What Does "Challenge and Response" Mean
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Does "Challenge and Response" Mean
As a new FO, I've discovered that my understanding of "challenge and response" is different from reality and I'd welcome advice on how it should be done. It was a systematic, item by item "challenge" and "response" in TR training, but in reality, the Captains flick through everything in double quick time and say "done, done, done" or ask me to start half way down the list. Leaves me feeling rushed and unsure that I've cross-checked everything properly (and a bit useless). Obviously no newbie is particularly quick but practice makes perfect. Just wondering if I've misunderstood the whole concept?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope. it's your captain's who are missing the boat.
Challenge and response in it's most basic form is one person presenting an item, question, query, requirement, etc, and the other person providing an answer that describes the condition or status of the item.
Any checklist exists to facilitate an orderly sequence of events. The checklist isnt' sacred, nor does the checklist actually ensure that the items on it are noted or done.
Discipline in properly performing the checklist, and doing so consistantly, is what makes the checklist work (as it won't read or perform itself). Checklist discipline.
Sounds like your captains don't have it.
Challenge and response in it's most basic form is one person presenting an item, question, query, requirement, etc, and the other person providing an answer that describes the condition or status of the item.
Any checklist exists to facilitate an orderly sequence of events. The checklist isnt' sacred, nor does the checklist actually ensure that the items on it are noted or done.
Discipline in properly performing the checklist, and doing so consistantly, is what makes the checklist work (as it won't read or perform itself). Checklist discipline.
Sounds like your captains don't have it.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Challenge and response in it's most basic form is one person presenting an item, question, query, requirement, etc, and the other person providing an answer that describes the condition or status of the item
That therefore completely negates the idea of one man challenges and waits for the other pilot to respond with hopefully the right answer.
The Boeing 737 after take off checklist has always been thus. And I might add, is why the after take off pressurisation check has been missed on countless occasions and which resulted in the Helio Airways crash where the 737 took off and remained unpressurised because neither pilot used the checklist properly. In the simulator I have observed hundreds of occasions over many years, the first officer challenging himself and answering his own challenge without the captain ever double checking the correct actions were indeed completed by the first officer.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Challenge/Response or Challenge/Response/Response is a read and do checklist. Things happen in a specific order and one at a time. These checklists are used most often for non-normal or emergency checklist.
Engine number 1 thrust lever-RETARD
RETARD
Engine number 1 start lever- OFF
OFF
etc.
The Do/Verify checklist allows flows and you proceed at your own pace. The checklist then is a checklist to check that all tasks on the list have been accomplished. This type checklist is most often used for normal checklists.
And "done, done, done' is no response as it does not identify what has been done. Switch positions should be called (off, on, etc). The person running the checklist then verifies that not only the response is correct but also the switch is in the actual position. More than a few airplanes have left the gate without sufficient fuel in spite of the checklist response on the CVR stating required fuel on board.
Your Captain is defeating the checklist and its purpose.
Engine number 1 thrust lever-RETARD
RETARD
Engine number 1 start lever- OFF
OFF
etc.
The Do/Verify checklist allows flows and you proceed at your own pace. The checklist then is a checklist to check that all tasks on the list have been accomplished. This type checklist is most often used for normal checklists.
And "done, done, done' is no response as it does not identify what has been done. Switch positions should be called (off, on, etc). The person running the checklist then verifies that not only the response is correct but also the switch is in the actual position. More than a few airplanes have left the gate without sufficient fuel in spite of the checklist response on the CVR stating required fuel on board.
Your Captain is defeating the checklist and its purpose.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that policy changed with for instance some Boeing checklists where the first officer (be he PNF or PM depending on your updates) not only reads the checklist that covers the items he has personally switch-flicked or is "responsible" for as in area of responsibility- but then he answers himself as well. In other words he challenges himself and answers his own "challenge".
Challenge and Response:
Nacelle Anti-Ice....................ON
Other forms exist, however, which are merely a change in format:
Nacelle Anti Ice ON.
Either way it can be read by one pilot, or by two pilots. It's a format of presentation. While an entire checklist may be formatted in a challenge and response format, some checklists or parts of checklists may by neessity, policy, practice, or tradition be done silently, or by one individual. The flight engineer may silently perform the after takeoff checklist, for example, reading both the challenge and response...at a time when pilot workload is high.
This does not compromise safety. Done properly it may enhance it.
Challenge and response does not necessarily mean a challenge; it's presentation of one side of the checklist...and it need not be given by two different individuals. How do you think single pilot operations are conducted?
Personally when flying single pilot I read both challenge and response out loud, confirming the control or switch position after already having executed my flows.
Challenge/Response or Challenge/Response/Response is a read and do checklist.
In abnormal or emergency situations, some stabilizing items may be accomplished by rote memory as a flow, then the entire checklist read. Each item is verified,and items that have already been done are verified in the same manner that is done in any normal checklist. Subsequent items, cleanup items, are then executed one at a time.
The checklist concept is just that; a checklist. Not a do-list, with some exceptions.
To add my little two cents worth---
First I'd like to revisit the CRM aspect with regards to checklist execution---perhaps [although under most circumstances the captain's checklist management should be as specified under company sops and in line with training received---however poorly designed checklist procedure may interfere with the real world execution of the flight including interruption in flows due to extraneous demands such as dispatch or delays in completing an item---
in short many sop breakdown due to poorly conceived checklist procedures---
Most superficially stated--
'read and do items' are generally preferred for before engine start/taxi/shutdown flows--- where the most critical aircraft systems are configured ..
and
do and verify for time sensitive items under high workload and in the modern flight deck I see no reason for EICAS items to be printed or done as as traditional challenge and response as these can be expeditiously handled by one pilot
Furthermore, in order to reduce checklist lengths especially in a two crew environment ---I believe that item that are not related aircraft/ systems configuration [so the may be rushed or they are vulnerable to delay or interruption]--but nevertheless critical should be subdivided into 'procedures' i.e W&B/performance/fuel/wx/ company com/ACARS---so that the fluidity and common sense requirements of such items will not impinge upon the timely and economical completion of a flight, as well as provided an opportunity to cross-crew cross check other critical items
--and in the captain's defense he may have had to use his past operational experience in order to perform sensibly with poorly conceived procedures.
Excellent thread Ladies and Gentlemen
PA
First I'd like to revisit the CRM aspect with regards to checklist execution---perhaps [although under most circumstances the captain's checklist management should be as specified under company sops and in line with training received---however poorly designed checklist procedure may interfere with the real world execution of the flight including interruption in flows due to extraneous demands such as dispatch or delays in completing an item---
in short many sop breakdown due to poorly conceived checklist procedures---
Most superficially stated--
'read and do items' are generally preferred for before engine start/taxi/shutdown flows--- where the most critical aircraft systems are configured ..
and
do and verify for time sensitive items under high workload and in the modern flight deck I see no reason for EICAS items to be printed or done as as traditional challenge and response as these can be expeditiously handled by one pilot
Furthermore, in order to reduce checklist lengths especially in a two crew environment ---I believe that item that are not related aircraft/ systems configuration [so the may be rushed or they are vulnerable to delay or interruption]--but nevertheless critical should be subdivided into 'procedures' i.e W&B/performance/fuel/wx/ company com/ACARS---so that the fluidity and common sense requirements of such items will not impinge upon the timely and economical completion of a flight, as well as provided an opportunity to cross-crew cross check other critical items
--and in the captain's defense he may have had to use his past operational experience in order to perform sensibly with poorly conceived procedures.
Excellent thread Ladies and Gentlemen
PA
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 23rd May 2008 at 00:12. Reason: to add Ladies---to L&G
Moderator
without the captain ever double checking
what the detail of SOP may be ... surely doesn't preclude the sensible captain (and FO) checking on what the other is doing as part of normal scanning practices ?
Both are going to die if it all turns pear-shaped .. each can help the other do a better job in the longer term for the collective benefit ...
what the detail of SOP may be ... surely doesn't preclude the sensible captain (and FO) checking on what the other is doing as part of normal scanning practices ?
Both are going to die if it all turns pear-shaped .. each can help the other do a better job in the longer term for the collective benefit ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS3Guppy said:
Actually there are different kinds of checklists and many airlines and operators specify which are actually 'read and do' and which ones are 'do-verify'.
Good checklists are exquisite tools and are unfortunately more rare than badly designed checklists which frustrate the user and complicate the task. A checklist that is too long will be abbreviated by the crew after using it a while and one that is too short will not check or assign all tasks properly.
Checklists that use 'as required' or such are meaningless in that they do not address the required action, ie, system ON or OFF or STBY, etc. Thus one can say, "As required" and have the switch in the incorrect position such as 'engine anti-ice' ... 'as required' and it be off when you are departing runway 36 at DCA in a snow storm.
Also, numerous operators now use PF and PM for "pilot flying" and "pilot monitor' which some will say is mere semantics. Not so. PM describes what the pilot is charged with, not what s/he is not doing.
Finally, many operators are now going with the Capt running the emergency or non-normal checklist after the initial steps have been completed such as engine failure after V1 with the Capt flying. Crew goes through initial steps, cleans up and then Capt engages autopilot, gives a/c to F/O and defines situation. "We've lost number 2.. we're at 3000ft and 220kts clean. Let's stay clean and at this altitude.. advise ATC of our situation. Let's proceed to the outer marker and hold until we complete all checklists. You have the aircraft."
The Capt then reads aloud the steps while the F/O programs the autopilot and talks to ATC. This way the Capt is free to make decisions and at each critical juncture, advise the F/O of the decision. This works much better than the F/O reading the checklist and asking the Capt what s/he wants to do, each time interrupting the workload of the Capt flying the airplane.
Once the checklist is complete and the crew ready for the approach, the Capt can then re-assume control of the airplane or let the F/O shoot the approach.
Also, many airlines and operators are doing away with memory items after finding that the critical items, which should be accomplished in a specific order, are subject to memory failures in high stress events. It is better to rely on a checklist to get all steps right and in order than to rely on memory of a procedure that has not been done except in the last sim check.
The checklist concept is just that; a checklist. Not a do-list, with some exceptions.
Good checklists are exquisite tools and are unfortunately more rare than badly designed checklists which frustrate the user and complicate the task. A checklist that is too long will be abbreviated by the crew after using it a while and one that is too short will not check or assign all tasks properly.
Checklists that use 'as required' or such are meaningless in that they do not address the required action, ie, system ON or OFF or STBY, etc. Thus one can say, "As required" and have the switch in the incorrect position such as 'engine anti-ice' ... 'as required' and it be off when you are departing runway 36 at DCA in a snow storm.
Also, numerous operators now use PF and PM for "pilot flying" and "pilot monitor' which some will say is mere semantics. Not so. PM describes what the pilot is charged with, not what s/he is not doing.
Finally, many operators are now going with the Capt running the emergency or non-normal checklist after the initial steps have been completed such as engine failure after V1 with the Capt flying. Crew goes through initial steps, cleans up and then Capt engages autopilot, gives a/c to F/O and defines situation. "We've lost number 2.. we're at 3000ft and 220kts clean. Let's stay clean and at this altitude.. advise ATC of our situation. Let's proceed to the outer marker and hold until we complete all checklists. You have the aircraft."
The Capt then reads aloud the steps while the F/O programs the autopilot and talks to ATC. This way the Capt is free to make decisions and at each critical juncture, advise the F/O of the decision. This works much better than the F/O reading the checklist and asking the Capt what s/he wants to do, each time interrupting the workload of the Capt flying the airplane.
Once the checklist is complete and the crew ready for the approach, the Capt can then re-assume control of the airplane or let the F/O shoot the approach.
Also, many airlines and operators are doing away with memory items after finding that the critical items, which should be accomplished in a specific order, are subject to memory failures in high stress events. It is better to rely on a checklist to get all steps right and in order than to rely on memory of a procedure that has not been done except in the last sim check.
many airlines and operators are doing away with memory items after finding that the critical items, which should be accomplished in a specific order, are subject to memory failures in high stress events. It is better to rely on a checklist to get all steps right and in order than to rely on memory of a procedure that has not been done except in the last sim check.
EFATO
ED [O2 first-always!!!]
FIRE WARNING--all [411A and Old Smokey have both reccomended this one!]
smoke abatement
Windshear
GA and initial approach climb
every other non-normal /emergency can be run through at a more relaxed and thoughtful pace
one second point is that--- before taxi [brakes--flight controls --free and correct]---before takeoff [lights, camera action and BelArg's 3 killers] and pre-ldg check GUMP
should be really simple and not susceptible to a single point of failure---but decent and climb should be do and verify and should be correalated with other procedure and or operational cues such after reaching acceleration altitude or reaching 10000' [ this may prevent critcal items from being missed such as someone already mentioned---the B-737 cabin pressurization procedure---but SOPs/procedures and checklist never replace airmanship and discipline!
PA
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a systematic, item by item "challenge" and "response" in TR training,
That is what you ought to be doing on line ops too.
but in reality, the Captains flick through everything in double quick time and say "done, done, done"
or ask me to start half way down the list.
Your operations manual ought to have a section on checklist procedure and use of checklists. Look it up and refresh your memory. Your best defence as a newbie FO is not "I dont feel comfortable", it is "I dont understand. FCOM 10.34.1 says 'do it like this!' Shall I start again?"
Have a chat with your training captain, fleet manager and/or chief pilot about your concerns. If it is a decent operation they will be most interested and should be very supportive.
"Challenge and Response" seems to be confused in some posters minds with "Read and Do" vs "Do then Verify" (aka "Scans" or "area of responsibility')
It is possible to use a Challenge and Response checklist in both cases. That is, an After Takeoff checklist read by the PNF to 'himself' to confirm after takeoff 'scan' actions, and a Engine Fire or Severe Damage checklist 'read and do' can both be done as Challenge and Response.
The Pilot reading the checklist calls the Challenge, and the pilot responsible for the switch position or system setting either makes the change, or looks at the the control/system/switch and calls out the setting in Response. The pilot reading the Challenge may be challenging himself.
It is a question of flight discipline. If you apply the proper discipline, it works. You don't just read it out like a 10 yo reciting prayers at a church service his mother made him attend. We are supposed to be the leaders, the professionals, the 'believers' if you like. We read the words, we look for the truth, and we are ready to correct our errors. We aim to produce an error free, smoothly executed flight, but we know that in all likelihood we will commit 3 unforced errors each sector, and we don't know what they will be!
Checklists are designed to ensure that important configuration changes have been made prior to entering the next phase of flight.
Its a shame your line colleagues are dragging you down, instead of encouraging you to attain the next level of professionalism.
Last edited by ITCZ; 14th May 2008 at 13:40.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PugAni said,
I still remember my old USAF of "Stop. Think. Collect your wits" but that was decades ago.
for an engine failure after t/o, we would do nothing until 1000ft or obstacle clearance, clean up and then work through with Thrust Lever-retard; Engine Start lever-Cutoff
For fire warning, mostly the same except some punched the fire switch before retarding the throttle and others went through thrust lever to idle, if light still illuminated, start switch off, if still illuminated, fire switch push.. 30 seconds if still illuminated, push other switch.
Most of the procedures made sense if one just STOPPED and thought about what was happening. For example, the fire light means there is heat being sensed where there shouldn't be any. But the engine is producing thrust and if necessary, let it burn for a while until one gets enough speed.
EFATO
ED [O2 first-always!!!]
FIRE WARNING--all [411A and Old Smokey have both reccomended this one!]
smoke abatement
Windshear
GA and initial approach climb
ED [O2 first-always!!!]
FIRE WARNING--all [411A and Old Smokey have both reccomended this one!]
smoke abatement
Windshear
GA and initial approach climb
for an engine failure after t/o, we would do nothing until 1000ft or obstacle clearance, clean up and then work through with Thrust Lever-retard; Engine Start lever-Cutoff
For fire warning, mostly the same except some punched the fire switch before retarding the throttle and others went through thrust lever to idle, if light still illuminated, start switch off, if still illuminated, fire switch push.. 30 seconds if still illuminated, push other switch.
Most of the procedures made sense if one just STOPPED and thought about what was happening. For example, the fire light means there is heat being sensed where there shouldn't be any. But the engine is producing thrust and if necessary, let it burn for a while until one gets enough speed.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ITCZ is correct
Challenge/response is used with both read and do and do-verify checklist.
Good CRM on the forum. Nice monitoring and nice challenge
"Challenge and Response" seems to be confused in some posters minds with "Read and Do" vs "Do then Verify" (aka "Scans" or "area of responsibility')
Good CRM on the forum. Nice monitoring and nice challenge
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a chat with your training captain, fleet manager and/or chief pilot about your concerns. If it is a decent operation they will be most interested and should be very supportive
In the 50 years or so I have been in the flying game I have rarely if ever struck the ideal situation where the blokes concerned with flight standards have enjoyed a "chat" about pilots concerns. And certainly almost never "most interested and supportive." Depends to a large extent however on your seniority and status within the operation.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the 50 years or so I have been in the flying game I have rarely if ever struck the ideal situation where the blokes concerned with flight standards have enjoyed a "chat" about pilots concerns. And certainly almost never "most interested and supportive."
It is a question of acting in accordance with your training, your responsibilities and your convictions.
Those who invoke the 'real world' argument are often talking of a place they fear -- and not necessarily a world they actually visited.
You new guys - try sticking up for yourself, or asking the question if what you see does not seem right. Dont whinge, dont moan, dont bitch, dont backstab. Just ask the question and be prepared to be forthright, and be prepared to listen to the answer. If your question is delivered in the proper manner, you may be surprised; the guillotine in Flight Ops is for cutting paper, not chopping off heads.
Last edited by ITCZ; 18th May 2008 at 14:42.
wileydog3:
True, true ---I agree
everyone has made wonderful points on this discussion--and I agree with many statements--just a little more from me
both read and do and do and verify could have a C@R format
read and do:
pilot reading ---Retrorockets
pilot doing ----fired
pilot doing ----gear down--and locked
pilot verifying :check down and locked
PA
True, true ---I agree
everyone has made wonderful points on this discussion--and I agree with many statements--just a little more from me
both read and do and do and verify could have a C@R format
read and do:
pilot reading ---Retrorockets
pilot doing ----fired
pilot doing ----gear down--and locked
pilot verifying :check down and locked
PA
ITCZ---I agree also untenable procedure should be directed through correct channels rather---unfortunately if your SOPS are bad than your managemen might not be too much better
notwithstanding that you are absolutely correct about the captain in question
notwithstanding that you are absolutely correct about the captain in question
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the old USAF, the rule was wind the clock.
On my first solo in the T-37 as I turned for the crosswind, sunlight hit the fire lights just right and both appeared to illuminate at the same time. My solution was simple. I looked the other way for a second before checking the EGTs and other engine indications. I later realized the likelihood of both engines being on fire at the same time was VERY remote and it was another lesson on what my instructor had said, "No fast hands in a jet cockpit."
On my first solo in the T-37 as I turned for the crosswind, sunlight hit the fire lights just right and both appeared to illuminate at the same time. My solution was simple. I looked the other way for a second before checking the EGTs and other engine indications. I later realized the likelihood of both engines being on fire at the same time was VERY remote and it was another lesson on what my instructor had said, "No fast hands in a jet cockpit."
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the engine is producing thrust and if necessary, let it burn for a while until one gets enough speed.
If the aircraft is already under control from start of take off run and climb away then any complacent relaxed delay in taking action to extinguish an engine fire warning is nothing less than sheer recklessness.
Moderator
is nothing less than sheer recklessness
.. reality is that a lot of warnings are false ... the problem is guessing which is which at the time.
There are pros and cons to acting quickly or acting after a delay (and we can all find odd ball examples to demonstrate that one or the other is the way to go) .. the underlying consideration for rational management should be sensible risk management and mitigation .. the value of these sorts of PPRuNe discussions is that folk get to see how a variety of pilots go about the underlying decision processes .. perhaps that educational benefit is the main one to be had ?
To me, emergency management prioritisation means "first worry about the thing which is going to kill you right now .. the next problem can wait a few seconds .." ? Indeed, if you are not likely to die in the next few seconds ... could it be (in general) that we don't really need to do things quite so quickly ? ... which is the basis for the generalisation that, for most emergencies, it is a good idea to sit on one's hands (or wind the clock .. hadn't come across that one before .. )
.. reality is that a lot of warnings are false ... the problem is guessing which is which at the time.
There are pros and cons to acting quickly or acting after a delay (and we can all find odd ball examples to demonstrate that one or the other is the way to go) .. the underlying consideration for rational management should be sensible risk management and mitigation .. the value of these sorts of PPRuNe discussions is that folk get to see how a variety of pilots go about the underlying decision processes .. perhaps that educational benefit is the main one to be had ?
To me, emergency management prioritisation means "first worry about the thing which is going to kill you right now .. the next problem can wait a few seconds .." ? Indeed, if you are not likely to die in the next few seconds ... could it be (in general) that we don't really need to do things quite so quickly ? ... which is the basis for the generalisation that, for most emergencies, it is a good idea to sit on one's hands (or wind the clock .. hadn't come across that one before .. )