FLYER Forums

If you look at my avatar you will see why I wasn't impressed having saved all my pennies to buy a decent guitar back then

Again - not a checklist but a set of instructions

Provided the end result is that the things that need to be done in the correct order and time at flight phase, are - then, it's just semantics...

riverrock wrote:Again - not a checklist but a set of instructions

One way or the other, does it matter? If someone does it your way, doing a flow round the cockpit to "do", then uses a checklist to check everything is done, that's a checklist. If, somewhere along the line, something isn't as the checklist specifies, then you "do" what's been missed.

When I do my pre-take off checks, I follow the list. Some things are already done, just checked, such as fuel on, which particular tank and whether it's sufficient to get me in the air, and some things are "to do" such as switching the fuel pump on. For me it's a combined check and instruction list!

If you use a set of instructions (a "do-list"), each of which are short with later ones not confirming earlier items, then you'll skip steps inadvertently. For long lists, you'll chunk steps together (glance at the list, do 4 items, look back at the list) which means you reply on memory of doing an action, which can also mean items are easily skipped. If you are reading something, checking something, going back to the list, you are more likely to be focusing on the list rather than the thing that should be checked (so you'll get confirmation bias).
If ATC interrupts - at which point will you restart your list?
I suggest reading through this: https://ti.arc.nasa.gov/m/profile/adega ... klists.pdf . Although its focus is multi-crew, most of what is said is amplified for single crew, as you don't have mutual redundancy.

So you have to ask - how can you mitigate the inherent issues with checklists?
One way is to set everything, using a flow method, then use a short mneumonic based memory checklist for the critical things, to confirm the critical things are correct. The aircraft we fly really aren't that complex!

I've always used a checklist for our group a/c: As time has gone by it's inevitably got a bit longer with new avionics to get used to.
The main thing IMHO is that if at any point I get interrupted by pax/ATC/ idiot taxying his wingtip too close for comfort, I go back to the beginning of the section I'm on and re-start..

The pre-landing checks are of course memorised and vary slightly whether IFR or VFR

Peter

@PeteSpencer
interesting you say that

for me:
pre-take-off everything done by list
after that all from memory

FlarePath wrote:If you look at my avatar you will see why I wasn't impressed having saved all my pennies to buy a decent guitar back then

Thread drift for a short musical interlude.

mmcp42 wrote:@PeteSpencer
interesting you say that

for me:
pre-take-off everything done by list
after that all from memory

?

Peter

Charles Hunt wrote:

FlarePath wrote:If you look at my avatar you will see why I wasn't impressed having saved all my pennies to buy a decent guitar back then

Thread drift for a short musical interlude.

Says it all really doesn't it...

PeteSpencer wrote:

mmcp42 wrote:@PeteSpencer
interesting you say that

for me:
pre-take-off everything done by list
after that all from memory

?

Peter

er what I meant was, much like your post implied
a) I follow a checklist for pre-takeoff drill
b) everything else done from memory
hope that makes more sense?!?

As I see it, virtually any checklist - whether printed, mnemonic, memorised, or flow can basically be used in one of three ways...

1. Read - Do.

2. Do - Confirm.

3. Challenge - Respond.

The last pretty much only exists in multi crew operations, so as single pilot operators, we are down to 1 and 2.

If I read then execute pre-take-off checks, recite then carry out from memory pre-landing checks, scan across the cockpit looking for actions to resolve a rough running engine, those are all ultimately "read - do".

If after landing I do the obvious things such as turn the transponder and landing light off and raise the flaps, then once the aeroplane is stationary get the checklist out and run my finger down to be sure that I didn't miss anything, that was "Do-Confirm".

You can construct checklists to be optimised for one approach or another, but ultimately almost any version can be used in any of the three ways.

G

A couple of years ago, I had a really good chat with Captain Aseem Hashmi, then skipper of the Cunard Queen Elizabeth. He's a thoroughly good bloke who is an aviation fanatic, and he ended up in the maritime world after he was laid off by BA as a young 737 second officer. Capt. Hashmi pushed hard for the introduction of checklists into cruise ship operations and actually got an award for that work. Sadly he's not allowed to fly by Cunard but is still aeroplane barmy.

https://www.beyondships2.com/cunard-que ... ptain.html

rats404 wrote:.. he's not allowed to fly by Cunard ..

ah, I can rememember when British Eagle (one of my former employers) was briefly 'Cunard Eagle'

T67M wrote:When flying as a CRI, I often encourage the pilot I'm flying with to ditch the "do list" and try using it as a "check list". Invariably I end up with a pilot who is both more confident and, importantly, more competent.

After 12 years of using a ‘to-do’ list for the on-the-ground checks, I followed your advice and ditched it for three flights over the weekend, instead using it just as a quick check that I’d done everything I needed to immediately before start-up, taxi and take off.

I’m happy to report that it delivered as promised. My brain felt a lot more involved in what I was doing and why I was doing it, rather than just following a prescriptive list of mostly very obvious ‘checks’, such as remembering to take the parking brake off before taxiing . It did feel like my mind was more ahead of the aircraft than it usually would be when slavishly following the piece of paper.

So thank you for the advice. It will be my new SOP from now on!