Where are the rote memory procedural utterances?

[bstolle]

As long as you can still see…(all the words matter, right?)

That's when a simple transfer of controls occurs with the associated standard call outs, although it would be a good idea to inform the other guy why you are transferring the controls.

[3WE]

That's when a simple transfer of controls occurs with the associated standard call outs, although it would be a good idea to inform the other guy why you are transferring the controls.

Ok…that was sort of getting at…EXCEPT, I would still IDEALLY like some one to state and/or ask if things are ok versus ‘total silence’.

Common sense also means that it a guy wants to say SHIT, it’s ok.

Thanks for entertaining my free outsider advice on how to do your job.

[bstolle]

I would still IDEALLY like some one to state and/or ask if things are ok versus ‘total silence’.

Thanks for entertaining my free outsider advice on how to do your job.

I think that's a question of training and countless flight were you get used to the fact that really only critical items are being mentioned.
A bird strike at this altitude and speed is very unlikely to cause serious demage to the windshield and I'm pretty sure that both pilots did glance at the engine instruments.

You are most welcome. As mentioned before, I really like the relaxed atmosphere in the JP forums.

[3WE]

4. [Extremely obvious, borderline “stupid” callouts]

4. Don't understand that one.

I’m using stupid JUST to make a point. I know that in the greater realm of things, they are reasonable.

My favorite example- I got to wear a headset on a J-31 flight.

as we taxied out to the parallel runways that are used 98% of the time, we approached a crosswind runway used during heavy winds and (at the time) when converging ILS operations increased landing capacity because the parallel runways were too close.

As we approached it, the captain said “clear”… the FO responded “clear”.

Ok, great, except the winds are light, the weather severe VMC, the ATIS makes no mention of the runway being in use, no operations of any kind were visible and we were cleared to cross.

The robotic “clear” amazed me. Why it wasn’t “6 not in use AND clear?

And I dunno, sometimes when the phraseology is too canned, pilots have (rarely) barfed back “the normal answer” even if wrong…just out of habit.

Soooo, back to birds….. splat…shit!… can you see ok?…

Repeating- foul on me for getting into pilot business.

[Evan]

4. [Extremely obvious, borderline “stupid” callouts]



I’m using stupid JUST to make a point. I know that in the greater realm of things, they are reasonable.

My favorite example- I got to wear a headset on a J-31 flight.

as we taxied out to the parallel runways that are used 98% of the time, we approached a crosswind runway used during heavy winds and (at the time) when converging ILS operations increased landing capacity because the parallel runways were too close.

As we approached it, the captain said “clear”… the FO responded “clear”.

Ok, great, except the winds are light, the weather severe VMC, the ATIS makes no mention of the runway being in use, no operations of any kind were visible and we were cleared to cross.

The robotic “clear” amazed me. Why it wasn’t “6 not in use AND clear?

And I dunno, sometimes when the phraseology is too canned, pilots have (rarely) barfed back “the normal answer” even if wrong…just out of habit.

Soooo, back to birds….. splat…shit!… can you see ok?…

Repeating- foul on me for getting into pilot business.

Here's what you still don't get: human error is inevitable. For that reason, the egghead people who made flying through the air ridiculously safe developed rote defenses, known as procedures and protocols, that defend the pilot against pilot error. Because they seem so 'stupid' to certain pilots, certain pilots dismiss them. These are the pilots we read about in final reports.

Other examples: I used to go with a friend to the pistol range. After everyone has emptied their clips, they are required to say 'clear' and put the gun down. Despite the guns being clearly empty, mostly semi-automatics with the slide open, impossible to fire, no one is allowed to touch the gun while people are downrange retrieving targets. It is this quasi-superstitious level of safety that prevents the unforeseen sequence of events that lead to Brandon Lee getting shot or the debacle on the set of Rust.

I've observed how newby pedestrians cross the street in New York, watching for the walk light and then going into the street without checking for cars that might be running the light. I have a rote procedure installed in my head: look both ways—yes BOTH ways—before crossing the street. It has saved my ass a few times.

I want my pilots to say the words and never skip the procedures.

Better stupid than sorry.

[3WE]

Other examples: I used to go with a friend to the pistol range. After everyone has emptied their clips, they are required to say 'clear' and put the gun down. Despite the guns being clearly empty, mostly semi-automatics with the slide open, impossible to fire, no one is allowed to touch the gun while people are downrange retrieving targets. It is this quasi-superstitious level of safety that prevents the unforeseen sequence of events that lead to Brandon Lee getting shot or the debacle on the set of Rust.

Uttering the word “clear” would have prevented this?

I think it’s more about gross violations of fundamental basics.

[Evan]

Uttering the word “clear” would have prevented this?

No, and that’s a good point. Merely uttering the word out of habit does nothing. Nor does confirming a checklist item without looking at the controls or moving a control without looking at it. CRM requires discipline.

Uttering the word AFTER actually looking AND having your second pilot do the same to confirm would have prevented a runway collision in good visibility. So ask yourself, is that worth the trouble?

[3WE]

No, and that’s a good point. Merely uttering the word out of habit does nothing. Nor does confirming a checklist item without looking at the controls or moving a control without looking at it. CRM requires discipline.

Uttering the word AFTER actually looking AND having your second pilot do the same to confirm would have prevented a runway collision in good visibility. So ask yourself, is that worth the trouble?

You’ve gotten me off topic. I WANT the guy flying to utter “[windshield] clear” or “too many guts and feathers”….we could even use a nifty acronym TOMGAF…

GIVEN:

You leave the gun open, point it down, set it down, maybe even take a step back AND SAY CLEAR…

Or the runway is rarely used, the winds don’t favor it, the ATIS doesn’t mention it, you have seen no operations on it today NOR DURING your 2000 ft approach to it in clear weather, you have taxi clearance across it, BUT YOU UTTER “CLEAR”

THEREFORE:

A “Clear” or “TOMGAF” seems kind of reasonable for a bird strike when there’s real odds the windshield is gunked up…odds greater than the gun getting picked up, loaded, aimed and fired. Odds greater than a plane making an emergency landing on an inactive runway or a triple ATC fubar.

PS: Never said that the pilots shouldn’t look, nor verbally confirm, just saying that in [RELATIVE] terms it’s 1) Borderline dumb and 2) Questionably effective given a long list of recent incursion incidents.

[Evan]

You’ve gotten me off topic. I WANT the guy flying to utter “[windshield] clear” or “too many guts and feathers”….we could even use a nifty acronym TOMGAF…

GIVEN:

You leave the gun open, point it down, set it down, maybe even take a step back AND SAY CLEAR…

Or the runway is rarely used, the winds don’t favor it, the ATIS doesn’t mention it, you have seen no operations on it today NOR DURING your 2000 ft approach to it in clear weather, you have taxi clearance across it, BUT YOU UTTER “CLEAR”

THEREFORE:

A “Clear” or “TOMGAF” seems kind of reasonable for a bird strike when there’s real odds the windshield is gunked up…odds greater than the gun getting picked up, loaded, aimed and fired. Odds greater than a plane making an emergency landing on an inactive runway or a triple ATC fubar.

PS: Never said that the pilots shouldn’t look, nor verbally confirm, just saying that in [RELATIVE] terms it’s 1) Borderline dumb and 2) Questionably effective given a long list of recent incursion incidents.

Well here's the difference:

- Saying clear whenever crossing a runway, ANY runway, is intended to prevent pilot error when performing common tasks that are prone to error.

- Saying TOMGAF is intended to establish situational awareness. And, since there isn't any established procedure, it isn't going to initiate one.

My way of thinking is that a bird exploding on your windscreen is as good as a cavalry charge in terms of getting the pilots attention, and the blood plastered on the window is as good as ECAM in terms of giving that situational awareness. So I'm of the mind that situational awareness is established there already. If the PF is on the bird side, I would expect that pilot to hand over to the other one; that would be the callout, and the other pilot would call out to confirm taking control. But if the other pilot's field of view is not affected, and there is nothing amiss on the instruments, no further action is needed. Unless there is reason to believe more birds are coming, but even then, at that point in the final approach, I would think landing is the best move.