A320: What "additional procedures" are you considering when reaching the STS page?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was PF, we were flying into an airport with some terrain, coordinating the go around with tower was a goat rope (You want to do what? Why? Where?) Further coordination with approach control was bothersome but not as bad as with tower. Of course fuel was an issue, probably more of a self imposed issue, we had about :40 mins of loiter left. Transferring control didn’t seem like a good idea time during that period. I also didn’t want to delay starting the procedure because of my self imposed fuel deadline. (Sounds like a bunch of excuses, but that is what was happening and what I was thinking)
I agree however that in virtually all circumstances transferring aircraft control to the FO is the appropriate course of action during a non normal.
I agree however that in virtually all circumstances transferring aircraft control to the FO is the appropriate course of action during a non normal.
I still think following manufacturer guidance is better in that case. Just my opinion.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with that approach (FO PF and Captain manages the abnormal) is that Fo's are less proficient at managing ECAM and if/when the right DU's are inop, FO has to manage the ECAM with very limited experience.
I still think following manufacturer guidance is better in that case. Just my opinion.
I still think following manufacturer guidance is better in that case. Just my opinion.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: 43N
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with that approach (FO PF and Captain manages the abnormal) is that Fo's are less proficient at managing ECAM and if/when the right DU's are inop, FO has to manage the ECAM with very limited experience.
I still think following manufacturer guidance is better in that case. Just my opinion.
I still think following manufacturer guidance is better in that case. Just my opinion.
As I said in my earlier post the preferred method of handling a non normal, according to our manuals, is for the Captain to transfer aircraft and radio control to the FO. It’s the “preferred” method. I prefer it, I teach new Captains to prefer it, however in this case I preferred not to do that for the reasons I listed.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every flight is different and every crew is different in terms of proficiency levels and skills, therefore there is not a one size fits all type of solution but task sharing has to be decided on a day to day or failure to failure basis. What works today with crew AB and a specific combination of wx/failures might not work tomorrow for crew BC in a different scenario.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BLQ
Posts: 1,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any procedure/information - other than a QRH summary - is considered necessary to consult after the ECAM status has been completed and understood.
Even if it is necessary to have a structured and disciplined failure management:
- fly, navigate, communicate
- start ECAM / QRH procedure
- Complete the status and understand its consequences
- Consider the reset, check-lists, additional procedures ...
however, the additional procedures cannot have anything prescriptive; each of us, in fact, has different needs due to the level of experience, knowledge, and time available depending on the situation we have to deal with.
An excellent way to understand the concept is to practice some chair-flying with failures in which you must think a bit “out of the box” in regards to finding the information you need to make a decision. Here is a non-exhaustive list, as you can play finding plenty of different combinations:
Double FCU fault - double FWC fault - many of the electrical failures ...
I hope this helps a bit.
Last edited by EI-PAUL; 30th Jan 2021 at 17:26.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only half a speed-brake
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At all the companies I’ve flown for, both pilots are assessed on handling non-normals, as PF and PM at each training event. I imagined that that was pretty standard.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BLQ
Posts: 1,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're right. Reading my post now, I realize that I have reversed the last two points of the sequence, obviously considering reset, checklists, and additional procedures come before the status review.
My apologies, in particular to saviboy, if I have caused further confusion on the subject. Nevertheless, the reccomendation not to treat additional procedures too prescriptively and practice some chair flying with some ECAM trainer and certain failures or combinations of them to start mastering this concept and enhance ECAM handling remain valid in my opinion.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That’s a very easy problem to fix. The instructor just needs to say “CA, your decision will be for the FO to handle the ECAM on this one.”
At all the companies I’ve flown for, both pilots are assessed on handling non-normals, as PF and PM at each training event. I imagined that that was pretty standard.
At all the companies I’ve flown for, both pilots are assessed on handling non-normals, as PF and PM at each training event. I imagined that that was pretty standard.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strangely, it is not the case at my company. So even if, as an instructor, I often offer or even make time for the Fo to get a chance to practice his/her ecam skills, it is not what is normally done. Therefore, (one could say, logically,) FO's are usually weaker at ECAM management.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for looking out for the professional development of your FO's and the safety of all on board. Perhaps you could convince those in charge that it's essential that both crewmembers attain the same level of proficiency, and make it a requirement. If you find yourself in an electrical emergency, you won't have the option of having the FO fly while you fix the plane.
Both seats train every six months; the LOFT events are always 2 legs.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: 43N
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I strongly believe either pilot should be able to handle a non-normal from the moment it presents itself until the non-normal procedure is completed. This is how we train our pilots both in our training center and when they come to the line. (And saviboy I second CheckAirman’s comments - I hope the mentoring/additional training you provide your FO’s becomes standard at your outfit)
Why do we prefer Captains to handle a non-normal? Why do Captains get paid more than FO’s? It is the intangibles Captains bring to the table - knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgement.
Captains are paid for higher level thinking. In most cases flying the airplane during a non normal is easy, working the radios is easy. The Captain shouldn’t use brain power on those low level tasks. He or she should be using their knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgment gained to be able to think three and four steps ahead to a point where the airplane is successfully recovered.
That’s not to say every FO couldn’t do that, just in most cases the FO doesn’t bring the depth and breadth of those intangibles to the table quite yet - be it experience on the airplane, in the environment, or at the airline.
Why do we prefer Captains to handle a non-normal? Why do Captains get paid more than FO’s? It is the intangibles Captains bring to the table - knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgement.
Captains are paid for higher level thinking. In most cases flying the airplane during a non normal is easy, working the radios is easy. The Captain shouldn’t use brain power on those low level tasks. He or she should be using their knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgment gained to be able to think three and four steps ahead to a point where the airplane is successfully recovered.
That’s not to say every FO couldn’t do that, just in most cases the FO doesn’t bring the depth and breadth of those intangibles to the table quite yet - be it experience on the airplane, in the environment, or at the airline.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We do use PF/PM. Once the plane's stabilised, the FO takes the role of PF, and directs the CA to accomplish the procedures. ("I have control and ATC, ECAM actions").
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for looking out for the professional development of your FO's and the safety of all on board. Perhaps you could convince those in charge that it's essential that both crewmembers attain the same level of proficiency, and make it a requirement. If you find yourself in an electrical emergency, you won't have the option of having the FO fly while you fix the plane.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I strongly believe either pilot should be able to handle a non-normal from the moment it presents itself until the non-normal procedure is completed. This is how we train our pilots both in our training center and when they come to the line. (And saviboy I second CheckAirman’s comments - I hope the mentoring/additional training you provide your FO’s becomes standard at your outfit)
Why do we prefer Captains to handle a non-normal? Why do Captains get paid more than FO’s? It is the intangibles Captains bring to the table - knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgement.
Captains are paid for higher level thinking. In most cases flying the airplane during a non normal is easy, working the radios is easy. The Captain shouldn’t use brain power on those low level tasks. He or she should be using their knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgment gained to be able to think three and four steps ahead to a point where the airplane is successfully recovered.
That’s not to say every FO couldn’t do that, just in most cases the FO doesn’t bring the depth and breadth of those intangibles to the table quite yet - be it experience on the airplane, in the environment, or at the airline.
Why do we prefer Captains to handle a non-normal? Why do Captains get paid more than FO’s? It is the intangibles Captains bring to the table - knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgement.
Captains are paid for higher level thinking. In most cases flying the airplane during a non normal is easy, working the radios is easy. The Captain shouldn’t use brain power on those low level tasks. He or she should be using their knowledge, experience, wisdom and judgment gained to be able to think three and four steps ahead to a point where the airplane is successfully recovered.
That’s not to say every FO couldn’t do that, just in most cases the FO doesn’t bring the depth and breadth of those intangibles to the table quite yet - be it experience on the airplane, in the environment, or at the airline.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who does what cannot be based on individual opinion no matter how correct it sounds. It depends on manufacturer's recommendations, company policy and the general experience level of the new recruit into the right hand seat. Equal competence in both seats is a desired state but not always the case. Most places a copilot is inducted with a few hundred hours and he will take time to reach that. Besides if Airline lays down a policy it cannot be brushed aside because should an incident occur the regulator will treat as violation. Forget QZ8501, in case of Atlas handing over a perfectly normal aircraft to FO resulted in a crash. Off course the Capt is supposed to hand over doing head down work. Coming to ECAM online few lucky ones will get to do it. Most will retire with sim experience. Every line pilot cannot have his way of doing things. There has to be standardization. Coming to FO having more experience Jetstar had an incident where the more experienced FO was making a mistake and the capt who was PM out of respect for tmore experience and being acquainted didn't intervene. A case of reverse gradient didn't help.
