Approach Briefing
 

right, here's the chart, now please, brief me ...

just write it down the way you say it, what do you focus on and why ...

(here's the URL for the chart if you'ld rather open it in a new window)

http://www.flightsim.com/feature/atwcdk2/image039.jpg

http://www.flightsim.com/feature/atwcdk2/image039.jpg

Hmmm, used that approach many times, in the past.
Normally, I toss it down on the center console, and say...any questions?

Works for me.:)

IE: When you deal with professionals, the wheel need not be reinvented on a daily basis.:D

Now, some may think that I'm being rather cavalier...keep in mind we don't have 300 hour wonders in the RHS, either.
And yes, it makes a difference.:rolleyes:

D'rather fly with a 200 hour F/O than 411A:E

Now what in this approach isn't clear for the poster?
Different missed approach gradients?you should have a performance table in your Flight Crew Ops Manual (for Boeing it is in the PERFORMANCE DISPATCH section of FCOM1) which will give you Single Engine Flaps 15 Climb gradient for your Aircraft actual weight and ambient conditions.(in case an engine fail under the altitude of you minima and the runway is unfortunately blocked as well).
If you can not achieve a gradient higher than the one for the lower minima use the one for the higher.
In that case if you cant make 3perc..use the higher minima of standard 2.5%.
DME is not collocated with the ILS so PNF should have Ibiza VOR selected and PF ILS.
DME reads 0 at threshold .
Missed appr altitude is 3000 feet after an intial left turn towards the sea passing 2000feet.
Engine out procedure towards the sea:O

The Initial approach is straight forward.

A briefing is not just about the approach plate. It is about the whole dynamic of how the briefer intends to conduct the approach and how that involves both or all flightdeck crewmembers in that process. It enables the main points to be highlighted in a manner that ensures that all parties understand and agree that the procedures are being interpreted correctly and it allows for any obvious errors or omissions to be questioned and corrected. In addition it allows for all of this to be modified for the variables that will be present on the day. Notam highlights for unserviceable equipment, lighting or temporary changes to promulgated procedures. Weather constraints and variables. Personal experience and observation factors. For example shear that may be present at the threshold of these types of runways very near the adjacent sea, (often present at IBZ). Similarly the missed approach initial instruction to climb straight ahead to 2000 ft, is because there is an island (not shown on the plate,) as well as the 525ft spot height, just to the South of the airport.

Although the brief should be succinct, it should still cover the main points and the variables on the day, as well as the primary actions likely to be undertaken if the approach needs to be discontinued. Using Ibiza as an example, most pilots will tell you that this approach is rarely flown from the Initial approach fix as published. A briefing would normally highlight the expected procedure as well as the published one.

In summary, no I can't give you a brief for this approach, as it would amount to nothing more than a template. The brief on any two days and with different crews might well vary to take all of the dynamic factors into account. Notwithstanding that, I would never throw the approach plate on the centre console with the statement "any questions?" A lovely bit of bravado, but a completely pointless attempt to satisy the rationale for the brief.

Dear 411A
You know that other times I've had exactly Your same opinion. But his time let me dissent.
Don't You think that it is wise at very least that both Pilots at controls ascertain that they have the same chart with the same date, for the same airport, for the same Runway, for the same kind of approach, before each and every landing?
In a couple of Carrier I flew for it was mandatory to remember by heart at least minima and missed approach procedure

What about a look at the airspace classification from the ERC?

Minimum safe alts? Grid MORAs ? MEAs? Little point in throwing the chart on the centre console for the AAIB to find it blowing across the side of the mountain 60 miles out.

LEIB is just an example, but please try to be more specific regarding the bits you never skip, and chart 10-9 as well ....

do you always go over lighting, rwy width, landing beyond the GS etc . . .

I appreciate that every flight is different, but what I'm after is the habbits that people acquire with time.

share your experience, what are the points that you think must be reviewed and why ?

I am sure we'll discover a few interesting points ... :ok:

Yes, DOVES, I would agree, except....we have one chart for both pilots, and the Flight Engineer.
Therefore, comparing charts is not necessary in our operation.
Now, as for comments from another poster, such as...
leads me to conclude that the respective poster is truly...out to lunch.:rolleyes:

I don't really understand where you are coming from on this airyana?

The brief covers all those points that the pilot flying it feels are relevant. If it is the second time in two days that the pilot has flown that approach with the same person, he may well refer back generally to the previous brief and only highlight the minima and tracking as well as any additions to the Vref that may be factored in because of the weather on the day. On the other hand there may be notam, traffic, operational or other factors that require a briefing change from one day to the next.

It is a fundamental mistake to assume that this is some sort of "parrot type" narration that needs to be judged from one persons performance to the next. A companys Standard Operational Procedures will lay down the skeleton of the points to be covered for a normal brief. It is up to the individual how much "meat" they want to put on those bones.

You appear to be soliciting various individual performances for the suggested benefit of discovery? Given the obvious and the variables, I am not sure why?

This approach is actually quite a complex one if you're in a non-FMS airplane...

You have a VOR, ILS, and 2 NDBs you have to tune and follow. When do you tune which in what radio, if you have no dedicated ILS receivers? How do you transition from NDB to VOR or ILS if you have a separate RMI for the NDBs?

You have a Decision Height choice to be made. If you don't have a climb performance chart in your FCOM/FHB/QRH, how do you decide (weight, temp, actual weather, fuel?)? Then there is a "gotcha" in the Missed Approach Altitude that you might not catch on first glance.

If you have to fly the full approach (no vectors to final), you may have to do a procedure turn or a dogleg path. Then you find there is no DME definition of the OM or the MM, so you may be confused by DME readings vs distance to the runway...

And today I agree with skyeurocapt that 411A IS way too cavalier in his attitude. He obviously has forgotten that his FO may have been flying with Captains who vary quite a bit in their techniques and expectations for crew coordination...

The amount and content of the brief depends on the circumstances. For a locally based (in this case) IBZ crew who have flown together into IBZ, it might be appropriate to say "Standard Brief".

If the FO had just passed his line check on his first type and never been to IBZ before then more briefing would be required, for example.

That said it's more important, I feel, to highlight what is "different" rather than droning on about stuff that's standard.

I am not a huge fan of masses of mnemonics but I think START is quite good for approach briefings, S = STAR/Arrival Route, T= Terrain, A= Approach, R= Runway, T = Taxi Route.

Very well said, Sir.
I have found that when these 'briefings' are done, parrot fashion....nobody listens, let alone actually pays attention.:rolleyes:

Sorry, not forgotten, however, I generally fly with the same First Officer on a short/medium term contract....everyday.
Therefore, what works for one, many not for another...however, one need not be incorrect.:}

Quote:
Yes, DOVES, I would agree, except....we have one chart for both pilots, and the Flight Engineer.
Therefore, comparing charts is not necessary in our operation.

And who keeps that chart handy for any need?

Pilot flying?
Pilot not flying?
Captain?
Flight engineer?

Regards
Romano

Flight Engineer...don't leave home without one.
It not only makes the job much easier, safer too.:ok:

OK guys... visual backed up by the ILS. Any questions? Good... lets land the jet and get some tapas and San Miguels:ok:.

But seriously folks... a full briefing of how the jet is going get from FLXXX to the stand whilst briefing the low altitude chart with reference to MORCAs and anticipated routing to the commencement of the STAR as well as routes to diversionary airports, Then the STAR itself with discussions relating to SLPs and Altitude restrictions. Then for the Approach itself in the normal format you have been trained by your company, pointing out special items such as minimum equipment required for the approach, and minimums based on your aircraft's performance, and special missed approach procedures and notes as may be appropriate. Last but not least the taxi in procedures so the entire crew can enjoy those tapas and San Miguels.


It takes some discipline to treat even your home airport as an unfamiliar airport when conducting the briefing.

I agree what 411A pointed out regarding the fact that the brief is a script and a non existent yes and nod is given by the NPF. To remedy this I pause after each phase of the descent/approach/landing/taxi briefing to confirm salient points with the NPF to ensure they are in the loop and not nodding for the sake of nodding just to get on with the program.

By the way... the same applies to departures procedures as well especially where a low initial level off altitude or quick heading change is required.

Now I see
That's crew integration and crew coordination.
For decades, my colleagues and I, flying for one of the greatest intercontinental airline have fought such a behaviour in the cockpit.
I remember there were times when we co-pilots had a notebook on which were recorded foibles of each commander. Remember though that we were dealing with people who had fought the Second World War and from whom we shared a strong generation gap. Some of them came from fighters and had shot down many aircraft opponents. So that often when we arrived in New York with one of those guys there was always some air-traffic controller who recognized him "Is .... On board? "
" Yes! "
" Now I understand your behaviours. "

Never mind briefing. Lets start with just reading the chart correctly. Then we would not have;

Does it? I estimate that the DME will read about 1.2nm at the threshold not allowing for slant range errors.

or

There is no procedure turn published. The full procedure from the IBZ utilises a racetrack procedure.

or

Well, I see from the chart that the DME will be aprox 5.6 at the LOM and 1.8 at the LMM (again ignoring slant range errors). However, do you need a DME as well as the marker audio and visual indications?

Clearly, briefing the procedure can be very important.

The racetrack is the procedure turn.

Brief as follows:

I tend to think "less is more" when it comes to briefings. Include what you are comfortable with on the day. Your familiarty with the Aerodrome, crew, conditions and IAW your Comp SOP's will decide this.

I have always been of the understanding these Jepp charts are designed to be read left to right across the top box's and thats only what I verbalize in my briefs (although I dont say the ATC Freq's) terrain of course is the "big one" and dont forget the MAP. I usually say the electronic TCH although its probably not necessary.

Many still brief as per the old DC-8 days, but the more progressive operators have modernized briefs to suite an FMC environment. Chart (same and correct app), terrain, Wx and operational considerations (diff from normal) are good starting points. EFB's have further improved this.

PS; I watch out for the "fine print" there can be important points hidden there.

Sure, I would remember ALL of that! NOT!

The plate itself is laid out for you SO AS TO FACILITATE the briefing, which is why they were changed to look like this over the past few years.

Obviously, the information that is required by one's Op Specs are REQUIRED, unless the procedure has been flown earlier in the day, in which case, 411A's suggestion MIGHT suffice. Otherwise, some BASIC information is required to ensure BOTH crew members on on the same page (I know, I' ll get my coat!).

Anyway, without getting into the particulars of this specific approach, we all fly ILS approaches FOR A LIVING, so the NON-ROUTINE aspects of this particular approach (ESPECIALLY NOTAMS) would be of MOST PERTINENT VALUE to BOTH pilots before embarking on the final descent below sterile cockpit altitude.

:ok:

Which is why that is what is written on the crib sheet on my yoke clip. An extract of the essentials unique to this approach, everything else is pretty much standard stuff.

Say what?!?

The procedure turn from the IBZ NDB IAF is clearly depicted on the profile! How can you say there is no procedure turn published, then say there is a procedure turn that is a racetrack?!?

A procedure turn and "racetrack" are two different things... look it up to avoid ambiguities in the f/d! :ok:

On that side of the pond maybe, not over here.

Procedure turn vs procedure hold for coarse reversal.

Over here there a 3 types of PT. The standard procedure turn where pretty much anything goes, in order to effect a course reversal. Then two that must be flown exactly as depicted, the teardrop (now rarely used) and the holding pattern.

to dispel apprehensions there are two IAF therefore two possible approaches:

a straight in one from 20 DME depicted as IAF
race track on over IBZ NDB depicted as well as IAF. IT'S a RACETRACK

dependable on the IAF clearance one will have to fly the procedure accordingly.

Cheers.:ok:

Would I have any questions?
 

Why have you not set the course bars yet? Oh - forgot? Have you mis-dialled that frequency - or did you intend that? I haven't been here before, how are we joining the approach? Vectors? The full racetrack procedure? If we are flying an arc, how do you intend to do that? Use a VOR, then change frequencies for the ILS? If we have to hold for traffic or weather, where will you do that? How much holding fuel do we have? At what point in time will you want to divert? And to where? If we get a windshear warning, will you immediately go-around, or will you assess the performance first? :rolleyes:

None of this is on the chart, 411A - it's why professionals brief. :hmm:

An example:

The aircraft hit the ridge in clear air, and all three aboard (whom I knew) were killed.

I would have thought the way this thread discussion has progressed itself illustrates the need for a concise professional briefing at top-of-descent, prior to starting the approach.

In my opinion, Bealzebub and fireflybob both have it about right.

I would like to think that 411A was being tongue-in-cheek when he made his first reply ... but maybe he wasn't ...

Ibiza LOC/ILS 24 is not a straightforward approach and, for example, at least some mention of which navaids are to be used to define which waypoints, the limits to be used and the go-around procedure would be both sensible and professional. Weather and terrain should also be ingredients to the brief. I am not in favour of verbose briefings but neither is it appropriate just to That is just not a professional attitude in my book - and especially so if there is only one chart available, which is itself poor aviation practice for a multi-crew environment.


JD
:)

Those of use who have been playing in the sandpit for a while know that 411A

(a) has quite a bit of front seat experience behind him, and

(b) is VERY good at throwing a comment or two into a thread in a manner well calculated to stir up a vigorous discussion .. such as this one.

I would be very surprised if his earlier comment were not somewhat tongue in cheek.

Quite correct.

Especially, when I see this...
Yes, we always do a brief discussion about the approach, well before top of descent (if possible), however....I have seen it time and again, both on line checks and in the simulator (especially the former) where there is a last minute runway change, or a different STAR announced at the last minute, or, once having been assured of radar vectors, then assigned a totally different procedure altogether etc....
that it is far better to actually be slightly more adaptable with ones planning, instead of going on and on and on (endlessly)...first I will do this, then I will do that)...and in the end, the crew does none of the original plan, changes thrown at them at the last minute, more shuffling of papers, missed ATC calles because...more briefings infinitum....IF a professional crew cannot both look at an approach chart, see the quite obvious, select navaids without having to verbalise every step....then I would suggest that they have no business in the pointy end.
200 hour wonders in the RHS excepted, with an experienced training Captain to guide the new First Officer accordingly.


Then we have...
This all comes as rather second nature to experienced crew (and that is all we hire in the first place) so....the respective poster I expect would simply not fit into our organisation...fortunately:)

In short, all this verbal chatter is, in many cases, totally unnecessary...after all, it is a brief....so keep it just that way...brief.
It is not an apollo moon landing.:rolleyes:

Oh yes, we don't call it a briefing, it is called in our outfit....crew co-ordination... an old TWA expression that has worked for me, quite successfully thank you very much, for more than thirty years.

In closing, Harry Truman said it best....'If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen'.

I think it is a good question of the first poster. Somehow i think a briefing should be like the word itself: BRIEF!! Some charts are really complicated and when i do a whole briefing of the plate, i'm sometimes wondering if the guy next to me still knows after 5 min what i've said.

Kind of agree with the previous comment - Interesting that some of the posters here had misread the plate i.e. not as simple as it looks so it's worth a decent brief if you haven't been before. And then expect vectors for a straight in final.

Oh, and check that what's in your FMC actually coincides with what's on your plate! Too often missed.

When you have flown for a decent amount of time, you will know that nothing can be relied on as "second nature". All of those questions arose from errors I have seen on the line over the last 20 years or so. :rolleyes:

So, airvana - what would YOU pick out as important? Oh, and you have not told us the weather, which does affect the brief.

Have to disagree entirely.

Yup, works good, lasts a long time.

Or... approaching JED, ATIS says 34C for landing.
Standard crew co-ordination for 34C, 'localizer ....., DA 226, missed approach....., standard calls.'

Now, having flown into JED since 1981, sometimes 34L is assigned at the last minute.
So, 'localizer....., DA 213, missed approach...., standard calls'.

Done.:ok:

Clearly this would not be sufficient for Checkboard...that's why he doesn't work for us, nor is it likely would he would be invited.:)

Would you guys hold the posts for a minute, I need to go to the kitchen for some more pop corn!:D

... 411A I do notice that embarrassment is forcing your "second nature" brief to become more complex with each post. ;)

Not 'embarrassment'...sometimes it's necessary to wake to other guy up.:}

Adverse-Bump stop acting like a total cock, have you flown into IBZ yet?

I have with one of the posters here and have to say we didnt say "standard brief" to each other!

The reason being, it was my first time into IBZ as opposed to LGW for the second time today and 12 times this week, no offence :}