A320 ECAM Or QRH

[MD83FO]

As a general reminder
which abnormals favor the use of QRH rather than following ECAM?

thank you

[sonicbum]

Originally Posted by MD83FO

As a general reminder
which abnormals favor the use of QRH rather than following ECAM?

thank you

Pretty much depends on Your FWC standard, but there is nothing really that "favours" the QRH over the ECAM, unless You have to apply an OEB of course.
In our fleet, as of today, the only abnormal where You can actually choose to start with the QRH rather than the ECAM is the smoke/fumes/avionics smokes.

[Banana Joe]

I'm not rated on any Airbus, but a fuel leak would be a QRH procedure. Unless you can recall it as an ECAM procedure.

[sonicbum]

Originally Posted by Banana Joe

I'm not rated on any Airbus,

That's a good start.

[RUMBEAR]

The ECAM is an attempt for a paperless cockpit. However the QRH remains as recognition that not all abnormal events can be detected by a computer.

[CaptainMongo]

If present, we always follow the ECAM. If time is available we reference the QRH after complying with the ECAM. Referencing the QRH means reading additional information which may help in understanding the anomaly. In the presence of an ECAM any action directed by the QRH is ignored.

The ECAM is the most direct method of correcting or ameliorating the anomaly.

That said there are approximately 80 checklists in our QRH which don’t have a corresponding ECAM (unannunciated checklists in our vernacular) Since no ECAM is present we reference and apply QRH procedure. Fuel Leak, Air Temperature to Hot or To Cold, to name a few.

[pineteam]

Assuming no OEB, always ECAM first. If no ECAM and any abnormalities detected by the crew then it’s a good time to pull the QRH as required.
Some failures like Flaps/Slats locked, fuel Leak, Hydraulic issues, engine relight, the QRH is a must do but will always be reviewed after the ECAM actions.

[vilas]

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Asia
Age: 44
Posts: 456
A320 ECAM Or QRHAs a general reminder
which abnormals favor the use of QRH rather than following ECAM?

ORH is not favoured but it has sequence for it's application. Airbus philosophy for abnormal procedure is to use ECAM. OEBs are temporary fixes and previously were applied only before STATUS. But some bleed failure cases application of ECAM led to descend 210 and then ORH application recovered the bleed but was too late to prevent diversion. So OEB was shifted to first. The second case is when ECAM doesn't detect a failure/situation. Like loss of gradual pressurisation due to loss of pack/bleed, smoke, unreliable speed. These are primary emergencies and require immediate actions. Third case are Procedures that have to be referred to after ECAM is completed like Landing with slat/flap jam, overweight Landing. Fuel imbalance leads to fuel leak procedure. In smoke if ECAM appears it must applied first. Rest of QRH is different kinds of Data.

[deja vu]

Originally Posted by RUMBEAR

The ECAM is an attempt for a paperless cockpit. However the QRH remains as recognition that not all abnormal events can be detected by a computer.

When my company had first ordered the A320 we were promised a paperless cockpit, of course it wasn't even close to that. But the big joke was when our all female crew were operating it was known as a cockless paperpit. Sorry!