CAL 737 pilots

[wild bill kelso]

Lets get a petition going to stop this stupid change to our procedures with regard to altitude selection and the monitoring pilot.
This has go be one of the worst ideas since this merger started.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Lets get a petition going to stop this stupid change to our procedures with regard to altitude selection and the monitoring pilot.
This has go be one of the worst ideas since this merger started.

What? You have a problem with two hands manipulating the MCP during critical phases of flight? At night? In turbulence? Don't you know that having two people make changes at the same time is so much safer than one doing it and one watching?

 

[scoreboardII]

OK, share please, hard to understand when your only giving us half a story.

 

[IAHERJ]

The 737 guys finally see a change in procedure as a result of the merger and they are up in arms. Simple procedure change. Nothing compared to 777 and 756 changes on both sides to date. Welcome to the merger boys.....

 

[BID]

Out of curiosity, what other airlines do it this way?

I can't remember what I did before CAL.

 

[gobyebye]

DO IT WHAT WAY?!! we are not psychic

 

[flythere]

Can't be any more dorky than what Alaska does! That's what happens when a pilot group busts too many altitudes, they come up with this! Every time there is an altitude change, both pilots must do this---><----

 

[xjhawk]

Same thing happened in our merger. We went from the pilot flying changing the altitude selector to the Pilot monitoring. So when you are doing a visual or are in a critical "want it done now" phase but the pilot monitoring is on the radio and programming the FMS....its a pain in the but to wait or interrupt them when they are trying to do their job. In 9 years of doing it the other way, I never had a altitude deviation but since the change I have had many close calls over confusion over what and why something was selected. But its par for the course in mergers. There might be a perfectly good reason why it was done one way but the person who wants it changed some how got a higher spot in the new company so they flexed their muscles and now everyone is doing it that way. Same goes for any new fleet manager who has something to prove-they want to make their mark on the system so they change something

 

[kommutrdog]

I'm guessing the "Pilot Monitoring" has to spin the ALT knob, regardless of whether the auto pilot was engaged or not.

Is this correct?

If so, it's an ridiculous procedure as it adds a "variable" or an "exception" into the flow of things.

The Pilot Flying either "owns" the guidance panel or he doesn't, in my opinion.

 

[kommutrdog]

the person who wants it changed some how got a higher spot in the new company so they flexed their muscles and now everyone is doing it that way. Same goes for any new fleet manager who has something to prove-they want to make their mark on the system so they change something

Ding. Ding. Ding.
We have a winner.

People in Ivory Towers make changes for the sake of making changes and it really is irrelevant to them as to whether it makes the cockpit a safer operating environment.

Little men in big jobs.

 

[bizicmo]

I'm guessing the "Pilot Monitoring" has to spin the ALT knob, regardless of whether the auto pilot was engaged or not.

Is this correct?

If so, it's an ridiculous procedure as it adds a "variable" or an "exception" into the flow of things.

The Pilot Flying either "owns" the guidance panel or he doesn't, in my opinion.

I thought the captain owns it and only allows the other guy to touch it from time to time.

 

[airplane wizard]

Why do the SOPs for the same plane vary so much from airline to airline?

 

[trip]

Pilot flying should be the one who spins it, leave your finger on it until the PM acknowledges it. Done.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Why do the SOPs for the same plane vary so much from airline to airline?

Well, at my airline, it's usually, "Well, that's how we did it on the XXX, and if it was good enough on the XXX, then it's good enough for the NG." And if your airline had plane YYY before going to the NG, then you'll have different SOP. Or, Heaven forbid, you actually follow Boeing's SOP. . .

Well, we liked to do the landing check and then set final flaps on the -200, so that's how we'll do it now.

Hell, we're required to use F25 on the approach because that's how they did it on the 727!

I think some Captains are still trying to trim the engines or set the mixture because that's how we did it on the Convair or the Goose.

"FCTM? What the hell is that? F@g commie training manual?"

 

[Furloughed80]

Just for reference, I have worked at 3 different airlines. CAL was the only one that had the PF select the altitude on the MCP. What do they do at AA, DL, or US?

 

[waveflyer]

SW has the PF work the mcp if the autopilot's on - and the PM work it if handflying. We do have to both point at all changes now.
I've got six airlines, I've never had the PM work the altitude with the AP on.
Did they give a reason? What's that supposed to accomplish?

 

[eaglesview]

For what it's worth we feel the same way about the changes on the airbus on the UAL side. Diffrence is I don't think the one making the changes has ever seen the inside of the bus. We are not a Boeing but they are trying to make us operate like one. Just keep laughing it's all thats left.

 

[SWA Bubba]

SW has the PF work the mcp if the autopilot's on - and the PM work it if handflying. We do have to both point at all changes now.
I've got six airlines, I've never had the PM work the altitude with the AP on.
Did they give a reason? What's that supposed to accomplish?

Don't know how long you've been here, Wave, or if you don't remember or not, but actually that's how SWA used to do it, until just a few years bask: The PF always "owned" the MCP with the sole exception of the altitude window. When the PM read back an altitude change on the radio, he (the PM) selected the new altitude on the MCP, with the PF concurring. That was with or without the autopilot on.

Now, we do what you described above (we made this change a few years back with the whole PFD/VNAV/RNP package of changes): With Autopilot on, the PF makes changes to MCP (incl altitude) and the PM concurs; with autopilot off, the PM makes changes to MCP (incl altitude) with the PF concurring.

Which is better? Who knows... I suppose it's what you're used to doing.

Bubba

 

[densoo]

I think this was driven by many ASAP reports stating that the PM was not in the loop on the altitude change because he was making PA, getting ATIS, or otherwise off line. PF put in wrong altitude and there was no backup. I think the new change will make things worse because now the PF can't hear it, do it, when there's a change. It creates an extra step in which a delay, distraction, or misreading can come into play.

 

[Furloughed80]

I assumed this new procedure is what sUA used; is that not true?