Airbus 320 new SOPs
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LANDING GEAR PINS AND COVERS
So for clarification, from FCOM:
* GEAR PINS and COVERS................................ CHECK ONBOARD and STOWED | PM
Check that the covers and the three gear pins are on board and stowed.
And from FCTM:
GEAR PINS & COVERS...................................................... ................................................ REMOVED
The PF confirms that the gear pins and covers were checked removed (e.g. during the walkaround).
The PF announces “REMOVED”.
* GEAR PINS and COVERS................................ CHECK ONBOARD and STOWED | PM
Check that the covers and the three gear pins are on board and stowed.
And from FCTM:
GEAR PINS & COVERS...................................................... ................................................ REMOVED
The PF confirms that the gear pins and covers were checked removed (e.g. during the walkaround).
The PF announces “REMOVED”.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can the PF confirmed that the pins and covers were removed when these items are not part of his flow? I always check but it’s the PM responsibility and unless the PF go and check also, he is only assuming that the PM did his part correctly.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightDetent
Walkaround.
Or the PF assumes that if the PM did the walk around then the pins and covers are removed I guess?
Last edited by pineteam; 21st May 2022 at 04:09.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: at the edge of the alps
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by T54A
I've always wondered why companies use their SOP as opposed to the OEM SOP. Why do some people think they know better than the guys who actually made the machine?
Can't speak for Airbus but some aspects of original Embraer E-Jet checklists are ill suited for a multiple sector operation and some redesign would allow for a more streamlined ops. E.g. the company checklist on a previous airplane was designed to minimise the number of items to be checked between closing of doors and pushback. Some manufacturers publish separate procedures for optional equipment or optional procedures (such as RNP approaches) which airlines using them frequently might want to include in their normal checklists.
I also knew an airline that would use similar procedures on all their planes to ease transition between models. It's a common topic in training that people "fall back" to previous airplanes' procedures under stress (e.g. go-around callouts, calling out malfunctions).
