Babblespeak, the endless checklist

[clunckdriver]

A few years back I was tasked to select and hire pilots to fly high wing Cessnas for a major forestry project, their task was to fly above the spray aircraft with a qualified observer in the right seat and take note of spray patterns/drift and all that good stuff, as they would not go below 1000AGL it was a great chance for some newbies to make some very good coin as well as gain about 600hrs PIC. The selection flights were simple, show me a short/rough field TO, complete a power of landing onto a local grass strip, and navigate to a point in the bush using only the photo used by the spray pilots, nothing trickey at all. I could just not belive the endless babling these kids had been taught at some of our Government run schools, from start up to shut down it sounded like there were a flock of bloody parrots on board, it took some time to de program these kids but in the end all was well, and piece and quiet returned to the cockpits, where is this leading? I recently sat next to another pilot just hired into a turbo prop outfit, during our chat he produced the "Normall Checklist" his new employer is using, dear God, the space Shuttle check list is only one quarter the lenght of this incredible thing, when asked how the hell did he manage to fly the aircraft and listen to ATC, his reply was, "We try, but do seem to miss a lot of calls". Question, am I the only one who finds that there are those out there who seem to be trying to make a fairly simple job sound bloody complicated? I think the final word on this should go to Col Chuck Anderson, for those not in the know he was the lead test pilot for the whole B52 series, and I quote."Im indebted to SAC for one thing, they gave me the incentive to retire,when I first started on the B52 the pilots checklist was on one side of a five by seven card, the co pilots on the other, in SAC the normall checklist was fourty two pages!" Its worth noting, that TC has the longest King Air checklists but manage to land gear up with great regularity, after I got home I dug out my collection of checklists, not one of them came close to the size of the one shown to me by this F/O, and these aircraft were untill recently about as big as you could buy,any comments/observations on my rant?

[boofhead]

And when they use these great cumbersome and obstructing documents, they delay the takeoff to the point that you run out of fuel, they still cannot find their way and miss items (like the landing gear!) because the lists are just too long to manage, and when they turn downwind they know there will not be enough time to run the whole thing so they either don't do a checklist or use a memory checklist like GUMPS anyway.

[Flash2001]

I seem to recall that the inquiry into the crash of a B58 shortly after takeoff attributed the accident to the pilot's failure to monitor aircraft attitude due to the complexity of the post takeoff checklist. The board recommended that a requirement to monitor attitude be added to the list.

After an excellent landing etc...

[Wizofoz]

any comments/observations on my rant?

Yes,

Before bitching about others communication skills, learn what a paragraph is!!

[virgo]

c driver. I totally agree with you. Several years ago I was part of the management of a large international airline.
Whenever there was ANY sort of "irregularity" from an MOR to a full-scale incident the eventual outcome was nearly always to "add it to the checklist".

This serves several essential purposes;
1. Not only can the management be SEEN to be doing something, there is documentary evidence to prove it.
2. Crews can never again wriggle out of the responsibility by saying "No-one told us"
3. Management "feel good" factor of We've Done Something
4. The popular belief that if it is important it MUST be written down.

(After an aircraft nearly landed with the wrong altimeter setting, every checklist - Normal, Abnormal and Emergency included as a final item;
"ENSURE EVERY CHECKLIST ITEM HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED")

Sadly, the tendency to "cover your own arse" in case the lawyers try to take your livelihood and pension off you, controls most areas of aviation as it does other disciplines.

[clunckdriver]

Wizof, you have spent way too much time in the sandbox, "Endless checklists, no paragraphs, get it? {its a joke, OK?}

[Zoner]

It seems the hardest thing in life is to simplify anything and the easiest is to complicate everything.

[fireflybob]

There is a difference between doing "things right" and doing the "right thing".

The former is management, the latter leadership.

Recall not long after I joined BOAC in 1970 the accident report for GARWE (B707) had been published. The a/c suffered a major engine failure on departure RW28R and landed back on RW 05 having been airborne only a few minutes. I think about 5 lost their lives in the evacuation due to fire.

I boarded the crew bus to travel from the car park to operations. Two senior captains were discussing the report and one said "I really don't understand how they managed to do the after take off checks, the descent check, the approach checks and the landing checks in such a short period of time". Someone on the back of bus then shouted "Gear and Flaps! What else do you need?". All on the bus fell about laughing but the conversation taught me quite a lot!

There also seems to be a mistaken belief that if you require pilots to drone on about what they would do in the event of a take off emergency that this means they will do the right thing. Sorry but I think this is rubbish - the only way to ensure (as far as you can) that they will react correctly is to actually practice it in the simulator on a regular basis. Am I against take off briefs - no not at all but they should, in my opinion, be as brief and concise as possible otherwise it's done by rote and people stop listening.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The problem starts in flight schools, and has many elements

1) The vast majority of instructors have no real world operational experience and thus have no idea of operational efficency. There is no penalty in flight training for wasting a bunch of time doing long elaborate checklists, in fact the longer the student takes the more the school makes.

2) Flight schools tend to use the checklist as a training tool loading it up with operating procedures and non essential bumpf instead of only including items directly affecting flight safety.

3) Flight schools in general do not understand the difference between check lists and do lists and the concept of building the checklist around a system of simple consistant flows. Instead every check seems to require a long labourous head down reading and doing exercise.

It is not malice it is just ignorance on the part of flight intructors....and will never change unless there is a critical mass of instructors with some real world line flying experience. Unfortunately the economics of flight instruction in North America will never allow this.

[PLovett]

I remember reading an article by John Deakin about checklists that made a lot of sense to me. The basis of it was that they should only include the "killer" items, those things that will kill you if you get them wrong.

The whole issue came back to me last week as I was renewing my instrument rating and adding a RNAV Approach endorsement to it at the same time. The company where I did this was very strong on using the checklist for the aircraft, a Baron BE-55. The checklist was straight from the handbook and involved several A5 pages of small type to get from pre-start to shut-down.

The detail contained in that checklist amused me when compared to the one contained in the Boeing 737 NG FCOM which in essence follows Mr Deakin's dictum of only having the killer items. It is set out below, with apologies for the formatting, and I think a perfect example of less is more:


PREFLIGHT

Oxygen Tested, 100%

NAVIGATION transfer
and DISPLAY switches NORMAL, AUTO

Window heat On

Pressurisation mode selector AUTO

Flight instruments Heading____, Altimeter____

Parking brake Set

Engine start levers CUTOFF

____________________________________________________________ __
BEFORE START

Flight deck door Closed and locked

Fuel _____KGS, PUMPS ON

Passenger signs On

Windows Locked

MCP V2____, HDG___, ALT___

Takeoff speeds V1____, VR____, V2____

CDU preflight Completed

Trim ___ UNITS, 0, 0

Taxi and takeoff briefing Completed

ANTI COLLISION light ON


BEFORE TAXI

Generators On

Probe Heat On

Anti-ice ___

Isolation valve AUTO

ENGINE START switches CONT

Recall Checked

Autobrake RTO

Engine start levers IDLE detent

Flight controls Checked

Ground equipment Clear

____________________________________________________________ __

BEFORE TAKEOFF

Flaps ___, Green light

____________________________________________________________ __

AFTER TAKEOFF

Engine Bleeds On

Packs AUTO

Landing gear UP and OFF

Flaps UP, no lights

DESCENT

Pressurisation LAND ALT___

Recall Checked

Autobrake ___

Landing data VREF___, Minimums___

Approach brief Completed

____________________________________________________________ __

APPROACH

Altimeters ___

____________________________________________________________ __

LANDING

ENGINE START switches CONT

Speedbrake Armed

Landing gear Down

Flaps ___, green light


SHUTDOWN

Fuel pumps Off

Probe heat Off

Hydraulic panel Set

Flaps Up

Parking brake ___

Engine start levers CUTOFF

Weather radar Off

____________________________________________________________ __

SECURE

IRSs Off

Emergency exit lights Off

Window heat Off

Packs Off

[Mach E Avelli]

Absolutely agree that the Boeing checklist is an example of how ALL complex aircraft checklists could or should be. The good thing is that it is Boeing themselves who created this, so it's hard to argue against it. Most aircraft will get airbone and return to earth quite safely if they have fuel, are configured correctly, have no warning lights on at takeoff and are kept in trim. I flew F27s in command for over 5000 hours with NO checklist for the pre-start (had to be memorised in a scan sequence or you did not get to fly it) and the only printed one (which I made up and had approved) said:

PRE- TAKEOFF
Fuel (pumps on, enough of the stuff? and crossfeed off)
Air (pneumatics needed for brakes and gear)
Water (methanol, needed or not needed?)
Flaps (two usual settings - make sure it's correct)
Trim (being the usual flight control trims plus fuel trimmer)
PRE-LANDING
Gear
Air
Water
Flaps
Trim
The setting of V speeds, checking instruments and briefings etc came under 'airmanship' and so were not formalised in a checklist. Yet I have seen checklists for this same aeroplane that ran to 5 pages.
Of course there were other things to look at and do, but none were likely to kill you and most had lights associated (prop locks etc).
The problem starts with those manufacturers who write detailed blow-by-blow accounts of how to operate every switch, button and lever in their wonderful flying machines. This appears in the Flight Manual or Pilots' Operating Handbook.
In Australia, all operator checklists must be approved by CASA. If an operator has the right argument, can show 'equivalent safety' etc and is working with a practical Inspector, a lot of what's in the AFM or POH can be detailed in a SOP somewhere and then an abbreviated checklist MAY get the official nod. The problem arises if the regulator is in ass-cover mode and insists on the AFM detail being included in the checklist. And is compounded when management pilots add their own stuff in because they feel a need to pitch it at the lowest common denominator (often themselves).

Why do so many operators of fixed-gear single-engine aircraft use such detailed checklists? It seems to be the 'in-thing' now. I don't recall learning to fly with a checklist. Even on light twins we got away with memonics and scans and I bet there were no more gear-up landings then than now.
For a simple type, other than perhaps before starting engines when it could be good for the lowest common denominator to be reminded to remove the pitot cover, turn on the fuel and apply parking brake, a person of average intellect should be able to do the rest without referring to an instruction manual, which is what these long checklists are.

[hawker750]

Could not agree more with these comments.
What has happened is the "check list" has changed into a "do list" because pilots are being tought that this is the only safe way to operate.
IMHO the safest way is with SOP's, airmanship and a very small check list

[clunckdriver]

Mach E, Im so glad you mentioned simple single engine aircraft, I recently saw a checklist for an unpresurised, fixd gear S/E aircraft, it was fourteen pages in total! The author of this document then proceeded to start up and taxi with the engine cover still on, didnt do the engine, {160H/P Lyc} or the cover any good.As for the turbo prop checklist which prompted my rant Im now told by the same young man that its a rip- of the one used by production test pilots at the plant where the aircraft are built and contains many items of interest only to the QA folks, which are totally pointless during normall revenue flights, just what you need during a ten sector day! Glad to read Im not the only one who finds this stuff to be total horse feathers!

[Centaurus]

While on a flying instructors course we flew the first Winjeels delivered to RAAF Central Flying School at East Sale circa 1955. The RAAF taught a standard before take off check at CFS that basically covered all RAAF aircraft from Wirraways to Mustangs. Bits were added or subtracted here and there depending on the type. The standard RAAF before take off check started with Harness, Hatches, Hydraulics.

Apart from these generic before take off items which were learned by heart, all other items were in a left to right general sequence. Of course there were no written checklists in the aircraft in those days - it was all up there in your head.

40 plus years on I happened to see a privately owned civil registered Winjeel at Point Cook and looked into the cockpit for old times sake. I was astonished to see the owner had one of these pilot shop roller-blind checklists attached the coaming.

Glancing over my shoulder to ensure the owner wasn't around to snarl "Piss Orf", I scrolled through this beautiful carefully typed work of art guaranteed to warm the cockles of the most cold blooded CASA FOI. The first item and underlined in red as a "Killer" item was "GOODAY!

I scrolled and scrolled and scrolled until I came to the end of 147 items of challenge and response by the single pilot. And all that nonsense for a simple ab-initio trainer designed to replace the Tiger Moth....

PS. I forgot to add I saw the owner fly his Winjeel some time later. He was all dressed for combat with bone-dome, dark vizor, green flying suit, fur lined flying boots (looked like sophisticated UGH boots), white chamois flying gloves and a survival knife tucked into a flying boot. He was off to do a few touch and go's..

[clunckdriver]

Ah yes Centaurus, "The Warbird/Walter Mitty Bunch", If only we had known how difficult it is to fly these things we all would have joined the Army! Its really just an extension of my rant, folks babling on about sweet FA and thinking they are making flying more safe, in fact the reverse is the case, we had a clasic example of one of these types that I had to restrict from flying my vintage stuff, this after he just about melted the mags with his endless ground idle whilst he babled on giving endless briefings to his students, but in spite of this he managed to total one of our Oldies, started with full throttle and no brakes, better write a longer checklist to include "check for stupidity".

[Idle Thrust]

Yes Centaurus brings back memories of nearly 50 years ago with the RCAF. I expect all the commonwealth air forces inherited it from the RAF.

Without listing all the items the acronym/mnemonic went like this:

HTMPCFFGVGMH

And then there was the U.S. "GUMP" check.

[nurjio]

Interesting.

We've just been subjected to a revision of the airbus pre-take off cx list. What a diatribe it is now.

I used to fly a jet that required very little in cx listing. However, on taxiing on to the tin strip:

FUEL (er, enough?)
FLAPS (anywhere but up)
ARM MASTERS (ON)
STO STOP (set)
TRIM (set)

WATER (armed)

..life savers. I still do it now, in the back of my mind, lining up on 27R etc, LHR.

nurj

[plugster]

I absolutely agree to the use of checklists, nevertheless only usefull and sensible written ones make your life easier or even extend it. Who would read a 15 items approach checklist in a traffic circuit with 5 aircraft?
LH went so far their final checklist on the airbus is simply: "all green, flaps xx"

[By George]

This thread is like a breath of fresh air. In my younger days flying light twins I always used mnemonics including the likes of "PUF" on final........pitch.. undercarriage.. and flaps etc. Joining the Airlines along came checklists, which I think is fine and the way things are done in a mult-crew cockpit. Recently with retirement looming I renewed my Aussie I/F rating to have a current licence on my return home next year. The checklist on the little Beech Duchess was longer than any Space Shuttle. This is obviously something that has crept in over the years. The 747 pre-take off checklist has only five items, the Duchess at least 50. Glad to see they are all lunatics and I'm not. You have all made my day.

[clunckdriver]

By George, the most complex turbine aircraft I ever flew had the check lists which were in the form of small "click over" lists on the glare shield, when all checks were done they folded down out of sight thus no" heads down "during taxi.The most items on any one of these was nine!
It would seem that those with experience are all on side here, so how do we fix it? For myself Im taking instructors along on revenue flights to try to show them the real world, however its an uphill task, one of them turned up with his "own" checklist which included pressing to test the gear lights after the three greens were on , and I quote "make sure its not just a short putting them on", I gues the bloody great thump under the floor when the uplatches let go could in his mind have been a bird strike! There has to be a middle ground between "Kick the tires, light the fires, first one of the ground is leader and brief on guard", and the present babblespeak , we can but try.