Verifying the flightplan with the legs page

[777forever]

So the training department did away with verifying the flightplan with the legs page except for rnav departures but the majority of pilots still use the old way saying they like it better. Why? Verifying using the flightplan page is a faster, more efficient way of verifying your flightplan than looking at what at many times is a long list of wierdly named fixes. Much easier to catch a mistake using the flightplan page than the legs page.

 

[Abernathy]

Check both. Let the captain check the legs then you flip the page and verify the Flightplan route. No big deal. If it continues to bother you let the captain know how you feel. After he's done telling you to get bent, let us know how it went.

 

[asayankee]

I've seen too many occurances where even though it looks OK on the flightplan page there is a discontinuity on the legs page. Especially when runway, departure, or flightplan changes are received The flightplan page may be quicker, but the legs page is definitely more accurate and comprehensive.

 

[sunlitpath]

The legs page is useless if the PDC or verbal clearance differs from the filed flight plan. The SOP for route verification described in the Amplified Procedures section of the OM is completely adequate, provided that FMS database currency is verified. Discontinuities would appear in the FMS flight plan function. If you would like to do both methods, that is fine. You can do it independently. The other crewmember would be foolish to object.

 

[lonestarpilot20]

I always check on the legs page and recently caught a discrepency. From IAD to DTW, I loaded and have watched a couple of FOs load the FP right from the release and PDC. The problem occurs on how the FP is filed and how you put the arrival transistion in. In every case on the FP page it was entered just as shown on the release and PDC, yet on the legs page it had a course reversal with one fix in there twice. Be careful out there..

 

[777forever]

I've seen too many occurances where even though it looks OK on the flightplan page there is a discontinuity on the legs page. Especially when runway, departure, or flightplan changes are received The flightplan page may be quicker, but the legs page is definitely more accurate and comprehensive.

It's not possible to have a discontinuity in the legs page but not on the flightplan page. You sure about that?

 

[LazyLightnin']

So the training department did away with verifying the flightplan with the legs page except for rnav departures but the majority of pilots still use the old way saying they like it better. Why? Verifying using the flightplan page is a faster, more efficient way of verifying your flightplan than looking at what at many times is a long list of wierdly named fixes. Much easier to catch a mistake using the flightplan page than the legs page.

Flying with old, wrinkly crusties who are stuck in their ways? No way

 

[asayankee]

It's not possible to have a discontinuity in the legs page but not on the flightplan page. You sure about that?

If you think that what shows up on the flight plan will in every case match what's on the legs, well then good luck to you. It will work every time until it doesn't! They still don't know with 100% certainty why fixes keep dropping out of ATL. If you just want to do the absolute minimum per the book to cover your own butt instead of taking 20 seconds to do something that might HELP you, then I don't know what to tell you. Good luck with your violations....

Our jobs as pilots is to minimize risk. Why wouldn't you want to take just a few seconds to do just that?

 

[COOPERVANE]

But, But.... the OM says we dont hafta!!!

 

[777forever]

If you think that what shows up on the flight plan will in every case match what's on the legs, well then good luck to you. It will work every time until it doesn't! They still don't know with 100% certainty why fixes keep dropping out of ATL. If you just want to do the absolute minimum per the book to cover your own butt instead of taking 20 seconds to do something that might HELP you, then I don't know what to tell you. Good luck with your violations....

Our jobs as pilots is to minimize risk. Why wouldn't you want to take just a few seconds to do just that?

Rnav departures still verified on the legs page...

 

[ace6453]

Rnav departures still verified on the legs page...

It's at the captains discretion, so STFU and do what he says.

 

[JumpersAway]

Does the extra hurt? Then why not? Better to do too much than too little. Why not burn a tad bit of the time spent complaining about stuff on a quick verification- still leaves plenty of time to bitch.........

 

[LearLove]

I see this thread going the same way as the "autopilot mel" topic.

Really impressive that some of you guys list CR2, 7 and 9 in your profiles. Yeah your rocking the aircraft types now. Listen, you're still an RJ pilot just like the rest of us. Ranks right up there with listing an SIC type.

 

[777forever]

Does the extra hurt? Then why not? Better to do too much than too little. Why not burn a tad bit of the time spent complaining about stuff on a quick verification- still leaves plenty of time to bitch.........

There is no extra being done in most cases. Just people reverting to the old way and completely disregarding the new standard op. If anything both procedures should be used not just the old. I do so myself of confusing clearances like IAD-DTW. When a route us issued people are still using the legs page for verification. The new standard op was implemented due to an increase in lateral deviations

 

[JoeMerchant]

This is the problem when "procedures" take the place of "common sense"...Really folks, just make sure you know where you are supposed to go and that it is set....Funny how we never had a "procedure" before FMS.

The "procedures" will always change as there are many people working in cubicles who's job depends on writing procedures...

Procedures will never stop "excrement from happening" and common sense goes a long way....

 

[DrewBlows]

This is the problem when "procedures" take the place of "common sense"...Really folks, just make sure you know where you are supposed to go and that it is set....Funny how we never had a "procedure" before FMS.

The "procedures" will always change as there are many people working in cubicles who's job depends on writing procedures...

Procedures will never stop "excrement from happening" and common sense goes a long way....

FAA Inspector: Did you do the procedure?

Joe: No, I was using common sense.

FAA Inspector: Thanks, your suspension letter should be sent out in five to seven business days.

 

[sweptback]

This is the problem when "procedures" take the place of "common sense"...Really folks, just make sure you know where you are supposed to go and that it is set....Funny how we never had a "procedure" before FMS.

The "procedures" will always change as there are many people working in cubicles who's job depends on writing procedures...

Procedures will never stop "excrement from happening" and common sense goes a long way....

I'm sorry bud, but the minute you started working at an airline is the minute you agreed to fly per the OM and FOM. The problem with common sense is that it isn't that common. If we had no published procedure, how would pilots know what to expect of each other?

I agree that for the most part, manuals are written by those that do not fly the line. But, also for the most part, procedures are well thought out and are made to fix a problem. With ASAP and FOQA data, expect more changes to the manuals as time goes on. Course deviations are a major ASAP driver right now.

If you want to be a cowboy and fly by your rules of common sense, you should fly corporate. Especially at a regional airline, where it isn't uncommon to have a 10,000 hour pilot fly with a 1,000 hour pilot, well-defined procedures are extremely important. If a procedure isn't working, or it's unduly cumbersome, then pass on your feedback.

 

[Varmint]

I've seen too many occurances where even though it looks OK on the flightplan page there is a discontinuity on the legs page. Especially when runway, departure, or flightplan changes are received The flightplan page may be quicker, but the legs page is definitely more accurate and comprehensive.

If there is a discontinuity on the legs page it will show up on the flight plan page unless you have not executed a new entry. If everything has been executed and you have a discontinuity in one place but not the other, you might need to defer your FMS because it isn't working right.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

FAA Inspector: Did you do the procedure?

Joe: No, I was using common sense.

FAA Inspector: Thanks, your suspension letter should be sent out in five to seven business days.

Classic.... the guy has an inferior complex.... nothing worse than a regional guy who can't go to the majors, yet has to prove himself to himself.....

As a back up... just double check the miles on the release and the FMS. Should be the same or one off..... not absolute... though...

 

[JoeMerchant]

Drew and Sweptback,

Let me ask you a few questions:

Do both of you read the entire weather package you get before each leg? The entire thing, not just certain parts of it.

If not, why not?

Have either of you read both copies of the company manuals from cover to cover? Both the aircraft and the company manual. If not, why not?

Do both of you follow every policy, procedure and rule to the letter? Have either of you ever uttered one word that wasn't pertinent to the safety of flight during sterile cockpit?

Do either of you knowingly drive faster than the posted speed limit?

I have yet to meet anyone that doesn't willingly and knowingly violate some policy, procedure or rule or alter the procedure to their liking.

I agree that there has to be some procedures. The problem is the important things get drowned out by all the useless ones. In addition, the constant changing of "little" things contributes even further to confusion and mistakes.

Examples:

Does it really matter what words you use to verify the gear is down? Why has that terminology constantly changed over the years?

How about the terms "checked", "set", "verified", "cross checked"...Those are constantly changing and I have yet to get through an "originating check" by using the "proper" terminology for every response. How about a simple "checked".

Speaking of "checklists"....How about the "cockpit check" which became the "originating check"...or the "before taxi" that became the "after start" check...

Sometimes the "solution" creates even more problems...The extensive "briefing" of minutia has IMO created more distraction and loss of situational awareness in the terminal environment and on the ground while taxing...Sometimes these procedures create even more of a hazard.