General EFIS and A320-specific questions
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sticking to Mr. Boeing/Airbus SOP has a distinct disadvantage - it means the airline's SMS has nearly zero input into it, and the input it might have, will have an enormous latency between the line events and the implementation of the SOP change that seeks to eliminate similar events from occuring.
Manufacturers cannot predict every single operational environment in the world, and these will vary a lot between airlines - e.g. requency changes over Africa, where all frequencies have a single decimal number and occur once every hour pose less risk of dialing the wrong frequency, getting into PLOC and perhaps even getting intercepted than operating in Maastricht/Rhein area in EU, where you have 8.33 frequencies, and changes less than 5 mins apart.
Similarly, pointing to MCP/FCU might seem silly to somebody who operates in airspece, where you get five level changes in the entire flight, but it might - possibly - make a small bit of sense when you operate 4 or 6 sector days into London TMA, FRA, etc., where you often get 20 level changes on the way up and 20 on the way down.
Manufacturers cannot predict every single operational environment in the world, and these will vary a lot between airlines - e.g. requency changes over Africa, where all frequencies have a single decimal number and occur once every hour pose less risk of dialing the wrong frequency, getting into PLOC and perhaps even getting intercepted than operating in Maastricht/Rhein area in EU, where you have 8.33 frequencies, and changes less than 5 mins apart.
Similarly, pointing to MCP/FCU might seem silly to somebody who operates in airspece, where you get five level changes in the entire flight, but it might - possibly - make a small bit of sense when you operate 4 or 6 sector days into London TMA, FRA, etc., where you often get 20 level changes on the way up and 20 on the way down.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a safer and simpler way. Inform the manufacturer about your proposed changes. Because apart from the design philosophy and software and hardware access the manufacture has a global customer reach and incidents. So if you want to change something in Argentina that may have been already done in Korea and ended in a screw up. Armed with FCOM, FCTM no one is in a position to make their own procedures. There's famous incident of Jetstar Australia and two other Airlines changing FMA call on GA to only after gear up. The captains stopped short of TOGA and waited for gear up to check the FMA. Copilot waited for positive climb to put gear up. The aircraft remained in approach and worst case it came down to 14feet before they pulled up. All returned to previous procedure. TOGA first FMA to confirm transition to GA then everything else.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does not make any sense to point the altitude on the FCU ; Airbus callout is FL XXX blue (or magenta in case). Pointing the FCU is only half of the story and in case of an alt constraint lower than the FCU altitude it is actually misleading. What the airplane will do is only dictated by the FMA, all other data is almost useless.
This situation is where I actually find it useful to point to the FCU. ATC clears you to 6000, and the FCU reflects that clearance limit, even though the PFD shows 12,100 in pink.
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: italy
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can’t comment on the bus but on the boeing you can’t deduce the state of the modes by looking at the MCP!
You can see what is deselectable, that does’t give you the complete picture.
e.g.
in alt hold, the mcp button might NOT be illuminated.
an illuminated VORLOC button could be armed not engaged.
an Illuminated AP button isn’t necessarily engaged (e.g early part of intended 2 channel approach)
This is why you look at the FMA not the MCP
how the **** do people not understand this? Why is the question even being asked?
**** training, that’s why.
this industry need to stoo cutting corners and pull its head out of its arse.
FFS. Somebody shoot me.
You can see what is deselectable, that does’t give you the complete picture.
e.g.
in alt hold, the mcp button might NOT be illuminated.
an illuminated VORLOC button could be armed not engaged.
an Illuminated AP button isn’t necessarily engaged (e.g early part of intended 2 channel approach)
This is why you look at the FMA not the MCP
how the **** do people not understand this? Why is the question even being asked?
**** training, that’s why.
this industry need to stoo cutting corners and pull its head out of its arse.
FFS. Somebody shoot me.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The case with altitude constraints is the only case where I’ve seen the PFD not match the FCU (by design).
This situation is where I actually find it useful to point to the FCU. ATC clears you to 6000, and the FCU reflects that clearance limit, even though the PFD shows 12,100 in pink.
This situation is where I actually find it useful to point to the FCU. ATC clears you to 6000, and the FCU reflects that clearance limit, even though the PFD shows 12,100 in pink.
Depends a lot on airlines SOPs then. We never set anything lower (higher) than the active constraints, I.e. cleared down to 6000 ft via STAR we set the different step down constraints on the FCU, but yes technically it is perfectly fine to just set your final altitude provided you are in DES or CLB all the time.
If your policy is the latter, then I see the point of your comment.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You mean magenta I guess.
Depends a lot on airlines SOPs then. We never set anything lower (higher) than the active constraints, I.e. cleared down to 6000 ft via STAR we set the different step down constraints on the FCU, but yes technically it is perfectly fine to just set your final altitude provided you are in DES or CLB all the time.
If your policy is the latter, then I see the point of your comment.
Depends a lot on airlines SOPs then. We never set anything lower (higher) than the active constraints, I.e. cleared down to 6000 ft via STAR we set the different step down constraints on the FCU, but yes technically it is perfectly fine to just set your final altitude provided you are in DES or CLB all the time.
If your policy is the latter, then I see the point of your comment.
I have to ask. Why? Assuming you fly a Boeing/Airbus, what’s the benefit, and how do you handle soft constraints (eg 21,000-23,000)?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: taking up the hold
Age: 53
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A basic Airbus principle is to look for the output rather than rely on the input. If you try to switch your kitchen light on you check that the bulb has illuminated rather than relying on the switch position alone.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not a big fan of the above procedure, as we were discussing above “know your FMA at all times” should be the priority but as we know our business is driven by internal and external statistics.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As many operators, we also had a few level busts over the years, because of crew selecting the final cleared altitude on SID/STARS with constraints in the middle and for some reason getting out of CLB/DES and here you go, you get a level bust. We basically write down the final cleared altitude on PM MCDU (eg. descend via STAR 3000 ft) and select step by step the different altitudes on the STAR (5000 ft, 4000ft, etc..).
Thanks for the insight though. There are as many ways to do it as there are operators.
As many operators, we also had a few level busts over the years, because of crew selecting the final cleared altitude on SID/STARS with constraints in the middle and for some reason getting out of CLB/DES and here you go, you get a level bust. We basically write down the final cleared altitude on PM MCDU (eg. descend via STAR 3000 ft) and select step by step the different altitudes on the STAR (5000 ft, 4000ft, etc..).
I am not a big fan of the above procedure, as we were discussing above “know your FMA at all times” should be the priority but as we know our business is driven by internal and external statistics.
I am not a big fan of the above procedure, as we were discussing above “know your FMA at all times” should be the priority but as we know our business is driven by internal and external statistics.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Doha
Age: 13
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew with a guy who failed his upgrade a few years ago and was hoping to be given another shot at it sometime in the future.
As we climbed out passing transition altitude, as with SOPs I said “Set Standard” and although he did the action, his side remained on the QNH. He then replied as with SOPs “Standard cross checked passing FL???” even though in front of him it was very clear he still had the QNH set.
As we climbed out passing transition altitude, as with SOPs I said “Set Standard” and although he did the action, his side remained on the QNH. He then replied as with SOPs “Standard cross checked passing FL???” even though in front of him it was very clear he still had the QNH set.
On the E Jet, there are no lights or digits on the MCP/FCU. The only way to confirm you have set/selected anything is to check the PFD.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently the fleet office is quite happy with the statistics of this SOP. There have been in the past events where the crew mainly changed from DES to V/S and that lead to the troubles. The mitigation strategy was to prohibit the use of V/S when descending/climbing "via" a STAR/SID and the use of step FCU altitude selections. My bet is that the latter will be removed soon as, again, it does not make sense if things are done properly from the beginning.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PM will then use the MCDU as needed.
Apparently the fleet office is quite happy with the statistics of this SOP. There have been in the past events where the crew mainly changed from DES to V/S and that lead to the troubles. The mitigation strategy was to prohibit the use of V/S when descending/climbing "via" a STAR/SID and the use of step FCU altitude selections. My bet is that the latter will be removed soon as, again, it does not make sense if things are done properly from the beginning.
Apparently the fleet office is quite happy with the statistics of this SOP. There have been in the past events where the crew mainly changed from DES to V/S and that lead to the troubles. The mitigation strategy was to prohibit the use of V/S when descending/climbing "via" a STAR/SID and the use of step FCU altitude selections. My bet is that the latter will be removed soon as, again, it does not make sense if things are done properly from the beginning.
Only half a speed-brake
If the vertical profile guidance before FAF/P was not such crap, perhaps people would be inclined to using the DES mode without intervening all the time?
But it is not.
But it is not.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately from a trainer's point of view the solution is always the same : training !
From a Ops/safety point of view it's training AND something else to teach the remaining 99% of the pilots population not to be naughty.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PM will then use the MCDU as needed.
Apparently the fleet office is quite happy with the statistics of this SOP. There have been in the past events where the crew mainly changed from DES to V/S and that lead to the troubles. The mitigation strategy was to prohibit the use of V/S when descending/climbing "via" a STAR/SID and the use of step FCU altitude selections. My bet is that the latter will be removed soon as, again, it does not make sense if things are done properly from the beginning.
Apparently the fleet office is quite happy with the statistics of this SOP. There have been in the past events where the crew mainly changed from DES to V/S and that lead to the troubles. The mitigation strategy was to prohibit the use of V/S when descending/climbing "via" a STAR/SID and the use of step FCU altitude selections. My bet is that the latter will be removed soon as, again, it does not make sense if things are done properly from the beginning.