Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3184329)
Is the CA taxiing while reviewing the WDR?
OOPS - see CX beat me too it. |
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3184418)
What was wrong with getting the WDR at the gate?
What's wrong with dwell time? What is wrong with doing one thing at a time when it is critical to safety? I honestly don't know the answer to any of these questions. Dwell time clogs up the ramp. Unless one of the crew members is low time, and or short taxi, it's way more efficient to start the engine, get the wave off and get off the ramp then double check what you need to double check on a long taxiway. Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by FlighTimeBarbie
(Post 3184422)
While its certainly a “best practice” to minimize and plan workload based on monitoring demands - in and around ramps, unfamiliar areas, hot spots, crossing runways, etc. - The Volume 1 Amplified Procedures specifies (3.4.10) two conditions for flight control checks: “When workload and conditions permit.” In fact, similar conditions are present throughout Volume 1 to direct workload/procedural tasks.
Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 3184529)
Nothing wrong with getting the WDR at the gate. Especially if your over 5 mins early to push.
Dwell time clogs up the ramp. Unless one of the crew members is low time, and or short taxi, it's way more efficient to start the engine, get the wave off and get off the ramp then double check what you need to double check on a long taxiway. Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by LAXtoDEN
(Post 3184548)
I agree that’s extremely efficient, but what could possibly go wrong with 2 heads down during taxi. I’m surprised it’s not stressed as much, and seems to be sort of the cultural norm. Texting while driving is 6x more likely to cause an accident than driving drunk, yet here we are confirming numbers while driving the aircraft with 100+ souls aboard.
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 3183442)
So, how do they set the flaps at American?
But, at AA, we get a TPS (Takeoff Performance System) with our flight plan. It's the takeoff performance, based on planned loads, current conditions and up to 5 runways that are possible to take off on. We're given a planned takeoff weight, an assumed takeoff weight (if a Standard Power takeoff is authorized), which is 2K above the planned weight, the planned flap setting, assumed temperature for that runway, N1 settings (on the 737), V speeds and max takeoff weight for that runway. The load planner can also put in whether or not the runway is wet or if we'll be using anti-ice or not. We're also given runway data for manual calculations (headwinds, temp changes, anti-ice on, etc) on the bottom of the TPS. We plan our takeoff based on that data (and on most fleets, it's uplinked to the FMS). After they're done boarding and loading, we get our Load Closeout. This is the final weights (also uplinked to the FMS). We compare the planned t/o weight with the actual. If it's up to 2K more than planned, we can go with the TPS data we have. If it's over 2K, but under the max takeoff weight (or climb limit weight) for that runway, we can go Max power and use QRH V speeds from the FMS (on the 737 at least). We also have the option of pulling a new TPS from the ACARS which has the most current data. We set the flaps after we get the salute from the ground crew, before we move the airplane. On the taxi out, I, as the FO, brief the load closeout and takeoff data to the Captain as part of the Before Takeoff Checklist and he reviews it in the box. |
Originally Posted by EMBFlyer
(Post 3184565)
I don't know if this was sarcasm or a genuine question.
But, at AA, we get a TPS (Takeoff Performance System) with our flight plan. It's the takeoff performance, based on planned loads, current conditions and up to 5 runways that are possible to take off on. |
Originally Posted by FangsF15
(Post 3184571)
Do you get a cover sheet with your TPS report? :D
|
Originally Posted by LAXtoDEN
(Post 3184548)
I agree that’s extremely efficient, but what could possibly go wrong with 2 heads down during taxi operations. I’m surprised it’s not stressed as much, and seems to be sort of the cultural norm. Texting while driving is 6x more likely to cause an accident than driving drunk, yet here we are confirming numbers while driving the aircraft with 100+ souls aboard.
|
Originally Posted by LAXtoDEN
(Post 3184548)
I agree that’s extremely efficient, but what could possibly go wrong with 2 heads down during taxi operations. I’m surprised it’s not stressed as much, and seems to be sort of the cultural norm. Texting while driving is 6x more likely to cause an accident than driving drunk, yet here we are confirming numbers while driving the aircraft with 100+ souls aboard.
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:24 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands