Airbus SOP's
Thread Starter
Airbus SOP's
I know many airlines all insist they are using Airbus SOP's on their Airbus fleets yet there seems to be a big difference between carriers.
If anyone from Airbus reads this and can PM me a copy of actual Airbus SOP's for either A320 or A330 I would be grateful. I will supply my Name and position privately. I am just interested to see how far removed, if at all, we have come from original Airbus recommended SOP's.
In the nicest possible way, if you are not from Airbus but are sure your company is using standard Airbus SOP's please do not PM me as I really want it straight from "The Horses Mouth". I just would not be able to be certain that it really was Airbus unless it came from Airbus.
Thanking you in advance.
If anyone from Airbus reads this and can PM me a copy of actual Airbus SOP's for either A320 or A330 I would be grateful. I will supply my Name and position privately. I am just interested to see how far removed, if at all, we have come from original Airbus recommended SOP's.
In the nicest possible way, if you are not from Airbus but are sure your company is using standard Airbus SOP's please do not PM me as I really want it straight from "The Horses Mouth". I just would not be able to be certain that it really was Airbus unless it came from Airbus.
Thanking you in advance.
Your chances of getting it from Airbus are zip. There also have been significant changes lately so beware of the Airbus one online. Also give your company a chance to promulgate the new procedures...
If you post the procedure(s) in question here then those who run straight unadulterated airbus can comment or compare. Not what you want, but as good as you'll get.
If you post the procedure(s) in question here then those who run straight unadulterated airbus can comment or compare. Not what you want, but as good as you'll get.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slopwith
I would not recommend ploughing through and comparing two FCOM's .. you may end up not knowing either set of SOP's. As an SFI I train Airbus SOP's and other airlines and I always have to get the books out and study carefully.
It's your employer's train set - play with it the way they want.
I would not recommend ploughing through and comparing two FCOM's .. you may end up not knowing either set of SOP's. As an SFI I train Airbus SOP's and other airlines and I always have to get the books out and study carefully.
It's your employer's train set - play with it the way they want.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before airlines put into service their A320s they consult with Airbus who either invite over or send a rep that sits down with the big chief to produce a tailored version of documentation derived from the source documents for a particular fleet. As for SOP, I don’t think the FCOM is something the airline can re-write. For example, you will not find a custom SOP described in the Airbus Normal Procedures section of the FCOM – not for any airline. For this, Airbus will work with the airline to produce a customised FCTM or other documentation. Most don't bother. They simply rely on teaching airline SOP passing it off as Airbus SOP.
So in answer to your question, where can I find an Airbus SOP? In the NP section of the FCOM!
A question for you is how much has to change before you no longer consider your procedures to be Airbus SOP? If an airline chooses to add a couple of additional checklist items, are they no longer following Airbus SOP? Where do we draw the line?
An example of a big deviation from Airbus A3xx SOP is airlines that do not allow the FO to start engines/taxi the aircraft (for whatever reason) when the books clearly show PF/PNF actions regardless of phase of flight. Again, where do we draw the line?
So in answer to your question, where can I find an Airbus SOP? In the NP section of the FCOM!
A question for you is how much has to change before you no longer consider your procedures to be Airbus SOP? If an airline chooses to add a couple of additional checklist items, are they no longer following Airbus SOP? Where do we draw the line?
An example of a big deviation from Airbus A3xx SOP is airlines that do not allow the FO to start engines/taxi the aircraft (for whatever reason) when the books clearly show PF/PNF actions regardless of phase of flight. Again, where do we draw the line?
Thread Starter
Read the Original Post!
Dear All,
Thank you for your replies. As professionals and an English speaker, I thought my post was quite straight forward:
Compressor Stall: You say "Your chances of getting it from Airbus are zip" yet then you say "beware of the Airbus one online"! Which is it? Is there a link to the Airbus website where one can see genuine Airbus SOP’s or are you refering to something like Smartcockpit or similar SOP’s online that are not from the Airbus website but are probably company specific? Why would I be interested in them or as you say beware? Further, my post was asking "if anyone from Airbus reads this". I was not asking for an address in Airbus from which to obtain them (though maybe that is the answer!). Further still, the whole point of asking for unadulterated Airbus SOP's was to see how far the "company promulgated procedures" differ from unadulterated Airbus. Exactly what am I supposed to be waiting for?
Vilas: Thank you for your suggestion. I should have worded my post as "Anyone from Airbus or anyone who has just done a non-company type rating with Airbus in Toulouse using unadulterated Airbus SOP’s, reads this and can PM me a copy of actual Airbus SOP's for either A320 or A330 I would be grateful".
Winnerhofer: Exactly my point!
TyroPicard: Firstly, do you know anything about me? Do you know if I too am an instructor or not? Do you know how many different sets of Airbus SOP's I have encountered, all different? Do you not understand the reason for my post?
Secondly, I am pretty sure (see above) that I was not asking for an opinion. I appreciate your sentiment but if you really feel the need to write a reply to my post, either PM with Airbus unadulterated SOP's as requested or say "Unfortunately, I too have many sets of Airbus SOP's as I am an SFI and train with many different Airlines. I therefore cannot vouch for which set of SOP's are unadulterated Airbus. Sorry I cannot help"!
“It’s your employers train set –play with it the way they want.” I am so tempted to say something rude to you. Again, I am not asking you for your opinion. One day you might be a TRI.
Superpilot: I feel you are contradicting yourself somewhat; "Produce a tailored version" and then “I don't think the FCOM is something the Airline can re-write". Well what is it to be? Yes they can put a custom SOP in the FCOM-PRO-NOR. That was the whole point of part of your reply regarding the rep from Airbus talking with the big Chief. We are surely all familiar with Airlines who have Boeing and Airbus fleets who try and make SOP's common? That is a classic example of moving away from the original “Un-adulterated” SOP's. You then say, "A question for you is how much has to change before you no longer consider your procedures to be Airbus SOP?" That comment again implies that airlines can and most of us know do, change SOP's thus bringing me back to the whole point of my post.
I have now wasted an hour of my time writing this reply. With one exception, that being Winnerhofer, you have all posted replies offering opinions. I know it is a Forum but I just asked for a copy of some SOP's nothing else. It staggers me that you are presumably all professional pilots and reminds me why I do not bother with PPrune very often.
Thank you for your replies. As professionals and an English speaker, I thought my post was quite straight forward:
If anyone from Airbus reads this and can PM me a copy of actual Airbus SOP's for either A320 or A330 I would be grateful.
I thought that was a fairly straight forward request yet even that, it seems, is open to interpretation.Compressor Stall: You say "Your chances of getting it from Airbus are zip" yet then you say "beware of the Airbus one online"! Which is it? Is there a link to the Airbus website where one can see genuine Airbus SOP’s or are you refering to something like Smartcockpit or similar SOP’s online that are not from the Airbus website but are probably company specific? Why would I be interested in them or as you say beware? Further, my post was asking "if anyone from Airbus reads this". I was not asking for an address in Airbus from which to obtain them (though maybe that is the answer!). Further still, the whole point of asking for unadulterated Airbus SOP's was to see how far the "company promulgated procedures" differ from unadulterated Airbus. Exactly what am I supposed to be waiting for?
Vilas: Thank you for your suggestion. I should have worded my post as "Anyone from Airbus or anyone who has just done a non-company type rating with Airbus in Toulouse using unadulterated Airbus SOP’s, reads this and can PM me a copy of actual Airbus SOP's for either A320 or A330 I would be grateful".
Winnerhofer: Exactly my point!
TyroPicard: Firstly, do you know anything about me? Do you know if I too am an instructor or not? Do you know how many different sets of Airbus SOP's I have encountered, all different? Do you not understand the reason for my post?
Secondly, I am pretty sure (see above) that I was not asking for an opinion. I appreciate your sentiment but if you really feel the need to write a reply to my post, either PM with Airbus unadulterated SOP's as requested or say "Unfortunately, I too have many sets of Airbus SOP's as I am an SFI and train with many different Airlines. I therefore cannot vouch for which set of SOP's are unadulterated Airbus. Sorry I cannot help"!
“It’s your employers train set –play with it the way they want.” I am so tempted to say something rude to you. Again, I am not asking you for your opinion. One day you might be a TRI.
Superpilot: I feel you are contradicting yourself somewhat; "Produce a tailored version" and then “I don't think the FCOM is something the Airline can re-write". Well what is it to be? Yes they can put a custom SOP in the FCOM-PRO-NOR. That was the whole point of part of your reply regarding the rep from Airbus talking with the big Chief. We are surely all familiar with Airlines who have Boeing and Airbus fleets who try and make SOP's common? That is a classic example of moving away from the original “Un-adulterated” SOP's. You then say, "A question for you is how much has to change before you no longer consider your procedures to be Airbus SOP?" That comment again implies that airlines can and most of us know do, change SOP's thus bringing me back to the whole point of my post.
I have now wasted an hour of my time writing this reply. With one exception, that being Winnerhofer, you have all posted replies offering opinions. I know it is a Forum but I just asked for a copy of some SOP's nothing else. It staggers me that you are presumably all professional pilots and reminds me why I do not bother with PPrune very often.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Produce a tailored version" for the specific fleet I said. I.e. paragraphs not applying to certain MSNs removed or added as may be the case and in the next sentence I should've mentioned FCOM Normal Procedures, not FCOM on it's own.
I'm hoping you could give an example of *something you feel* is your airlines' SOP and not Airbus' that made it into FCOM Normal Procedures?
I'm hoping you could give an example of *something you feel* is your airlines' SOP and not Airbus' that made it into FCOM Normal Procedures?
Last edited by Superpilot; 28th Aug 2014 at 20:16.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Or-E-Gun, USA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Slop...
Don't hold your breath, especially below FL100. Good luck! If you get a response from AB, yo probably won't like it.
- or even understand it. And if it makes you feel any better, Boeing is no better for out-of-channel inquiries. As much as both might light to assist you, the primary concern is liability and the legal 
restrict direct communications to a few canned responses created by their respective PR departments. Real, functional, usable information simply will not flow. Sorry dude, but it ain't gonna happen.
Don't waste your time.
- or even understand it. And if it makes you feel any better, Boeing is no better for out-of-channel inquiries. As much as both might light to assist you, the primary concern is liability and the legal restrict direct communications to a few canned responses created by their respective PR departments. Real, functional, usable information simply will not flow. Sorry dude, but it ain't gonna happen. Don't waste your time.
Thread Starter
Was worth a try-I think!
No fly Zone. I am sure your reply is closest as to why I would not be able to get a set of unadulterated SOPs-the lawyers. It was partly legal aspects that was prompting the requests. As superpilot was saying, there must be a point where you are on your own and while the management are congratulating themselves on creating a cluster**** of SOP's, if something goes wrong, Airbus will probably point a finger and say, "we did not tell you to do it like that"!
However I am not legal but I was just interested to see and compare, as I said, what Airbus where suggesting and what my company are actually doing since they are quite different to two others that I have used and from talking to others from other Airbus operators, different to theirs also. My understanding is that we have a 737 ised SOP's on our Airbus fleet.
Winnerhofer, thank you again! At least you seem to understand what I am getting at. I hope you are more fun to fly with than I apparently am!
However I am not legal but I was just interested to see and compare, as I said, what Airbus where suggesting and what my company are actually doing since they are quite different to two others that I have used and from talking to others from other Airbus operators, different to theirs also. My understanding is that we have a 737 ised SOP's on our Airbus fleet.
Winnerhofer, thank you again! At least you seem to understand what I am getting at. I hope you are more fun to fly with than I apparently am!
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Slopwith
My pleasure anytime! We agree!
Bottomline is why the hell can't carriers stick to the Goddamn original AFM??
This is why there's chaos and too many clever clogs who are are too clever by half.
From AFM to FCTM to FCOM to QRH!
Pointless tinkering!!!
No wonder everything gets mired in hypercomplexity.
Now here's a thelogical analogy as to why everything is destandardised:
It's called Inculturation i.e. the tail wagging the dog:
Matteo Ricci was an Italian Jesuit who lived in the second half of the 16th century, and who is known today for the way he communicated the Gospel in China.
Rather than preaching a foreign religion to the Chinese people, he established common ground with them by mastering their language and adopting their customs.
His methods became controversial among Jesuits and in the official Church but today Ricci’s legacy of inculturation is strong.
The importance of respecting the unique ways in which diverse cultures understand and express their spiritual experience, even while preaching a common core belief, is no longer disputed
Bottomline is why the hell can't carriers stick to the Goddamn original AFM??
This is why there's chaos and too many clever clogs who are are too clever by half.
From AFM to FCTM to FCOM to QRH!
Pointless tinkering!!!
No wonder everything gets mired in hypercomplexity.
Now here's a thelogical analogy as to why everything is destandardised:
It's called Inculturation i.e. the tail wagging the dog:
Matteo Ricci was an Italian Jesuit who lived in the second half of the 16th century, and who is known today for the way he communicated the Gospel in China.
Rather than preaching a foreign religion to the Chinese people, he established common ground with them by mastering their language and adopting their customs.
His methods became controversial among Jesuits and in the official Church but today Ricci’s legacy of inculturation is strong.
The importance of respecting the unique ways in which diverse cultures understand and express their spiritual experience, even while preaching a common core belief, is no longer disputed
winnerhofer,
I notice your checklist refers to the "in range checklist".
i notice a lot of north american carriers do this. what exactly does "in range" mean and in range of what? when is this check done?
Also, does your above checklist imply a fuel policy of always landing > 7000kg fuel?
regards
I notice your checklist refers to the "in range checklist".
i notice a lot of north american carriers do this. what exactly does "in range" mean and in range of what? when is this check done?
Also, does your above checklist imply a fuel policy of always landing > 7000kg fuel?
regards
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the rain
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have experienced flying the A320-232 in 3 different airlines and the SOPs may have been from different planets.
None of the three approached the standard Airbus SOP which I originally trained to so I understand Slopwith's point however I'm not convinced Airbus "standard" is always better. Sorry, drifting into opinion zone now.
I have some old unaltered PDFs laying around from rev 37 (2006) if you PM me an e-mail address. They're old but may still be helpful?
None of the three approached the standard Airbus SOP which I originally trained to so I understand Slopwith's point however I'm not convinced Airbus "standard" is always better. Sorry, drifting into opinion zone now.
I have some old unaltered PDFs laying around from rev 37 (2006) if you PM me an e-mail address. They're old but may still be helpful?