burning plane.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats that saying 'guidance of wise men, blind obedience of fools'?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know our completely unrelated type had a new set of memory items in response to Sully's ditching. We now have a "Loss of all engines at low altitude" set of memory items that was in direct response to the A320 ditching.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nirvana..HAHA..just kidding but,if you can tell me where it is!
Posts: 350
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditching in a Boeing..777/787..OPO U30..FA...that's it,not difficult to learn!
Having seen those flocks of geese around Dubai,in the evenings....Off 30L,not much time to go for the checklist..however,with the island building going on,it may be difficult to find the water..!!!!!
Having seen those flocks of geese around Dubai,in the evenings....Off 30L,not much time to go for the checklist..however,with the island building going on,it may be difficult to find the water..!!!!!
Last edited by Yaw String; 18th Aug 2016 at 16:17.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Netherlands
Age: 71
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment about the "forgotten" outflow valves is outrageous, I hope commenters will never have to face a comparable situation.
From the failure they initially decided to return, that became impossible so they changed that into Teterboro, and when that did not proved feasible, it became the Hudson. Writing these sentences took me longer.
Three major decisions in a short time span under super high stress.
That crew got everyone safe down in an extreme emergency in a scenario even the meanest sim instructor would never have dared to present to a crew.
They did not "forget" is, they skipped it because they concentrated on the main elements of the emergency. And that saved the day for all, the fact that it sunk a bit faster afterwards is comment from armchair and hobbysim pilots.
I had a few moments in my career during which I probably would not have been able to recall my first name.
From the failure they initially decided to return, that became impossible so they changed that into Teterboro, and when that did not proved feasible, it became the Hudson. Writing these sentences took me longer.
Three major decisions in a short time span under super high stress.
That crew got everyone safe down in an extreme emergency in a scenario even the meanest sim instructor would never have dared to present to a crew.
They did not "forget" is, they skipped it because they concentrated on the main elements of the emergency. And that saved the day for all, the fact that it sunk a bit faster afterwards is comment from armchair and hobbysim pilots.
I had a few moments in my career during which I probably would not have been able to recall my first name.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment about the "forgotten" outflow valves is outrageous, I hope commenters will never have to face a comparable situation.
From the failure they initially decided to return, that became impossible so they changed that into Teterboro, and when that did not proved feasible, it became the Hudson. Writing these sentences took me longer.
Three major decisions in a short time span under super high stress.
That crew got everyone safe down in an extreme emergency in a scenario even the meanest sim instructor would never have dared to present to a crew.
They did not "forget" is, they skipped it because they concentrated on the main elements of the emergency. And that saved the day for all, the fact that it sunk a bit faster afterwards is comment from armchair and hobbysim pilots.
I had a few moments in my career during which I probably would not have been able to recall my first name.
From the failure they initially decided to return, that became impossible so they changed that into Teterboro, and when that did not proved feasible, it became the Hudson. Writing these sentences took me longer.
Three major decisions in a short time span under super high stress.
That crew got everyone safe down in an extreme emergency in a scenario even the meanest sim instructor would never have dared to present to a crew.
They did not "forget" is, they skipped it because they concentrated on the main elements of the emergency. And that saved the day for all, the fact that it sunk a bit faster afterwards is comment from armchair and hobbysim pilots.
I had a few moments in my career during which I probably would not have been able to recall my first name.
Sounds familiar from another thread here - it was obviously a 'no brainer'.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I notice in various syllabus of type rating and recurrent training in jet transport simulators, that loss of thrust on both engines is included. It is a QRH item. The checklist always assumes one engine comes good and its a happy ending. Box ticked.. Next sequence please.
But what if either engine cannot be restarted? It has happened. Then you have no choice but (force) land at the nearest airport/flat ground/ocean. That being so, how come airline pilot simulator training does not include a practice dead stick landing (say) from 25,000 feet? After all it has happened over the years. We spend endless simulator hours on LOFT exercises as well as probably 90 percent of simulator training being on automatics. Repeat ad nauseum each cyclic training.
In fact, unless you have experienced this event (dead stick forced landing) in a simulator several times (there is considerable judgement skill required) the chances of crashing are high. Indeed very high. Granted, simulator time is not a revenue generator. But what training is allotted needs to be prioritised. Automation practice is fine. But a pilot gets that in line flying for 95 percent of his career. The weak link in the chain is invariably the crew as we have seen countless times. No pilot can reasonably claim he can successfully force land a jet or turboprop airliner at first go. It requires manual flying at its most skilful. Yet no priority is allotted for crews to practice a dead stick approach and landing from altitude.
But what if either engine cannot be restarted? It has happened. Then you have no choice but (force) land at the nearest airport/flat ground/ocean. That being so, how come airline pilot simulator training does not include a practice dead stick landing (say) from 25,000 feet? After all it has happened over the years. We spend endless simulator hours on LOFT exercises as well as probably 90 percent of simulator training being on automatics. Repeat ad nauseum each cyclic training.
In fact, unless you have experienced this event (dead stick forced landing) in a simulator several times (there is considerable judgement skill required) the chances of crashing are high. Indeed very high. Granted, simulator time is not a revenue generator. But what training is allotted needs to be prioritised. Automation practice is fine. But a pilot gets that in line flying for 95 percent of his career. The weak link in the chain is invariably the crew as we have seen countless times. No pilot can reasonably claim he can successfully force land a jet or turboprop airliner at first go. It requires manual flying at its most skilful. Yet no priority is allotted for crews to practice a dead stick approach and landing from altitude.
Last edited by sheppey; 17th Aug 2016 at 15:25.
I used to do that regularly in the sim whenever we had 10 minutes or so to spare at the end of a slot. 10,000 feet or so above somewhere like Geneva; good weather, engines (four) not recoverable.
Most crews made a reasonable job of it and got down to the extent that they would have walked away from the aeroplane.
The biggest surprise was how late they had to leave lowering the gear (bearing in mind emergency lowering). I well remember one captain who was continually pestered by the F/O to lower the gear, got it just right and obtained three greens about 10 seconds before touch down! They made a perfect flapless landing.
Most crews made a reasonable job of it and got down to the extent that they would have walked away from the aeroplane.
The biggest surprise was how late they had to leave lowering the gear (bearing in mind emergency lowering). I well remember one captain who was continually pestered by the F/O to lower the gear, got it just right and obtained three greens about 10 seconds before touch down! They made a perfect flapless landing.