![]() |
Originally Posted by sleeves
(Post 1833351)
You don't think checking altimeter settings are important? I'll bet the guys that screwed up not setting it and thus got violated might disagree. I have always learned a lot in the 737 school house, found the training outstanding.
Sure, we should set and check the altimeters. I think that once might be enough, though. We should also probably confirm what is on the route page and set on the MCP. Scott |
Scott;
You are spot on, and reading the SID, verifying modes, MCP, and altitude was not only L-UAL's way, but it is industry standard. Boeing has it in their procedures I believe, and Airbus published procedures call it a "Mini-brief". I can't believe it went away in the first place. The other thing I can't believe is these "safety events" haven't been disseminated to the pilot group. Have we gone backwards in aviation and safety culture and now try to hide our mistakes? What are we becoming? Maybe we should be in the press......... |
Originally Posted by Scott Stoops
(Post 1833511)
Worst training I've had in 20 years at United.
Sure, we should set and check the altimeters. I think that once might be enough, though. We should also probably confirm what is on the route page and set on the MCP. Scott |
Originally Posted by Scott Stoops
(Post 1833511)
Worst training I've had in 20 years at United.
Sure, we should set and check the altimeters. I think that once might be enough, though. We should also probably confirm what is on the route page and set on the MCP. Scott |
Originally Posted by sleeves
(Post 1833850)
I know that checking it multiple times has saved me in the past. Did you go to training with the same anti everything LCAL that you display on this forum? I can see why you had problems.
We have (as a collective pilot group) had some pretty close calls. A 767-400 landing with under 20 minutes of fuel in Guam. A 737 scraping a wingtip in EWR. Airplanes landing with emergency fuel after accepting direct routings into the jet stream and overflying acceptable fuel stops when the fuel situation became critical. Close CFIT incidences. We better start looking at least a little bit inward WRT to the way we're doing business as a pilot group. Scott |
Sleeves,
We aren't bashing Cal. There were some items removed from the before takeoff checklist that we knew had saved us a lot of heartache in the past. It got to the point that standards capts during pc's were telling us even if it's not on the checklist we need to continue checking the mcp and fmc before takeoff. I'm done with the us vs them. I only want is right and the safest. |
Originally Posted by krudawg
(Post 1833923)
In the meantime, just do the check list and talk about more important things like the Profit Sharing Grievance we won and when the lUAL guys are gonna get a financial settlement.
|
SOP calls for either HDG SEL or LNAV to be selected at 400' AGL...so what's the big deal? You might want to re-check that. 400' is where you select a roll mode on a missed approach. Takeoff is different. |
Originally Posted by krudawg
(Post 1833923)
It wasn't too long ago guys were complaining about wearing hats; now you complain about checklists. I wear that stupid hat, I do the checklist. It doesn't matter how stupid I think it is, I do it. Years ago when UAL tried to harmonize the check list across fleets, the checklists were really stupid. If you don't like the checklist, become a PI and spend the day arguing about why you think they should change the checklist. In the meantime, just do the check list and talk about more important things like the Profit Sharing Grievance we won and when the lUAL guys are gonna get a financial settlement.
|
Originally Posted by Knotcher
(Post 1834045)
Amen...they are paying you $200,000 to fly the plane, just fly it the way they want you to, take your paycheck and go home. Is it that hard to respond to altimeters? Sometimes I just have to shake my head at airline pilot problems.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:07 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands