THR REF on Takeoff roll
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: london
THR REF on Takeoff roll
Guys,
Questions on where must / usually put eyes on after pressing TOGA switch?
Company POM states PF, after pressing TOGA switch 'monitors airspeed' and then 'maintain direction control.'
Does one follow whatever the most common practice maybe, either scan FMA TOGA or THR REF on PFD and then look out or immediately look out ?
Questions on where must / usually put eyes on after pressing TOGA switch?
Company POM states PF, after pressing TOGA switch 'monitors airspeed' and then 'maintain direction control.'
Does one follow whatever the most common practice maybe, either scan FMA TOGA or THR REF on PFD and then look out or immediately look out ?
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,775
Likes: 353
From: UK
Check the engine instruments to confirm that the appropriate thrust value has been achieved.
e.g. https://assets.publishing.service.go...JZHL_11-22.pdf
e.g. https://assets.publishing.service.go...JZHL_11-22.pdf
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 39
From: Wanderlust
Check the engine instruments to confirm that the appropriate thrust value has been achieved.
e.g. https://assets.publishing.service.go...JZHL_11-22.pdf
e.g. https://assets.publishing.service.go...JZHL_11-22.pdf
Last edited by vilas; 8th October 2022 at 04:44.
Only half a speed-brake
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,459
Likes: 136
From: Commuting not home
Other places the engine instruments and general cockpit environement (including at least in a small part the non-verbal comms and body language of the other pilot) are a natural element of constant scanning. Doing the distant stare is frowned upon. PM's responsibility for verification and a callout does not absolve the PF from their duty to know what's going on themselves in the first place.
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 39
From: Wanderlust
Only certain sections of the globe, beware. And yes - it is being taught rigorously.
Other places the engine instruments and general cockpit environement (including at least in a small part the non-verbal comms and body language of the other pilot) are a natural element of constant scanning. Doing the distant stare is frowned upon. PM's responsibility for verification and a callout does not absolve the PF from their duty to know what's going on themselves in the first place.
Other places the engine instruments and general cockpit environement (including at least in a small part the non-verbal comms and body language of the other pilot) are a natural element of constant scanning. Doing the distant stare is frowned upon. PM's responsibility for verification and a callout does not absolve the PF from their duty to know what's going on themselves in the first place.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 35
From: I wouldn't know.
Depends on variable takeoff circumstances. PF should always glance but in strong gusty crosswind, pouring rain he has the duty to control takeoff run and may be even reject takeoff which PM will not do. So all takeoffs are not same. Once thrust is set let PM do his job. PF should concentrate on what is his priority.
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,775
Likes: 353
From: UK
‘Thats the job of …’
It's the job for all of the crew - check the engine parameters; the professionalism in being able to contribute more than just required by procedures. To look at the speed trend - and with experience build a deeper awareness of what is ‘normal’, associating that with the felt aircraft acceleration, the sound of the engines.
These questions and events identify with the weaknesses of SOP compliance - there is only one way to do ‘it’, stick to the rules, don't deviate.
The reality of operations is that adaptation is required, to add more than might be considered in training; the small, innocuous, apparently unimportant issues which at the end of the day avoid an incident or are just that feeling of a job well done.
Wet and windy; some aircraft require the relative engine thrust levels to be checked during acceleration - just to retain control of the aircraft.
It's the job for all of the crew - check the engine parameters; the professionalism in being able to contribute more than just required by procedures. To look at the speed trend - and with experience build a deeper awareness of what is ‘normal’, associating that with the felt aircraft acceleration, the sound of the engines.
These questions and events identify with the weaknesses of SOP compliance - there is only one way to do ‘it’, stick to the rules, don't deviate.
The reality of operations is that adaptation is required, to add more than might be considered in training; the small, innocuous, apparently unimportant issues which at the end of the day avoid an incident or are just that feeling of a job well done.
Wet and windy; some aircraft require the relative engine thrust levels to be checked during acceleration - just to retain control of the aircraft.
Joined: Oct 2019
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 171
Likes: 72
From: north of Harlow and south of Cambridge
Maybe i was getting it all wrong...
I really don't remember it being all that difficult to check most everything during a TO. After pressing TOGA, the airspeed is not changing that fast. It doesn't take that much time for the N1s to stabilize at the TO setting, which i did check regardless of whether i was PF or PM. As captain, i felt i needed to check everything i could. It only takes a second to confirm for one's self that TO thrust is set. Then there is a scan, inside and outside, rwy track, IAS etc. Any power changes or disruption would be signaled with a change of sound and/or asymmetric thrust/yaw and the crosswind affects on a/c track would be obvious to any pilot worth his/her/its salt. I would see that i had passed 80 kts, and approaching V1 and V2. How else could we survive the simulated incapacitation of the PM which we had on a regular basis on sim checks? The other pilot, PF or PM could be simulated incapacitated and the problem was dealt with in relation to V1 which might not be called out.
Only half a speed-brake
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,459
Likes: 136
From: Commuting not home
Depends on variable takeoff circumstances.
The best practice baseline standard at my home region would include controlled engine glances and PFD/ND scanning for PF during the take-off roll. Moreover for the PIC, intertwined with the primary task of steering the vehicle, one core style for all takeoffs down to LVTO 125 m (our lowest).
I've seen it done differently than that and was shown I don't understand the responsibilities and task sharing well. Okay, appreciate you sharing the knowledge, captain.
Hence the call to use the word 'should' in some context at all times.
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 4
From: UK
Why can't a simple automatic check by something fancy on the 737 not be able to determine if passing 80kts that the thrust wasn't in a valid takeoff range assuming drawing data from the FMC is too complicated?
Couldn't it either shout RETARD or SET TOGA etc (which call? that's probably the trickiest bit to figure out). SOPs are great, but clearly not robust enough to catch this error. Whilst I'm sure many heroes will disagree, I can't see how it can be reliably solved by SOPs alone.
Couldn't it either shout RETARD or SET TOGA etc (which call? that's probably the trickiest bit to figure out). SOPs are great, but clearly not robust enough to catch this error. Whilst I'm sure many heroes will disagree, I can't see how it can be reliably solved by SOPs alone.
Last edited by giggitygiggity; 9th October 2022 at 01:10. Reason: due grammar
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 4,087
Likes: 4,429
From: 3rd Rock, #29B
Why can't a simple automatic check by something fancy on the 737 not be able to determine if passing 80kts that the thrust wasn't in a valid takeoff range assuming drawing data from the FMC is too complicated?
Couldn't it either shout RETARD or SET TOGA etc (which call? that's probably the trickiest bit to figure out). SOPs are great, but clearly not robust enough to catch this error. Whilst I'm sure many heroes will disagree, I can't see how it can be reliably solved by SOPs alone.
Couldn't it either shout RETARD or SET TOGA etc (which call? that's probably the trickiest bit to figure out). SOPs are great, but clearly not robust enough to catch this error. Whilst I'm sure many heroes will disagree, I can't see how it can be reliably solved by SOPs alone.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 35
From: I wouldn't know.
Dunno about Boeings, Airbusses will tell you if the runway is too short for the thrust you have actually set, so there is already a cross check of the real performance. Red “T.O RUNWAY TOO SHORT” alert on setting take off thrust if the actual thrust is not enough to enable a safe distance for lift off.
Nevertheless, a quick glance is of course always a good idea to check for yourself as the PF.
