Life at Compass

[Nark]

2 out of the 3 did. I would say 3 out of 3 but I can't remember the checklist there. @Cruise does your place have a tow in checklist?

I didn't say it was considered anything. But this definiteness of 'sorry it is a normal shutdown' doesn't work either.

No checklist.

 

[JetDoc]

What chapter of the QRH is this so-called "eject" in?

They are working on a read file this very instant.

 

[MusketeerMan]

Ugh

 

[Hacker15e]

 

[aviator147]

Ugh

Reply All bites again

 

[JetDoc]

No "Command Eject" feature on the "E" model? All the crew served A/C Navy jets I worked on, EA6-B, S-3 etc. all had a command eject feature that if the A/C commander punched out so did everyone else in a specific order. The rocket motors were even color coded as such.

 

[Hacker15e]

No "Command Eject" feature on the "E" model? All the crew served A/C Navy jets I worked on, EA6-B, S-3 etc. all had a command eject feature that if the A/C commander punched out so did everyone else in a specific order. The rocket motors were even color coded as such.

There is in the F-15E, but the checklist I posted is from the T-38, where there used to not be such a beast prior to the upgrade program for the ejection seats.

 

[PropSettin']

Reply All bites again

Message recalled before I could see it, what gem did they send out in an email this time?

 

[Shiggydiggydoo]

An email was sent out saying long call reserve will be available. Nicole the crew scheduling manager replied to all pilots with an "ugh". Since I'll be back on reserve for May...when I get called for airport reserve I'll just say uuuggghhh

 

[Cruise]

2 out of the 3 did. I would say 3 out of 3 but I can't remember the checklist there. @Cruise does your place have a tow in checklist?

I didn't say it was considered anything. But this definiteness of 'sorry it is a normal shutdown' doesn't work either.

Nope, no tow-in checklist here.

 

[MikeD]

Nope, no tow-in checklist here.

Anything related to a tow checklist at my operation, isn't something contained in the flight pubs or QRH; it's contained in the checklist the ground handlers use, and there's a couple of items they confirm with us or themselves (if they're the ones riding brakes), if towing one of our large aircraft.

 

[MusketeerMan]

Anything related to a tow checklist at my operation, isn't something contained in the flight pubs or QRH; it's contained in the checklist the ground handlers use, and there's a couple of items they confirm with us or themselves (if they're the ones riding brakes), if towing one of our large aircraft.

Makes sense to me. A procedure to know in your head makes sense. A checklist to look up in the qrh is just silly.

 

[Nick]

Can't wait for the hat wearing, harness through the epaulettes, overbearing nerd, UND alum to chime in here and tell me "it's actually a pretty good idea." (Based on his previous 6 months in the industry)

I didn't go to UND and I definitely don't feed my shoulder harnesses through my epaulets.

But I did read almost every single Compass pilot ASAP report submitted from October 2009 to March 2015.

Trust me, when you have an airline that has had the highest proportionate turnover in the industry perhaps of any airline, ever, if there is any doubt as to whether or not something that involves moving a jet in close quarters ought to be put in writing or left to the discretion of thousands of different crew pair possibilities, it's best to have something in writing.

And there's a good chance that when someone there moves on to another shop, they might then realize how nice it was at times to have the very structured SOPA/SMAC approach to things, and that it was there for a very good reason and not just for kicks.

If there is any airline out there that should have the most procedures in writing, it's the one with the highest recent turnover and people in new seats.

 

[poser765]

I didn't go to UND and I definitely don't feed my shoulder harnesses through my epaulets.

But I did read almost every single Compass pilot ASAP report submitted from October 2009 to March 2015.

Trust me, when you have an airline that has had the highest proportionate turnover in the industry perhaps of any airline, ever, if there is any doubt as to whether or not something that involves moving a jet in close quarters ought to be put in writing or left to the discretion of thousands of different crew pair possibilities, it's best to have something in writing.

And there's a good chance that when someone there moves on to another shop, they might then realize how nice it was at times to have the very structured SOPA/SMAC approach to things, and that it was there for a very good reason and not just for kicks.

If there is any airline out there that should have the most procedures in writing, it's the one with the highest recent turnover and people in new seats.

I have to agree, *sigh*. As frustrating as stuff like deice or crossbleed start QRH procedures are, or a runway change check, those things are there for a reason. I don't doubt it...of course I may gripe about it and roll my eyes when ever the captain calls for the runway change check, but I get it.

You are right...Compass is a perfect storm of greenness, especially with the influx of non prior 121. A lot of captains have just enough time to legally upgrade, and they are paired with FOs who's heaviest aircraft flown is a Seneca. It makes sense to have as much in procedure form as possible...from a safety AND liability perspective.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Someone please explain why there is heartburn over having a procedure in a "Quick Reference Handbook". That certainly sounds quick and it keeps the main checklist to the 121 standard (8.5x11 front or front/back).

I flew for a carrier that used to issue a de-ice checklist every year (they had to use a new one yearly because I guess the holdover tables on it are only valid for a season); this operator tended to issue the de-ice checklist in..... March. So, inevitably, to stay legal, we had to crack open the much larger CFM (FCOM I etc)...

I'd say having a procedure available for Quick Reference in a Handbook is a great idea, especially for stuff we don't do daily or can't fit on the other checklist.

 

[poser765]

My only issue is the over complication of what I believe is a not complicated task. Take the engine start with external air procedure, and the obvious follow up procedure for the crossbleed start. The two procedures take up a page and a half in the QRH and have a grand total of 24 steps. I can sum up a external air start with three steps, and a crossbleed with two...in both cases starting the damn engine takes up one whole step! My complaint is the same for the deice check.

Now the runway change check I totally agree with having, I just hate the way the checklist is designed and implemented. It's confusing and breaks away from the normal checklist methodology.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

My only issue is the over complication of what I believe is a not complicated task. Take the engine start with external air procedure, and the obvious follow up procedure for the crossbleed start. The two procedures take up a page and a half in the QRH and have a grand total of 24 steps. I can sum up a external air start with three steps, and a crossbleed with two...in both cases starting the damn engine takes up one whole step! My complaint is the same for the deice check.

Now the runway change check I totally agree with having, I just hate the way the checklist is designed and implemented. It's confusing and breaks away from the normal checklist methodology.

So get on the QRH steering committee (or whatever), and suggest these changes!

 

[Seggy]

Anything related to a tow checklist at my operation, isn't something contained in the flight pubs or QRH; it's contained in the checklist the ground handlers use, and there's a couple of items they confirm with us or themselves (if they're the ones riding brakes), if towing one of our large aircraft.

So what happens if you are at a station y'all aren't usually at and it needs to be towed?

 

[ClarkGriswold]

My only issue is the over complication of what I believe is a not complicated task. Take the engine start with external air procedure, and the obvious follow up procedure for the crossbleed start. The two procedures take up a page and a half in the QRH and have a grand total of 24 steps. I can sum up a external air start with three steps, and a crossbleed with two...in both cases starting the damn engine takes up one whole step! My complaint is the same for the deice check.

Now the runway change check I totally agree with having, I just hate the way the checklist is designed and implemented. It's confusing and breaks away from the normal checklist methodology.

Trust me, when one day you fly an airplane thats less electro than the 175 you'll apreciate your checklist discipline much more. These things are there for a reason, same with turning the hyd pumps on @Autothrust Blue. Don't become a reason for a new procedure or checklist line, minimum fuel anyone? Have you flown anything more than the E175? You'll see one day if not. Focus on getting out rather than things you think you can do better.

 

[MikeD]

I have to agree, *sigh*. As frustrating as stuff like deice or crossbleed start QRH procedures are, or a runway change check, those things are there for a reason. I don't doubt it...of course I may gripe about it and roll my eyes when ever the captain calls for the runway change check, but I get it..

I agree, it is understandable, when you figure that things like crossbleed start are operations that are probably seldom done, and runway changes involve more than just moving to a different runway......things like changing information in nav systems, etc. So a runway change in a 172 and a runway change in an A320, while accomplishing the same end-state, one is definitely more complex than the other for those reasons. So yes, while on the face of it a checklist for items like these sounds hokey, but when you delve into the details of an unusual operation or complex change, it does make sense.