WSJ Article: Airline Mishaps Raise Concern

We had a takeoff config check item on our before takeoff checklist also.

Don't know the safety numbers behind it all, though. I wouldn't get too frustrated, though, now that you're seeing all the data and the stupid pilot tricks that people are capable of.
 
Not to take this off topic, but how do caterers accomplish this at your other stations? This is pretty normal for our operations (not that it's easy - I think you're absolutely right). Do they stock the galley for the FA?

Thanks!
J.

(In Theory) the way they did it in Atlanta was they would take the drawers off the airplane, replace it with a full one, then go restock the old one. Much quicker, much easier, and the flight attendant could concentrate on making sure the rest of the cabin was ready, greeting passengers as they boarded, etc. They don't make much money, they work very hard, and are really treated like crap by our company. I really don't see why anyone would willingly go work as a flight attendant at a regional. That's why I try to help them whenever I can.
 
We had a takeoff config check item on our before takeoff checklist also.

Don't know the safety numbers behind it all, though. I wouldn't get too frustrated, though, now that you're seeing all the data and the stupid pilot tricks that people are capable of.

We don't, but we have "CAS-Checked and cleared". The expanded checklist says that's when we are supposed to look for it.

...but I see C150J flies the CRJ too ;-)
 
Checklist construction is tricky. You're absolutely right in that some items - ones that are INCREDIBLY simple - need to be on checklists. As humans, we are all capable of forgetting the easiest of actions. FL180 callouts, "top of descent" callouts, altimeter cross-checking, and many others NEED to be present. However, if you have too many items on any given checklist, active cognition tends to go down the drain and task saturations occurs.
 
However, if you have too many items on any given checklist, active cognition tends to go down the drain, and task saturations occurs.

Yep...that can be very obvious when there's been a recent change to the chcklist. You can be looking at the checklist and reading it, but the old response still comes out of your mouth.
 
Yep...that can be very obvious when there's been a recent change to the chcklist. You can be looking at the checklist and reading it, but the old response still comes out of your mouth.

We've been thru so many checklist revisions here it's not even funny.
 
In that case I say that a climb check isn't a bad idea. While pretty obvious, the workload at that part of the climb isn't very high, so its not a bad idea to have a checklist there to double check.

Believe it or not we don't have a climb, cruise, or decent checklist here. I like it.
 
wheelsup said:
Believe it or not we don't have a climb, cruise, or decent checklist here. I like it.

Me too. I'd like to see it stay that way, as I think it's a good combination of "big picture" checks and discretion. If you read books on Boeing's checklist philosophy, we follow it pretty well. Not saying it's the only way to do it, but I like it.
 
I've done it once, in a 172. Didn't catch the oversight til I released the parking brake to start taxiing and nothing happened.








:D

:)

"Man, these DC ENC's are sure effective!"

I have "get the engines started" paranoia because in the MD-88/90, you can't hear the engines while idling.
 
:)

"Man, these DC ENC's are sure effective!"

I have "get the engines started" paranoia because in the MD-88/90, you can't hear the engines while idling.

That airplane is strange like that. In the VIP room in the back its loud enough to hurt your soul, in the jumpseat its actually kinda scary because when the nose gear comes up after takeoff its COMPLETELY silent.
 
Back
Top