Silly radio tuning question?
01-28-2018, 08:43 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 1,114
DFW isn’t the world. End of convo. Out bound it’s absolutely ridiculous and not needed. One radio and everyone in the cockpit on one page is actually much safer.
Guarding throttles. Yeah 1970 727/707 carry overs. Let’s just say things are changing and being in the school house those in charge understand how US Airways and AWA did things makes much more sense. I’m told major changes to the 737 soon. I.e Landing call outs, localizer and glide slope captured being called by PM. You know modern things vs the 1970 logic of AA.... Many good changes coming to bring these procedures to best practice vs the adopt and go. Needless to say it’s needed and can’t wait for it.
Guarding throttles. Yeah 1970 727/707 carry overs. Let’s just say things are changing and being in the school house those in charge understand how US Airways and AWA did things makes much more sense. I’m told major changes to the 737 soon. I.e Landing call outs, localizer and glide slope captured being called by PM. You know modern things vs the 1970 logic of AA.... Many good changes coming to bring these procedures to best practice vs the adopt and go. Needless to say it’s needed and can’t wait for it.
01-28-2018, 10:17 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Position: Airbus button pusher
Posts: 2,447
Originally Posted by meyers9163
DFW isn’t the world. End of convo. Out bound it’s absolutely ridiculous and not needed. One radio and everyone in the cockpit on one page is actually much safer.
Guarding throttles. Yeah 1970 727/707 carry overs. Let’s just say things are changing and being in the school house those in charge understand how US Airways and AWA did things makes much more sense. I’m told major changes to the 737 soon. I.e Landing call outs, localizer and glide slope captured being called by PM. You know modern things vs the 1970 logic of AA.... Many good changes coming to bring these procedures to best practice vs the adopt and go. Needless to say it’s needed and can’t wait for it.
Guarding throttles. Yeah 1970 727/707 carry overs. Let’s just say things are changing and being in the school house those in charge understand how US Airways and AWA did things makes much more sense. I’m told major changes to the 737 soon. I.e Landing call outs, localizer and glide slope captured being called by PM. You know modern things vs the 1970 logic of AA.... Many good changes coming to bring these procedures to best practice vs the adopt and go. Needless to say it’s needed and can’t wait for it.
01-28-2018, 10:45 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 676
Originally Posted by meyers9163
Guarding throttles. Yeah 1970 727/707 carry overs. Let’s just say things are changing and being in the school house those in charge understand how US Airways and AWA did things makes much more sense.
I do note that since this merger started, the group with the biggest procedures complainers here are the LUS/LAW posters like yourself. Lighten up dude. There are good and bad procedures and both sides, hopefully we'll slowly migrate to the best of both worlds.
I will highlight your comment about your group "making more sense" falls on it's face with your Terrain Engine Out charts and procedures which I understand won out over AA's since your responsible shop was unionized and the AA side wasn't.
Seriously, we went from specific tracks backed up by Navaids and MOCA's along with final safe holding altitudes to limited stuff of "turn right heading 270, Good Luck!". Great plan in places like BOG, SJO and Central America. I'm more concerned with stuff like that than #1 or #2 Comm.
As for DFW? I've avoided that place as much as possible over 25+ years, but to my amazement, I've found another CF of ramp organization, operations and functionality as well as claustrophobic terminal that I've learned to avoid more the DFW.
CLT.
01-29-2018, 05:55 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 404
Originally Posted by aa73
I should have known this would turn into a dick measuring contest of who used to do it better and how much the AA Boeing way is retarded. What a surprise.
Guarding the throttles is a safety thing. There have been cases in the past where a throttle or two moved back and wasn’t caught right away. I’ve been taught to keep my hand on and/or guard the throttles ever since I went through multi engine training.
The guy asked a simple question and I provided a simple answer.
As long as it’s standard and safe WHO CARES which way is better? I’ve been on the 737 going on six years now and have never, ever had a problem with radio management... both as an FO and as a CA. If you guys are complaining about reaching an extra 3 inches to tune the #1 VHF for a frequency change.. or which radio should have Ramp vs ATC.... I got no words.
Good grief.
Guarding the throttles is a safety thing. There have been cases in the past where a throttle or two moved back and wasn’t caught right away. I’ve been taught to keep my hand on and/or guard the throttles ever since I went through multi engine training.
The guy asked a simple question and I provided a simple answer.
As long as it’s standard and safe WHO CARES which way is better? I’ve been on the 737 going on six years now and have never, ever had a problem with radio management... both as an FO and as a CA. If you guys are complaining about reaching an extra 3 inches to tune the #1 VHF for a frequency change.. or which radio should have Ramp vs ATC.... I got no words.
Good grief.
01-29-2018, 07:00 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 400
Originally Posted by Name User
I'm guessing the reason for keeping it on #1 instead of cross side tuning is to make it easier to go back to the last freq. It's a barrier.
But....on the Airbus....I think I would cringe to do it. I don't know about the 737. The S80 is irrelevant as you can't. Not sure about the big boys.
I fought the ramp on #2 for a while until I came to DFW and realized why. Guys it's not a big deal. It's not stupid, far from it. The LUS way of doing it was super easy and made "sense" until you got a call from ground and missed it. The LAA CAs are good about guarding the #1 while you call on #2 when you tell them what you are doing. The most important aspect is to keep both guys in the loop. In CLT and PHL it wasn't really a big deal, at our other hubs it can be especially DFW and LAX.
But....on the Airbus....I think I would cringe to do it. I don't know about the 737. The S80 is irrelevant as you can't. Not sure about the big boys.
I fought the ramp on #2 for a while until I came to DFW and realized why. Guys it's not a big deal. It's not stupid, far from it. The LUS way of doing it was super easy and made "sense" until you got a call from ground and missed it. The LAA CAs are good about guarding the #1 while you call on #2 when you tell them what you are doing. The most important aspect is to keep both guys in the loop. In CLT and PHL it wasn't really a big deal, at our other hubs it can be especially DFW and LAX.
01-29-2018, 07:22 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,889
Originally Posted by sumwherelse
Sorry but do you not see how your hard headebness is just as frustrating? There is more than one way to skin a cat and your insistence that your wat is always better and safer is just old. Its not 1973 anymore.
Just curious because when I JS on other airlines I see cockpits run very much similar to AA’s, in fact there are procedures at other airlines that also seem silly but they are probably there for good reason.
If our procedures are so old fashioned and stale, you’d think AA would be leading the pack on incidents and accidents.... that’s just not the case, and in fact if you look at the ASAP events amongst all the airlines you’ll see that AA falls in the middle of the pack.
No, I still think this amounts to a majority of LUS/AWA guys complaining about having had to adopt & go with a lot of LAA stuff. I remember CAL pilots complaining about UAL procedures and NWA with Delta. Guess it’s just the nature of the beast, nobody likes change. Guess what, LAA procedures are perfectly safe and work fine.
I remember when we adopted the LUS “stable, target, sink” call out at 500’, I thought it was a bit silly but now am glad we do it... I think if you guys just open up your minds a bit and research the real reason as to why we do certain things, you’ll also eventually realize the benefits of it.
01-29-2018, 07:31 AM
#28
Gets Summer Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: AA
Posts: 667
I watched “American Made” on a deadhead the other day. I got a kick out the scene in the beginning where they’re finishing up a checklist at TWA and it sounded almost identical to AA’s 737 checklist. I don’t know how accurate that is, and I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, but it was kinda funny.
01-29-2018, 08:45 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
You guys know the really good thing about what this thread turned into? If this is all we have to complain about then things are good!
Just a little LUS history. When I was hired at Piedmont, our ACARS was basic and we talked on company radio a lot. It always stayed in #2 unless it was needed for something else. As I remember, in cities like LGA where we used AA ramp, we would have ATC on 1 and ramp on 2. Over the years ACARS got better and we used company freq. less often.
The way LUS used radios for ATC/ramp probably evolved for our biggest hubs-CLT and PIT. There you basically have a hand off to ramp, and using #1 worked better. Once you were handed off if you had to contact ops, it was on #2. Now if you are waiting for a gate in CLT and have to call ops to check on it, it will be on #1. Who's on first? We adapted our radio setup for what was logical for that airport, without the need to be told how it had to be done.
Things change and AA decided that it needed to be standardized. I'm pretty sure that came from LAA guys coming to former LUS bases and throwing a fit to someone. So be it, things change and we will adapt and move on.
BTW, CLT wasn't always as much of a mess. Until a few years ago(hmm, what did that coincide with?) we only had two frequencies, inbound and outbound.
Now, that said, having the captain tell the F/As to be seated for takeoff IS stupid.
Just a little LUS history. When I was hired at Piedmont, our ACARS was basic and we talked on company radio a lot. It always stayed in #2 unless it was needed for something else. As I remember, in cities like LGA where we used AA ramp, we would have ATC on 1 and ramp on 2. Over the years ACARS got better and we used company freq. less often.
The way LUS used radios for ATC/ramp probably evolved for our biggest hubs-CLT and PIT. There you basically have a hand off to ramp, and using #1 worked better. Once you were handed off if you had to contact ops, it was on #2. Now if you are waiting for a gate in CLT and have to call ops to check on it, it will be on #1. Who's on first? We adapted our radio setup for what was logical for that airport, without the need to be told how it had to be done.
Things change and AA decided that it needed to be standardized. I'm pretty sure that came from LAA guys coming to former LUS bases and throwing a fit to someone. So be it, things change and we will adapt and move on.
BTW, CLT wasn't always as much of a mess. Until a few years ago(hmm, what did that coincide with?) we only had two frequencies, inbound and outbound.
Now, that said, having the captain tell the F/As to be seated for takeoff IS stupid.
Last edited by R57 relay; 01-29-2018 at 08:56 AM.
01-29-2018, 08:56 AM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by aa73
I’m just as guilty for being hard headed on issues but please show me where and why you guys constantly associate our procedures with the 1970s?
Just curious because when I JS on other airlines I see cockpits run very much similar to AA’s, in fact there are procedures at other airlines that also seem silly but they are probably there for good reason.
If our procedures are so old fashioned and stale, you’d think AA would be leading the pack on incidents and accidents.... that’s just not the case, and in fact if you look at the ASAP events amongst all the airlines you’ll see that AA falls in the middle of the pack.
No, I still think this amounts to a majority of LUS/AWA guys complaining about having had to adopt & go with a lot of LAA stuff. I remember CAL pilots complaining about UAL procedures and NWA with Delta. Guess it’s just the nature of the beast, nobody likes change. Guess what, LAA procedures are perfectly safe and work fine.
I remember when we adopted the LUS “stable, target, sink” call out at 500’, I thought it was a bit silly but now am glad we do it... I think if you guys just open up your minds a bit and research the real reason as to why we do certain things, you’ll also eventually realize the benefits of it.
Just curious because when I JS on other airlines I see cockpits run very much similar to AA’s, in fact there are procedures at other airlines that also seem silly but they are probably there for good reason.
If our procedures are so old fashioned and stale, you’d think AA would be leading the pack on incidents and accidents.... that’s just not the case, and in fact if you look at the ASAP events amongst all the airlines you’ll see that AA falls in the middle of the pack.
No, I still think this amounts to a majority of LUS/AWA guys complaining about having had to adopt & go with a lot of LAA stuff. I remember CAL pilots complaining about UAL procedures and NWA with Delta. Guess it’s just the nature of the beast, nobody likes change. Guess what, LAA procedures are perfectly safe and work fine.
I remember when we adopted the LUS “stable, target, sink” call out at 500’, I thought it was a bit silly but now am glad we do it... I think if you guys just open up your minds a bit and research the real reason as to why we do certain things, you’ll also eventually realize the benefits of it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
