Read and Do vs. Do and Verify for checklist use

Maurus said:
My question is when are these people doing the "read-do" type of checklist usage? Staring down a the checklist can cause a hazard while in the air. I understand a new pilot wont be able to do a "do-verify" type of checklist usage but if they memorize the checklist (which in a C-172 isn't bad) then they can create their own flow relatively quickly. I would also tell them to hanger fly when they can as it is free and they will transition to a "do-verify" system quite easily.

If they are career students the transition to an airline would be much easier.
Click to expand...
MidlifeFlyer said:
Stop whining, ranting and getting headaches because other people use a different procedure than you do.

Yes, when I get in the airplane with an experienced pilot who hasn't developed flows, I wonder how come. If it's a training flight (like a FR), I will even suggest that he or she consider learning flows. But, so long as the pilot isn't doing something unsafe, I don't get worked up over techniques just because they are not mine.
Click to expand...

Ok please let clarify my comment. I'm not blaming the pilot in that scenario. I'm really thinking "this guy's previous instructor did not teach him proper procedures. It's probably not his CFI's fault either. Most CFIs these days are not experienced pilots. They are probably building time to that first 135/121 gig. So what I was really trying to say was that as a group we instructors should try to pass on those airline procedures that make sense in any cockpit to the GA population that has never been exposed to that before. No offense meant friend."
 
I think the real answer is "it depends".

Different aircraft, different types of flying, different types of students require different techniques.
 
Read-do on the ground while stopped
Flow-check in flight

Thats how our school does it, but I have no gripe if im flying with a pilot that does it another way. Im even ok with a memory "LCGUMPS", just as long as they do it.
 
Fly_Unity said:
Im even ok with a memory "LCGUMPS", just as long as they do it.
Click to expand...

Well thats a good point. For most small airplanes, GUMPS gets the job done. Most airplanes will make it onto the ground ok as long as we get the gear down anyways...I wonder sometimes if we pilots overcomplicate the process.
 
TheNorthStar said:
Well thats a good point. For most small airplanes, GUMPS gets the job done. Most airplanes will make it onto the ground ok as long as we get the gear down anyways...I wonder sometimes if we pilots overcomplicate the process.
Click to expand...

Hell, the 1900 will be fine 90% of the time with nothing more than "gear down, three green, confirmed." Really, flying airplanes is substantially less complicated than people would have you believe.

It's my firm belief that doing things the same way, every time is the key to doing things safety and only modifying your procedure when conditions dictate. Or, "I'm at this point in space, I should do X, is that prudent? Yes/No, do X/don't do X - do Y." It's 10 years from the first flight lesson for me in May of this year. Frankly, an airplane is an airplane, fly the wing as such.
 
TheNorthStar said:
Well thats a good point. For most small airplanes, GUMPS gets the job done. Most airplanes will make it onto the ground ok as long as we get the gear down anyways...I wonder sometimes if we pilots overcomplicate the process.
Click to expand...
We do tend to over-complicate but the flip side is the development of bad habits.

The pre-landing check is a perfect example. In a 172, 99% of the time, the total pre-landing check comes down to carb heat and mixture. Hard to get used to going through a checklist (of any type) when it's that simple. So we let it go and get used to not doing one (I'm including mnemonic reminders and flows as checklists) formally.

Fast forward to that first HP checkout in a 182 where the only addition is a prop and cowl flaps. I haven't seen too many pilots forget the prop (since that's the more interesting thing) but have seen cowl flaps not touched again and again. I remember one transition in which I kept telling the pilot that he was missing something on the pre-landing check. Deer in the headlights. Not a clue. And never once even thought of looking at the checklist - which was sitting right in front of him.

Not using the checklist (or a flow or mnemonic replacement) had become so ingrained from early training that it was as though it wasn't even there.
 
ppragman said:
It's my firm belief that doing things the same way, every time is the key to doing things safety and only modifying your procedure when conditions dictate. Or, "I'm at this point in space, I should do X, is that prudent? Yes/No, do X/don't do X - do Y."
Click to expand...
Bottom line - this is what it's all about.
 
[quote="MidlifeFlyer, post: 1852726, member: 1194"Z]

Fast forward to that first HP checkout in a 182 where the only addition is a prop and cowl flaps. I haven't seen too many pilots forget the prop (since that's the more interesting thing) but have seen cowl flaps not touched again and again. I remember one transition in which I kept telling the pilot that he was missing something on the pre-landing check. Deer in the headlights. Not a clue. And never once even thought of looking at the checklist - which was sitting right in front of him.

Not using the checklist (or a flow or mnemonic replacement) had become so ingrained from early training that it was as though it wasn't even there.[/quote]


THIS is what I'm talking about. Flows and checks fix that. Student pilots should first learn flows VERY early in their PPL training. So it becomes just a part of flying. They learn to run a flow and then check it with the checklist. On most small airplanes they will memorize the checklists very fast. Even on small HP aircraft. Then if they get busy and forget the checklist they will have run the flow and at least have the critical items taken care of. This would have a big impact on GA safety IMHO.
 
ppragman said:
Not a CFI but that's never stopped me before.

I personally do-verify for everything with a notable exception. If its an abnormal procedure I read-and-do after any associated memory items are completed. Since I don't do those that often, I figure its super important not to screw it up, and given that order usually counts with what you do after a memory item, or after something abnormal makes you bust out the checklist, its important to be cautious about which switches you start throwing. That's just me though, initially at FSI they wanted us single pilot guys to read and do. I said, "this isn't going to work in the airplaane because we have no autopilot, and I can't be trying to read the checklist for every item in a busy terminal environment. I'll get to the list but its more important to fly airplane right now." Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Other than the ubiquitous "GUMP" and "5-Ts" checks, it's the only mnemonic I can remember. Good thing I don't use mnemonics; I'd need a mnemonic just to remember the rest.
 
Maurus said:
Staring down a the checklist can cause a hazard while in the air.
Click to expand...

How do you brief approaches, update/teach use of a nav log, or fly with a map then? Staring into the cockpit at paperwork is a routine any pilot should be comfortable with.

I was taught read/do from day one. Pre-landing checks in a typical trainer are 5-8 (8 being retract trainers) items. These are easily performed while on x-wind to downwind or after traffic is in sight and no factor on pattern entry. My training out of Nashua was a class D with typically 5-15 planes in the pattern. So to say it's impractical in busy airspace, well I figure I'll head off that rebuttal.

It boils down to practice and planning. If you've practiced so as to be proficient with the checklists, it's not dangerous. If you plan when to run the checklists, just as you do for approach briefs, it's not dangerous. All this is moot, however, if you're using the "checklist novels" provided by the manufacturer. Make your own and put some thought into how they flow.

A final note, I do flow checks for emergencies. Opposite some of you posting here, emergencies are the most likely time to have a time/attention critical situation. Fly, flow, then check. Just my 02 of course.
 
shdw said:
A final note, I do flow checks for emergencies. Opposite some of you posting here, emergencies are the most likely time to have a time/attention critical situation. Fly, flow, then check. Just my 02 of course.
Click to expand...
I find it interesting that there are two flows that are taught at the student pilot level - the preflight walk-around and emergencies. And yet we give so little attention to others.
 
shdw said:
How do you brief approaches, update/teach use of a nav log, or fly with a map then? Staring into the cockpit at paperwork is a routine any pilot should be comfortable with.
Click to expand...
Isn't the point to reduce the amount of time with your head inside the plane? Not to mention proper preflight planning should keep the staring at approaches and sectionals / low enroutes at a minimum.

A checklist is something easy to develop a flow for. It is amazing when watching people fumble around with a checklist while flying while doing the read-do technique. The best is when people lose their spot on the checklist and have to read through everything again to find their spot.

shdw said:
I was taught read/do from day one
Click to expand...
Primacy doesn't count as a good reason ;)

shdw said:
Pre-landing checks in a typical trainer are 5-8 (8 being retract trainers) items. These are easily performed while on x-wind to downwind or after traffic is in sight and no factor on pattern entry. My training out of Nashua was a class D with typically 5-15 planes in the pattern. So to say it's impractical in busy airspace, well I figure I'll head off that rebuttal.
Click to expand...

You would be surprised. I have had to catch a few things in patterns of towered and non-towered airports that could have been disasters had my head been staring at a checklist. Planes turning at the wrong time, tower telling planes to turn directly into me. Planes going the opposite direction of the pattern at pattern altitude and not talking. Pilots entering the class D without talking to tower. Seen it all.
 
Checklist, chart, approach plate, radio, etc should not be permitted to divert anyone's attention for more than 3 seconds en route nor more than 1 second in the traffic pattern or on an IAP.
 
Maurus said:
A checklist is something easy to develop a flow for. It is amazing when watching people fumble around with a checklist while flying while doing the read-do technique. The best is when people lose their spot on the checklist and have to read through everything again to find their spot.
Click to expand...

This is where developing your own plays a key role. My checklists are tri-fold with one side ground ops, one air, and one emergencies. They are cut to the size of my kneeboard, hence I never fumble around with them. I've either got it clipped to my board or the yoke, finger on my place and run through it. A pre landing check takes maybe 10 seconds. With a few seconds in between used for scanning.


Midlife,

I am not claiming one to be superior. They each have their flaws and I don't find either one to be superior so long as both end, or in the case of read/do, follow along, with the checklist. The only issue I have with a flow is when some macho pilot claims they are fine to replace the checklist.



(not at anyone in particular) Yes, the "I don't need checklists" mantra is macho. While an instructor might have perfect flows, it's absurd to think the weekend warrior they're teaching will be as proficient a year, or even a few months, out of training.

Don't demonstrate what you're capable of (that's macho), demonstrate what you think they will be capable of a year down the road. It's inevitable that students will follow our examples and flying once a month after training isn't going to lead to well memorized flows. To be safe, they will need to always verify.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top