Hit vs. Press

Ian J said:
I agree. However I'd hope the company would have all of it written down somewhere rather than rely on random sim instructors to teach it.

In my aircraft my pet peeve is when pilots say they are "bringing the PCLs back," or "bringing #1 back." Back where? Back to Fly? Idle? Back to Stop? It's advance or retard, you retard. :)
Click to expand...
That's basic flight instructing stuff... I think the old AIH had "open the throttle" vs. "cob it!".
 
I have solved a problem in an airplane more than once by hitting something. Fly old stuff and sometimes you have to whack something into working.

I have also been told 'we do not 'pop' the gear, we select gear down'. Mental midgetry if you ask me.
 
You can make a choice in your career.

Here's a good example of a crew that, among other things, did not think it important to use correct verbiage:

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2007/AAR0701.pdf

I do not post here anymore and the last 5 pages of this thread are a good example why. Here the membership had an opportunity to help someone understand the importance of correct verbiage and procedures at the very beginning of their airline pilot career. Instead they made a running joke about it.

It's all fun and games until someone makes a smoking hole in the ground. A little bit of self discipline and professionalism actually do make a difference. Say it the way your airline wants you to.


Typhoonpilot
 
typhoonpilot said:
Here's a good example of a crew that, among other things, did not think it important to use correct verbiage:
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, incorrect verbiage is very low on a list of causal factors, which is far overshadowed in importance by unprofessionalism and a lack of flight discipline.
 
Incorrect verbiage is the cause (or even a contributing factor) to the 3701 crash? Is that really what someone just said? Probably the most ridiculous thing that anyone has ever said on an internet message board. And that's really saying something.

Like I said, anyone who thinks the difference between "hit" and "push" is important, needs to get laid, and probably shouldn't be in a training department. People make this job far more difficult than it needs to be. Lighten up.
 
typhoonpilot said:
I do not post here anymore and the last 5 pages of this thread are a good example why. Here the membership had an opportunity to help someone understand the importance of correct verbiage and procedures at the very beginning of their airline pilot career. Instead they made a running joke about it.
Click to expand...

Exactly why I wish you would post here more. The purpose is to help educate, not to fold just because one feels that they are in the minority. Remember that people hear, even if we don't see the evidence.
 
Hacker15e said:
total-county.gif
Click to expand...

I know it's OT, but that is an awesome study.
 
typhoonpilot said:
You can make a choice in your career.

Here's a good example of a crew that, among other things, did not think it important to use correct verbiage:

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2007/AAR0701.pdf

I do not post here anymore and the last 5 pages of this thread are a good example why. Here the membership had an opportunity to help someone understand the importance of correct verbiage and procedures at the very beginning of their airline pilot career. Instead they made a running joke about it.

It's all fun and games until someone makes a smoking hole in the ground. A little bit of self discipline and professionalism actually do make a difference. Say it the way your airline wants you to.


Typhoonpilot
Click to expand...
Yeah...how about no, okay?
NTSB said:
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable causes of this accident were (1) the pilots’ unprofessional behavior, deviation from standard operating procedures, and poor airmanship, which resulted in an in-flight emergency from which they were unable to recover, in part because of the pilots’ inadequate training; (2) the pilots’ failure to prepare for an emergency landing in a timely manner, including communicating with air traffic controllers immediately after the emergency about the loss of both engines and the availability of landing sites; and (3) the pilots’ improper management of the double engine failure checklist, which allowed the engine cores to stop rotating and resulted in the core lock engine condition. Contributing to this accident were (1) the core lock engine condition, which prevented at least one engine from being restarted, and (2) the airplane flight manuals that did not communicate to pilots the importance of maintaining a minimum airspeed to keep the engine cores rotating.
Click to expand...

To be completely fair to you:
NTSB said:
Other errors in the performance of the double engine failure checklist included the captain’s failure to call out the items using standard phraseology and indicate when the checklist was complete. According to the simulator instructor who conducted part of the captain’s upgrade training, the captain did not always perform checklists according to company procedures.109 This reported behavior in the simulator was consistent with the captain’s performance of the double engine failure checklist. Specifically, although the checklist procedures were clear, the captain did not effectively manage the execution of the checklist or ensure that the first officer had achieved the necessary airspeed, which is inconsistent with the basic tenets of CRM and basic airmanship.
Click to expand...

In the 173 pages of the accident report, the term 'phraseology' appears exactly once. In that accident, they simply did not do the checklist—the lack of use of standard phraseology is merely incidental to the not doing the checklist. The airplane crashed because they flew it in an unauthorized manner, were inadequately trained to recover from the ensuing double engine failure, failed to subsequently aviate properly and point it at an airport, and a design attribute (sort of, kind of) in that aircraft's power plant.
 
While I don't agree with typhoonpilot's take on the 3701 crash, you guys need to quit with the cheap shots. He's a VERY valuable contributor to another pilot forum of which I am a member, and you really have no idea of the quality information he's capable of providing.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
While I don't agree with typhoonpilot's take on the 3701 crash, you guys need to quit with the cheap shots. He's a VERY valuable contributor to another pilot forum of which I am a member, and you really have no idea of the quality information he's capable of providing.
Click to expand...

+1
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
While I don't agree with typhoonpilot's take on the 3701 crash, you guys need to quit with the cheap shots. He's a VERY valuable contributor to another pilot forum of which I am a member, and you really have no idea of the quality information he's capable of providing.
Click to expand...

That's fine, I take your word for it, but he's dead wrong in this case. Leads me to see why he's wrong about JC too.

He, you and I really shouldn't be telling people what *they* need say in a cockpit when it comes to non-SOP/Checklist items.
I've never told my co-pilot press the intercom switch when it is cutting out. I've always said "hit". (Nebraskan)

"I can't hear you, hit the intercom button." <--- not wrong in the least.

Can anybody reeeeally object to that?
 
Douglas said:
He, you and I really shouldn't be telling people what *they* need say in a cockpit when it comes to non-SOP/Checklist items.
Click to expand...

I agree...which is why I haven't participated in this thread until now. I really couldn't care less what you say, as long as the point is made and the job gets done. Mash it, hit it, press it, switch it, push it, kick it, cut it on, cut it off, beat it (hold on, that's another topic)...doesn't matter to me. If you identify the button/switch that you need me to do any of the above to, then it'll get done.
 
Douglas said:
That's fine, I take your word for it, but he's dead wrong in this case. Leads me to see why he's wrong about JC too.
Click to expand...

I'd beg to differ. Use of incorrect verbiage goes to a mindset. A mindset that includes lack of self discipline which can lead to unprofessional behavior and/or outright disregard for procedures and policies. Yes, that may be taking it to the extreme, but as I originally posted, the Pinnacle crash is a classic example of lack of self discipline and where it can lead.

You have a choice as a professional pilot. You can either be disciplined and do what your company wants or you can choose not to. It's up to you to decide whether it's important to your career.

I guarantee you there are airlines in this world that will hammer incorrect verbiage out of a pilot very quick or they will fail training. Japanese and Korean airlines being prime examples.


TP
 
typhoonpilot said:
I'd beg to differ. Use of incorrect verbiage goes to a mindset. A mindset that includes lack of self discipline which can lead to unprofessional behavior and/or outright disregard for procedures and policies. Yes, that may be taking it to the extreme, but as I originally posted, the Pinnacle crash is a classic example of lack of self discipline and where it can lead.
Click to expand...

TP. I know most of your experience is in an airline cockpit. What's your take on a corporate crew; say, a department with 5 pilots, all of whom are very good friends, speak with each other in a casual setting on a very frequent basis (ie, know their "sayings")? Do you not agree that "standardized" phraseology is of a little less importance?
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
TP. I know most of your experience is in an airline cockpit. What's your take on a corporate crew; say, a department with 5 pilots, all of whom are very good friends, speak with each other in a casual setting on a very frequent basis (ie, know their "sayings")? Do you not agree that "standardized" phraseology is of a little less importance?
Click to expand...

One of the big reasons for harping on standard verbiage at an airline is that crews come from all over the USA, indeed, all over the world in some cases. Different words could lead to different actions being taken. That is one very big reason to use correct terminology.

If you fly with the same people everyday and all understand each other's verbiage it is not as important. The caveat to that is still my previous post. You can't be too casual or the professionalism in the cockpit goes down and that can lead to mistakes happening.


TP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top