Babblespeak, the endless checklist
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you still forget to reconfigure the pressurisation after take off that should be cought during the FL100 check which requires the check of cabin pressurisation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A37575, Thats just my point, when a much younger person flying some of the earlier jet fighters, many of which had marginal presurization and O2 systems it was drilled into us to check cabin diff/cabin alt/ and O2 flow on the way up on every flight, including close formation, those who didnt sometimes paid the ultimate price. I really dont care what aircraft a person is flying, such procedures apply to all {Unless you are REALLY good at holding your breath} If such drlills are ingrained from day one such crashes as the Greek disaster just wont happen, but to depend on reading a checklist during climb will not catch the problem every time. As an end note, Im amazed the number of pilots Ive flown on re current training who just dont have a clue as to where the cabin alt/diff should be at various altitudes in the climb.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might be indeed a company procedure as we use boeing provided company tailored manuals. However, as clunkdriver so aptly remarked it is simply airmanship to check every couple thousand feet on cabin rate of climb, cabin altitude and most probably temperature as well. Any non-standard configuration for performance purposes (bleeds off take off) has to be reconfigured to standard setup at 5000ft latest, preferably around 2500 as soon as flaps are up. the FL100 check is only a last line of defense check as even a completely unpressurized aircraft won't have have 10.000ft cabin altitude by then and you still can reconfigure or level out at FL100.
Anyway, the helios case is covered very early on the ground and thereafter any reconfiguration of the pressurization system has to be done according to specific procedures, while airmanship dictates that cabin pressurisation is checked every couple thousand feet anyway with a mandatory standard setup latest at 5000ft. Stupidity and bad training cannot be covered by checklists.
Anyway, the helios case is covered very early on the ground and thereafter any reconfiguration of the pressurization system has to be done according to specific procedures, while airmanship dictates that cabin pressurisation is checked every couple thousand feet anyway with a mandatory standard setup latest at 5000ft. Stupidity and bad training cannot be covered by checklists.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You hit the nail on the head Denti, if it is part of ones early training to check such vital things as cabin diff/cabin alt out of cardinal altitudes eary in ones training then it becomes part of ones personel SOPs regardless of aircraft type, its with utter dismay I have recently been given a glimpse of what pases for training at some of our "Puppy Farms" which "train" of shore students in Canada, , if it aint written down, it doesnt get checked, and if they miss a line the end result is sometimes very expensive, two gear ups WITH an instructor in the right seat!Think I might keep our little aircraft in retirment, might be a less stessfull way of flying.
When I did a bit of contract ferry flying, often the first time I flew a type was on a short test then on the actual ferry. Much of this flying was single-pilot.
Figuring that most aeroplanes work in similar fashion (convert air & fuel to pressure & noise), I made up a generic checklist that covered the 'killer' items and it worked OK in MU2, Metro, King Air, Conquest etc. Of course I would peruse the manual for an hour or two before launching to decide how best to start the engines without cooking them, and what speeds were needed to get it up and down, and how to turn on the anti-ice, but often that was the only preparation that time allowed. On this generic checklist for 'After Takeoff' I simply had GEAR & FLAP UP, BLEEDS ON, CABIN PRESSURE? then a personal airmanship 'thing' to check pressurization each 5000 feet in the climb. Sometimes I would miss one at 5000 but get it at 10,000 and so on, so that it was unlikely things would get too far out of hand.
I figured that setting power within the green range would keep me out of trouble until I found time to look up tables or charts so did not get too involved in finesse at the expense of track-keeping etc.
Despite this simple approach to a complex task, I did get caught once with a subtle pressurization failure above 30,000 ft that nearly cost me my life, but there was a whole lot of fatigue involved in that one. A more formal checklist and all the babblespeak in the world would not have prevented it - it was a pure lapse of vigilance.
Figuring that most aeroplanes work in similar fashion (convert air & fuel to pressure & noise), I made up a generic checklist that covered the 'killer' items and it worked OK in MU2, Metro, King Air, Conquest etc. Of course I would peruse the manual for an hour or two before launching to decide how best to start the engines without cooking them, and what speeds were needed to get it up and down, and how to turn on the anti-ice, but often that was the only preparation that time allowed. On this generic checklist for 'After Takeoff' I simply had GEAR & FLAP UP, BLEEDS ON, CABIN PRESSURE? then a personal airmanship 'thing' to check pressurization each 5000 feet in the climb. Sometimes I would miss one at 5000 but get it at 10,000 and so on, so that it was unlikely things would get too far out of hand.
I figured that setting power within the green range would keep me out of trouble until I found time to look up tables or charts so did not get too involved in finesse at the expense of track-keeping etc.
Despite this simple approach to a complex task, I did get caught once with a subtle pressurization failure above 30,000 ft that nearly cost me my life, but there was a whole lot of fatigue involved in that one. A more formal checklist and all the babblespeak in the world would not have prevented it - it was a pure lapse of vigilance.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I REALLY dislike the E190 (or more accurately, the utter shyte designed by Honeywell that tries to pass itself off as "state of the art" avionics), Embraer have got the checklists sorted out. There are no items to be completed whilst taxiing to the active runway and none taxiing in after landing. There are just seven airborne items contained within three checklists: After Take-off - two items, Approach - two items, Before Landing - three items. And that is all you need. Anything important generates a message with a 'ping' or 'pong'.
PM
PM
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Someplace where the water smells
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A37575
Rarely does the PF look across at the switching while the PNF does his own thing of challenging and responding to himself
This is all over the B737 checklist. The initial scan by the F/O of the overhead panel is covered in the “Pre Flight Checklist” however its the F/O that looked at a switch in his flow, then challenged the switch in the checklist, then responded to the challenge, usually while the skipper is having a coffee.....
I don’t know the logic behind it, but id love to know why I’m checking something that I have already checked and the captain hasn’t looked at. (sometimes
)Still, KISS is the best way forward along with airmanship, some people seem to forget that.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great subject Clunk, however I fear you have a steep hill to climb because the dumbing down of the training industry has produced a generation who truly believe in all this B.S. that is foisted on them in the name of safety.
When I was in Benin where VooDoo got it's start I was given a " Magic Stick " by a Voo Doo doctor and from that point on used it to stir a pile of chicken bones and ashes before boarding my airplane.......it worked perfectly as I never had an accident and lived to retire by choice from aviation.
When I was in Benin where VooDoo got it's start I was given a " Magic Stick " by a Voo Doo doctor and from that point on used it to stir a pile of chicken bones and ashes before boarding my airplane.......it worked perfectly as I never had an accident and lived to retire by choice from aviation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cant verify it but, was just told a story about an RJ crew who couldnt find the before landing checklist, called their company and declared an emergency, PLEASE tell me this isnt true!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi!
1- Checklists ARE needed. The US Air Force didn't have any, until they had their best crew test flying a B-29, and it crashed, because they omitted one or more important items....at first someone said they just needed better pilots, but then someone else pointed out that the Captain WAS their best pilots, so they created checklists.
2. Many companies (like Delta), are moving to used the manufacturer's checklist exactly, as it removes the company's liability if they had instead used the company checklists...so, that is good as it lends itself to smaller checklists and more standardization.
3. My previous airline had relatively small checklists and lots of items in the SOPs/Flows. It worked quite well.
However, my current job is in Africa: NONE of our pilots have had any training from our company. I think that more detailed checklists are good in this case, as we all have different SOPs/Flows, and it is very easy to miss something or assume the other guy did it. So far, each Captain has been flying with their own checklist, which is not optimal for the FOs.
We have a Chief Pilot now (didn't for about a year), and he is introducing a standardized checklist, and some standardized SOPs. The checklist is longer than I am used to, but I think that is a good thing in our situation. The captains are complaining about having to standardize, because each one thinks that their way is the best way, more or less, which is normal, from what I have experienced.
4. I have done walk arounds with a checklist in hand, until I felt comfortable with the items I needed to check....Just saw 747-400 walk-around checklist and it is only 5 items...VERY NICE!
5. While in UPT (USAF) I would do a walk-around and use my checklists as required. The instructors pressured me to not do a walk-around and use no checklists. I asked them if they felt safe without inspecting the plane, and they said they did, as they had an ejection seat. That way of thinking is one of the reasons I wanted to be in a multi-crew, non-fighter aircraft.
6. My dad flew a Piper 235 for thousands of hours, mostly single pilot. He ALWAYS used his checklist: Did everything in a flow, and then checked each item off of the checklist, even when single pilot. It worked very well for him.
7. "Bold Face", Emergency Action Items: Those on the checklists that are required to be done from memory before pulling out the checklists:
The J-41 I was trained on had something like 27 of these checklists (with Memory Items in them).
The Falcon 20 had around 17 or so.
The DC-9 about 12.
The KC-135R had 5.
The American Airlines MD-80 had 2 or 3, I believe.
cliff
LFW
PS-In the plane I am currently flying, before we land, and after the checklists are complete, regardless of whether I am PF or PM, I re-check that the gear is 3 green-no red, and the flaps are 40.
1- Checklists ARE needed. The US Air Force didn't have any, until they had their best crew test flying a B-29, and it crashed, because they omitted one or more important items....at first someone said they just needed better pilots, but then someone else pointed out that the Captain WAS their best pilots, so they created checklists.
2. Many companies (like Delta), are moving to used the manufacturer's checklist exactly, as it removes the company's liability if they had instead used the company checklists...so, that is good as it lends itself to smaller checklists and more standardization.
3. My previous airline had relatively small checklists and lots of items in the SOPs/Flows. It worked quite well.
However, my current job is in Africa: NONE of our pilots have had any training from our company. I think that more detailed checklists are good in this case, as we all have different SOPs/Flows, and it is very easy to miss something or assume the other guy did it. So far, each Captain has been flying with their own checklist, which is not optimal for the FOs.
We have a Chief Pilot now (didn't for about a year), and he is introducing a standardized checklist, and some standardized SOPs. The checklist is longer than I am used to, but I think that is a good thing in our situation. The captains are complaining about having to standardize, because each one thinks that their way is the best way, more or less, which is normal, from what I have experienced.
4. I have done walk arounds with a checklist in hand, until I felt comfortable with the items I needed to check....Just saw 747-400 walk-around checklist and it is only 5 items...VERY NICE!
5. While in UPT (USAF) I would do a walk-around and use my checklists as required. The instructors pressured me to not do a walk-around and use no checklists. I asked them if they felt safe without inspecting the plane, and they said they did, as they had an ejection seat. That way of thinking is one of the reasons I wanted to be in a multi-crew, non-fighter aircraft.
6. My dad flew a Piper 235 for thousands of hours, mostly single pilot. He ALWAYS used his checklist: Did everything in a flow, and then checked each item off of the checklist, even when single pilot. It worked very well for him.
7. "Bold Face", Emergency Action Items: Those on the checklists that are required to be done from memory before pulling out the checklists:
The J-41 I was trained on had something like 27 of these checklists (with Memory Items in them).
The Falcon 20 had around 17 or so.
The DC-9 about 12.
The KC-135R had 5.
The American Airlines MD-80 had 2 or 3, I believe.
cliff
LFW
PS-In the plane I am currently flying, before we land, and after the checklists are complete, regardless of whether I am PF or PM, I re-check that the gear is 3 green-no red, and the flaps are 40.
Last edited by atpcliff; 16th Jul 2010 at 14:26.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATP, this is not about not having checklists, its about having so much useless crap in them that they become a hazard to safety, if one does a flow check, AND UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEMS, then one can restict the in flight chatter to the important stuff, the problem Ive seen of late is learning by rote without understanding the aircraft systems, to compensate for this checklists are made to cover what should be common sense, as one poster pointed out, if you need a list to tell you to strap in then maybe your in the wrong job. As for the early B29 crashes, there were more than enough problems with the engine/airframe to make flying them a very risky game, not helped by by well meaning folks re engageing a controll lock after the crew had disengaged them.There is no way a fourteen page checklist for a S/E fixed gear piston aircraft improves safety.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi!
My last US airline (and the current checklist I am using) had an item for shoulder harness-ON for landing and takeoff. The US airline checklist was ripped off from NWA, so assume they had the same thing.
What is "Common Sense", and you are saying if it's common sense, it shouldn't be on the checklist?
Current Before Landing Check:
Altimeters
Ignition
Lights
Air Cond Auto Shutoff
Gear
Spoilers
Flight Director
Altitude Alert
Flaps/Slats
Annunciators
Landing Clearance
To me, with my level of experience, ALL the items are "Common Sense", so does that mean out Landing Check should be blank?
For new guys, I could see:
Ignition
Air Cond Auto Shutoff
Spoilers
So, even for new guys, if I were leaving out all "Common Sense" items, I would leave out items like Gear and Flaps, as they are "Common Sense" to all of us, even new guys.
If our checklist was up to me alone:
I would put the most essential items on the checklist, and leave out the rest. In the checklist quoted above, I would leave out:
-Altimeters (completed in Approach Check previously)
-Lights (completed in Approach Check previously)
-Flight Director (some guys don't want to use them, our FO one is broken anyway and has never worked, and some guys only use them part of the time...want to practice Raw Data)
-Annunciator Panel (if it is serious, we will get a Master Caution/Master Warning)
-Landing Clearance-(we will be talking and listening on the radio, and confirming this with tower/approach on the radio)
Bottom line, EVERY checklist I have seen has what I would call "Common Sense" items on them.
Everyone's ideas of "Common Sense" are, in fact, NOT Common: What may be Common Sense to me, you may never have even heard of or thought about.
Here is a great example: To me it is Common Sense that the universe (and our Sun) is powered by Electricty. But, to most physicists, scientists and laypeople that learn about our universe, they think our universe is held together by gravity, Black Holes, Dark Matter, and the sun is powered by Fusion. I think that is all totally and completely wrong, and doesn't make any kind of sense whatsoever.
But, you are right, in that if the Checklist is too long or cumbersome, then it lowers the chance of a safely completed flight.
There is a balance, and the BEST checklist, is one that offers the best chance of helping the pilots complete the flight safely.
Each organization is different, so I would say that each organization should develop their checklists so that they best reflect the needs of their organization.
On an interesting note, I was flying a DA-20. After about 3 years, the company decided to radically change the checklist, callouts, flows and procedures. I think it was a good idea.
What they did, was match the checklist/procedures, etc. to the DC-9 checklist/procedures, etc. Most guys were hired onto the DA-20, then transition to the DC-9, and we hired mostly relatively lower-experienced guys. So, after then finished DA-20 training and operations, when they moved to the DC-9, their learning curve was drastically reduced (and we had some -9 guys move to the Falcon...probably the only -121 airline with Capts who were over Age 65, so it helped them, too).
If another company did NOT have -9s, it would make more sense to optimize the Falcon checklist soley for Falcon operations.
Note: We are working on our checklists right now, to try and improve them....not so easy with a lot of different opinions of what is "Best" and different interpretations of "Common Sense".
cliff
LFW
My last US airline (and the current checklist I am using) had an item for shoulder harness-ON for landing and takeoff. The US airline checklist was ripped off from NWA, so assume they had the same thing.
What is "Common Sense", and you are saying if it's common sense, it shouldn't be on the checklist?
Current Before Landing Check:
Altimeters
Ignition
Lights
Air Cond Auto Shutoff
Gear
Spoilers
Flight Director
Altitude Alert
Flaps/Slats
Annunciators
Landing Clearance
To me, with my level of experience, ALL the items are "Common Sense", so does that mean out Landing Check should be blank?
For new guys, I could see:
Ignition
Air Cond Auto Shutoff
Spoilers
So, even for new guys, if I were leaving out all "Common Sense" items, I would leave out items like Gear and Flaps, as they are "Common Sense" to all of us, even new guys.
If our checklist was up to me alone:
I would put the most essential items on the checklist, and leave out the rest. In the checklist quoted above, I would leave out:
-Altimeters (completed in Approach Check previously)
-Lights (completed in Approach Check previously)
-Flight Director (some guys don't want to use them, our FO one is broken anyway and has never worked, and some guys only use them part of the time...want to practice Raw Data)
-Annunciator Panel (if it is serious, we will get a Master Caution/Master Warning)
-Landing Clearance-(we will be talking and listening on the radio, and confirming this with tower/approach on the radio)
Bottom line, EVERY checklist I have seen has what I would call "Common Sense" items on them.
Everyone's ideas of "Common Sense" are, in fact, NOT Common: What may be Common Sense to me, you may never have even heard of or thought about.
Here is a great example: To me it is Common Sense that the universe (and our Sun) is powered by Electricty. But, to most physicists, scientists and laypeople that learn about our universe, they think our universe is held together by gravity, Black Holes, Dark Matter, and the sun is powered by Fusion. I think that is all totally and completely wrong, and doesn't make any kind of sense whatsoever.
But, you are right, in that if the Checklist is too long or cumbersome, then it lowers the chance of a safely completed flight.
There is a balance, and the BEST checklist, is one that offers the best chance of helping the pilots complete the flight safely.
Each organization is different, so I would say that each organization should develop their checklists so that they best reflect the needs of their organization.
On an interesting note, I was flying a DA-20. After about 3 years, the company decided to radically change the checklist, callouts, flows and procedures. I think it was a good idea.
What they did, was match the checklist/procedures, etc. to the DC-9 checklist/procedures, etc. Most guys were hired onto the DA-20, then transition to the DC-9, and we hired mostly relatively lower-experienced guys. So, after then finished DA-20 training and operations, when they moved to the DC-9, their learning curve was drastically reduced (and we had some -9 guys move to the Falcon...probably the only -121 airline with Capts who were over Age 65, so it helped them, too).
If another company did NOT have -9s, it would make more sense to optimize the Falcon checklist soley for Falcon operations.
Note: We are working on our checklists right now, to try and improve them....not so easy with a lot of different opinions of what is "Best" and different interpretations of "Common Sense".
cliff
LFW
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although a lowly ex SEP flyer, I am intrigued by this thread as it I see it covering a lot of the "philosophical" aspects of Quality Management. When not reading the prune, I am engaged in engineering design and there are many quality related issues. My industry abounds with template type QA systems which are designed as one size fits all, are very high falutin and in my mind are often ineffective. Taking inspiration from the aviation world, I re-worked my own operation based around checklists. These checklists are essentially a list of the most common stuff-ups consistently re-appearing. The "standard" stuff-ups list was compiled in discussions and looking back at previous problems. In time, new errors become apparent and are sometimes added, if warranted.
So the lists are simply to check on the most common errors. They have proved highly effective. Some wag added: "Folks, I want to see NEW mistakes..." in other words, lets not repeat the old ones!
These checklists are designed with the philosophy "Did you do it?" not "This is how you do it"
So the lists are simply to check on the most common errors. They have proved highly effective. Some wag added: "Folks, I want to see NEW mistakes..." in other words, lets not repeat the old ones!
These checklists are designed with the philosophy "Did you do it?" not "This is how you do it"
