QRH, systems knowledge (from college thread)

[jtrain609]

I believe the point was that you're more competetive with a degree and instructing experience, so when the requirements go up in economy's downturn, you're the one staying afloat.
Anyway, I agree with most of what jtrain said, but I'd like to add that because of economy of scale and technological advances, being a pilot won't be such a hot high profile job as it once was (or still is?), I think it probably won't be as competetive in the future as it still is today. However, that's just my opinion on the subject.

Fair enough, and the forum has gone around and around on this issue. From my perspective of sitting in the cockpit of a fairly automated aircraft with my background in IT I'd say you couldn't be more wrong. Things fail on these aircraft more often than people would admit, and it takes a decent amount of systems knowledge to make these things work when they break. And it's not like your FBO where something breaks and the aircraft is grounded. We can defer a lot of stuff in these airliners and they'll still operate. If they couldn't do that, they wouldn't make the airline any money.

You know how busy you'd be if the APU, autopilot and FMS are all MELed? You'll earn your yearly paycheck on those days, and as far as the company is concerned you're expected to operate the flights just as if nothing had failed, on time all the time and with as much efficiency as possible.

 

[Check_Six]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Things fail on these aircraft more often than people would admit, and it takes a decent amount of systems knowledge to make these things work when they break.

No...it takes a QRH (EMERG/ABNORM maual...whatever), and some "abnormals" training. I'm not saying that systems knowledge isn't helpful (far be it from me to say that additional knowledge is a bad thing). But, part of the reason for emergency checklists existing is because airlines don't want pilots trying to use their special "systems knowledge" to fix the situation as they see fit. Flying pilot flies the a/c...non-flying pilot troubleshoots. I've had my fair share of emergencies in a regional jet. When the aircraft is under control, then you read, do, and communicate...per the book. Sidenote: yes, extreme situations do occur (i.e. Al Haynes @ Sioux City)

You know how busy you'd be if the APU, autopilot and FMS are all MELed? You'll earn your yearly paycheck on those days, and as far as the company is concerned you're expected to operate the flights just as if nothing had failed, on time all the time and with as much efficiency as possible.

You mean actually having to fly the aircraft and start the engine with a "huffer" cart and a crossbleed? God forbid!!!

The APU being out is, granted, an inconvenience...but once again, there is a published method of operation. No secret systems knowledge involved. Read and do. As for flying without autopilot and an FMS, well, life is indeed more difficult than usual. I wouldn't let a little something like conventional navigation and having to...aaaaggghhhh...hand-fly the aircraft ruin your week.

Believe it or not, I'm not trying to flame you. I just think that a few of your comments are a little over-dramatic and perhaps a bit arrogant. I find myself to be evidence that people can succeed regardless of...wait for it...

People being "smarter than you, people more driven than you, people more dedicated than you, people that have 4.0's from schools you didn't even dare apply to, people that are better looking than you, people that are more likable than you and people that have better training than you."

God knows how I ever got hired. I definitely don't qualify for your standards of personal excellence. I'm just try to be a solid pilot with a positive attitude and good work ethic.

As for getting hired by legacies, with the coming mergers and economic probabilities...most people, regardless of being Captain America, won't (yes...that may even include you; attractive fiance or not). New pilots in the U.S. are going to need to get really comfortable with the idea of a career in the regionals or looking abroad. That's the coming reality (for a while anyways)...

 

[kellwolf]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Try going through an upgrade oral with little to know systems knowledge past saying "Well, I'd run the QRH." Let me know how far you get.....

We had a TR get stuck open the other night (one the ground after landing). Doesn't say anything about turning off the 14th stage bleeds in the QRH, but low and behold it worked. Where did I pull that one out of? Systems knowledge.

 

[BobDDuck]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Try going through an upgrade oral with little to know systems knowledge past saying "Well, I'd run the QRH." Let me know how far you get.....

We had a TR get stuck open the other night (one the ground after landing). Doesn't say anything about turning off the 14th stage bleeds in the QRH, but low and behold it worked. Where did I pull that one out of? Systems knowledge.

On that note...

This happened SEVERAL times at my company because people had no systems/big picture knowledge and just figured the QRH would bail them all.

On that ground, rolling off the runway, one of the TRs wouldn't close. Quick... run the QRH...

Thrust level affected engine idle.
TR EMER STOW buttom push.

And like magic, $50,000 of damage to the engine. Now, a bit of systems knowledge would tell you that either shutting the 14th stage bleed or just shutting down the engine would solve most of the problem.

Yeah, I think I'll know my systems and not rely just on the checklists.

 

[derg]

QRH Procedures (moved by request into new thread)

About the QRH...

Don't ever...evereverever presume that problem solving in an aircraft begins and ends with a QRH procedure.

If you're "lucky", it'll be straight out of the book. A good number of situations that I've had in airplanes involved thinking outside of the box on unannunciated abnormal situations.

Works great in the box during recurrent, but QRH's do not replace situational awareness and systems knowledge at all!

 

[CaptBill]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

About the QRH...

Don't ever...evereverever presume that problem solving in an aircraft begins and ends with a QRH procedure.

If you're "lucky", it'll be straight out of the book. A good number of situations that I've had in airlines involved thinking outside of the box on unannunciated abnormal situations.

Works great in the box during recurrent, but QRH's do not replace situational awareness and systems knowledge at all!

Yup, you said that right!

 

[Dugie8]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

On that note...

This happened SEVERAL times at my company because people had no systems/big picture knowledge and just figured the QRH would bail them all.

On that ground, rolling off the runway, one of the TRs wouldn't close. Quick... run the QRH...

Thrust level affected engine idle.
TR EMER STOW buttom push.

And like magic, $50,000 of damage to the engine. Now, a bit of systems knowledge would tell you that either shutting the 14th stage bleed or just shutting down the engine would solve most of the problem.

Yeah, I think I'll know my systems and not rely just on the checklists.

Why do you think that isn't the procedure in the QRH?

Be real careful about getting creative with situtations, especially when they are outlined in some for or another, screw something up and the blame is all on you.

 

[BobDDuck]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Why do you think that isn't the procedure in the QRH?

Be real careful about getting creative with situtations, especially when they are outlined in some for or another, screw something up and the blame is all on you.

Not sure what you are getting at. The QRH was designed for in flight when it is advantageous to keep the engine going at the risk of doing structural damage to the TR. On the ground you don't need the engine so hence just shutting it down doesn't hurt anything.

And a QRH is NOT a be all and end all. There are two procedures in our QRH involving the electric system and throwing ties, where if you follow them you will lose everything and have the ADG blow. Sure, 9 times out of 10 you need to follow the procedures to the letter, but for that other 10% of the time you need to know what the systems are doing to stay out of trouble,

 

[Dugie8]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Not sure what you are getting at. The QRH was designed for in flight when it is advantageous to keep the engine going at the risk of doing structural damage to the TR. On the ground you don't need the engine so hence just shutting it down doesn't hurt anything.

And a QRH is NOT a be all and end all. There are two procedures in our QRH involving the electric system and throwing ties, where if you follow them you will lose everything and have the ADG blow. Sure, 9 times out of 10 you need to follow the procedures to the letter, but for that other 10% of the time you need to know what the systems are doing to stay out of trouble,

Ok, don't get defensive, I know nothing of CRJ systems or how the reversers actuate, by your description I would guess they are pneumatic. A reverser deploying on the ground may not be a control issue but it is a FOD issue I would "THINK" there would be a procedure to stow it that doesn't result in 50k of damage to the engine, and if as you say, it only takes a bit of system knowledge it would be a relatively easy procedure, ie close the 14th stage bleed air.

We had an entire crew get in some hot water at ATI for being creative with procedures and "applying" systems knowledge. Loss of hydraulics, icing condtions and moving the airplane after landing.

 

[BobDDuck]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

I would "THINK" there would be a procedure to stow it that doesn't result in 50k of damage to the engine, and if as you say, it only takes a bit of system knowledge it would be a relatively easy procedure, ie close the 14th stage bleed air.

We had an entire crew get in some hot water at ATI for being creative with procedures and "applying" systems knowledge. Loss of hydraulics, icing condtions and moving the airplane after landing.

Point well taken. There checklists certainly are there for a reason.

And no, there is no proscribed way to stow the reverser without doing damage. Typical CRJ functionality. The 200 is also the same airplane that has a hydraulic pump that has no way of disconnecting it from the engine. So, if your 1 or 2 engine driven pumps start to seize up, your only option is to shut down a perfectly good engine.

 

[Dugie8]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Ok, edumacate me on how the CRJ reverse works, what causes so much damage by using the EMER stow function. On JT15D engines it is a normal preflight check to just pull into idle reverse flip the switch and all that does is dump the hydraulic fluid into the stow side of the system.

 

[BobDDuck]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

From my understanding the TR system on the 200 (700 and 900 are hydraulic) works upon activation by directing 14th stage bleed are into a power drive unit that mechanically translates the cowls backwards. The reversers are normally locked out in flight, but if one becomes unlocked, the thrust level will snap to idle (taking your hand off with it if it is there). Even at idle thrust there is still a large amount of yaw and pitch oscillation so the UNLK switch can be pressed. This is where the damage is done. Basically it directs 14th stage air into the PDU from the other direction and mechanically slams the reverser shut. It is not designed to be moved mechanically this way and hence (according to the MX guys) normally has to be replaced if this happens. I've had to use it once in flight and all I know is the plane was down for 2 days after it happened.

The problem is our QRH doesn't differentiate between in flight and on the ground. It just says if the reverser unlocks take the engine to idle (which is should do automatically by bringing back the thrust lever) and then press the magic button. THEN it says, if the plane is uncontrollable (which it obviously wouldn't be on the ground) shut down the engine. But at that point the damage has already been done.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Why all the hubub about a -200 reverser that won't stow? Not really a big deal. Just spool the reverser up to about 50% N1, then slam the reverser down to stow. The extra bleed air in the system from being spooled up will stow the reverser 99.9% of the time. As for the QRH, the Bombardier QRH isn't meant to be used on the ground unless the checklist is specifically annotated as being "ON GROUND," such as "ENG FIRE/SEVERE DAMAGE - ON GROUND." Otherwise, the QRH is useless. The QRH is meant to be used in the air, and tons of QRH checklists are either worthless or will lead you down the wrong path on the ground.

 

[BobDDuck]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Just spool the reverser up to about 50% N1, then slam the reverser down to stow. ...... As for the QRH, the Bombardier QRH isn't meant to be used on the ground unless the checklist is specifically annotated as being "ON GROUND"

Not doubting you, but have you ever used that procedure in flight? The two times I've had a reverse come open on me the thrust lever (and reverser handle I assume) were locked at idle. There would be no way to bring the reverse up to 50% N1 and then shut it again.

Also, I have not seen ANYWHERE that the Bombardier QRH is for in flight use only. There are specific items as you say that are for ground use vs. in flight use, but the book as a whole applies (at least the way I've been taught here) to any time a CASS message appears.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Not doubting you, but have you ever used that procedure in flight?

In flight? No, definitely not a good idea. That's what EMER STOW is for. I was talking about the original scenario you posted about the reverser not stowing after the landing roll. Happens all the time, and it's easily fixed.

Also, I have not seen ANYWHERE that the Bombardier QRH is for in flight use only. There are specific items as you say that are for ground use vs. in flight use, but the book as a whole applies (at least the way I've been taught here) to any time a CASS message appears.

The QRH will lead you to do completely unnecessary and unhelpful things on the ground. Pinnacle taught not to use it on the ground, and that was supposedly based on guidance from Bombardier. Like I said, there are exceptions (aforementioned ENG FIRE, EVAC, etc...), but it's generally not a helpful tool on the ground, and calling MX will be the better help.

 

[FlyChicaga]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

A moderator should really separate these threads about systems knowledge and getting a degree. This is a great discussion that might not get the attention it needs by being in this thread.

Obviously, there isn't a QRH procedure for everything. Even on my airplane, which seems to have an EICAS message for everything, just blindly following the message can lead you down the wrong path. Example:

We were flying out of BNA one afternoon and went through a cloud layer that had some ice in it. Upon exiting icing conditions, one of our ENG ice valves was stuck in the OPEN position. With the airplane in that condition, the EICAS alerted us with an "ENG 1 A/I FAIL" message. The Captain pulled the QRH, and starting doing the "Engine 1(2) Anti-Ice Fail" procedure. This procedure is extensive and has you turning on the ice, timing, turning it off, and so forth. I looked at him quizzically and wondered why we were doing all that... We had a valve stuck open when we wanted it closed, not the other way around. He said, "We need to follow the QRH, and this is what it says to do."

I asked for the QRH, and started looking through it. I found a procedure, "Anti-Ice On, No Icing Conditions." This obviously was much more applicable. It stated, however, that we needed the message "NO ICE A/I ON." It was frustrating, because the Captain continued to press for the checklist associated with our message, and not the checklist that followed normal logic. We finally did the appropriate message, and it directed us to one step: Turn off the automatic valve function via button deselect. That was it. A minute or so later, the "NO ICE A/I ON" message decided to appear.

Another great case study in systems knowledge can be made by looking into the Northwest DC-9 ground collision with the Northwest A-320 in MSP. The crew on the DC-9 landed with a hydraulic system failure (I believe on the number 1 side). Upon landing, everything seemed normal. They had nose wheel steering, brakes, landing gear, etc. As they turned to go into the alley, habit brought them to shut down the engine with the operable hydraulic system. Are you following me here?

Because they shut down that engine, they now lost the engine driven hydraulic pump on that side. That was their only operative hydraulic system, since the other had failed. Now they had no hydraulics... No brakes, no steering. They also were heading right for the company A-320. In a desperate move, the Captain attempted to extend the thrust reversers and went to max reverse. Unlike the CRJ, the DC-9 "clamshells" are moved by hydraulic power. With no power, no clamshells. Basically, the Captain applied full reverse thrust in a forward direction, since that's all that is happening when the reverser doors are open. Forward thrust increases and is "deflected" to slow the airplane. Without the doors, all that thrust goes out the back, and the DC-9 was "pushed" at an even greater speed into the A-320.

I am a huge advocate of "use your checklist." However, as a true professional, you must have an extensive systems knowledge to know when the checklist might not apply. We operate in a very dynamic environment, and a checklist cannot be developed for every situation. Sometimes a problem can only be fixed by applying an in-depth systems knowledge and logic. I also advocate going beyond the Company Flight Manual, and use other resources to go more in-depth into the systems of your airplane. Look at Maintenance Manuals, the MEL book, and possibly some third party sources (be careful that they apply).

 

[SteveC]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

A moderator should really separate these threads about systems knowledge and getting a degree. This is a great discussion that might not get the attention it needs by being in this thread.

Done.

 

[derg]

Re: Don't need a degree eh?

Try going through an upgrade oral with little to know systems knowledge past saying "Well, I'd run the QRH." Let me know how far you get.....

You would probably have the APD leave the room, walk down the hallway to the instructor lounge, hear muted, uproarious laughter, then he'd return with tears in his eyes and a smirk and ask, "Umm, say that again?"

I'd crack the door and look outside to see how large the crowd is eavesdropping!

 

[KQ7]

What does QRH stand for?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Quick Reference Handbook. Basically it's just a collection of emergency and abnormal checklists for that airplane.

 

[Berkut]

Maybe airlines should accept graduation from a Part 147 A&P school as an alternative to the four-year degree.