Airbus RTO
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 267
Likes: 35
From: The Hot zone
Airbus RTO
Airbus publishes the RTO "Technique" in its FCTM even though it's clearly a 'procedure'. Equally it is NOT published in its FCOM at all. So it is not a procedure that is worth mention in the Abnormal Procedures. Unbelievable.
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,605
Likes: 154
From: Having a margarita on the beach
It used to 3 years ago (more or less) when it migrated to the FCTM - Procedures.
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,775
Likes: 353
From: UK
Maisk, what aspects are 'unbelievable'; information location, or your expectation of a procedure.
Whereas system failures can follow a defined process of IF - THEN, usually starting with an alert, the need for an RTO is less clearly defined and requires the crew to establish and confirm that the situation demands action, which may be published as a technique.
RTO procedures do-not decide whether action is to be taken or not.
The crews' task is to assess the cues presented to them, which may or may-not require action, decide to act, and then follow the best advice, a technique for that situation.
Situations can range from those of engine failure requiring aerodynamic control, steering, and braking, to those of a malfunction where continued takeoff could be unsafe. These situations demand understanding and judgement, and then action chosen by the pilot.
It is unlikely that such situations will be well defined, nor require identical actions; thus there is no set 'procedure', no 'Standard' for an Operating Procedure.
Many areas of the industry attempt to convert flying to a black-or-white process (SOPs), where in reality flight is an art, first involving a thinking process.
See; Airbus Safety First magazine #16, July 2013; https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...ne-failure.pdf
and #18, July 2014; https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...your_speed.pdf
and, for info
https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/airbus-brake-testing/
http://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com...0/think-quick/
Whereas system failures can follow a defined process of IF - THEN, usually starting with an alert, the need for an RTO is less clearly defined and requires the crew to establish and confirm that the situation demands action, which may be published as a technique.
RTO procedures do-not decide whether action is to be taken or not.
The crews' task is to assess the cues presented to them, which may or may-not require action, decide to act, and then follow the best advice, a technique for that situation.
Situations can range from those of engine failure requiring aerodynamic control, steering, and braking, to those of a malfunction where continued takeoff could be unsafe. These situations demand understanding and judgement, and then action chosen by the pilot.
It is unlikely that such situations will be well defined, nor require identical actions; thus there is no set 'procedure', no 'Standard' for an Operating Procedure.
Many areas of the industry attempt to convert flying to a black-or-white process (SOPs), where in reality flight is an art, first involving a thinking process.
See; Airbus Safety First magazine #16, July 2013; https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...ne-failure.pdf
and #18, July 2014; https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...your_speed.pdf
and, for info
https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/airbus-brake-testing/
http://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com...0/think-quick/
