Interested in soaring safety? Read this

[[email protected]]

There is not one mention of gliders in the following article. If this
doesn't convice you, your students, or the undisciplined pilots in
your community to get with the program I don't know what will.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/10/071210fa_fact_gawande

Matt Michael

[jeplane]

Well, I'll be the one who didn't get it.

This article is about intensive care, and how in modern times,
medicine does wonders.

But what does that has to do with soaring?

Thanks

[[email protected]]

I opened the link, took a look, and had the same reaction as JePlane
(moi aussi je plane). Must have missed something.

Cheers, Charles

[Hal[_2_]]

On Dec 14, 7:58 am, wrote:
> I opened the link, took a look, and had the same reaction as JePlane
> (moi aussi je plane). Must have missed something.
>
> Cheers, Charles

Checklist for B-29! ie. use checklist

[[email protected]]

On Dec 14, 9:58 am, wrote:
> I opened the link, took a look, and had the same reaction as JePlane
> (moi aussi je plane). Must have missed something.
>
> Cheers, Charles

well you must not have read the whole article. its about using
checklists in the ICU (i.e. Life Support System). Dramatic decreases
in infections were noted when doctors were bound to follow simple
checklists for seemingly simple tasks. consider your glider as your
ICU for the day every time you go fly. after all, if your Life
Support System fails, you probably wont be far behind it.

[jeplane]

Ah? It's all about checklists?

Ok great. Checklist to assemble the wings so we don't forget the
pins.... Checklist before X-country, so we don't forget safety kits
and such...

Yeah great.

But let me tell you, I have a lot more of a list while flying a
Citation in IMC. So why do I fly gliders too? So I can enjoy a lot
more freedom in VMC while minimizing radio calls, FMS programming, and
check-list reading.

It is not only check-list which will save people flying as a hobby. It
is the recency in their logbook.

But I agree: "The checklist is there to protect you, therefore
protect the checklist"

Richard Depinay

[tommytoyz]

The point is to not assume that you will never forget a vital
function, no matter how good a pilot you think you are.

Or rather, that it is assured that at some point, everyone will forget
something ans so the importance of the checklist and that the ego in
us will always try to convince us the opposite.

[Ramy]

On Dec 14, 3:20 pm, tommytoyz > wrote:
> The point is to not assume that you will never forget a vital
> function, no matter how good a pilot you think you are.
>
> Or rather, that it is assured that at some point, everyone will forget
> something ans so the importance of the checklist and that the ego in
> us will always try to convince us the opposite.

I don't think anyone questions the importance of checklists, the
problem is how to enforce yourself to use it, and use it correctly.
There is much higher chance to forget using a checklist, or skip an
item in the checklist, than making any other mistakes. Especially the
landing checklist, any distraction and the first thing to go will
likely be the checklist. Any ideas how to make sure you never skip an
item on the landing checklist?

Ramy

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

Ramy wrote:
> On Dec 14, 3:20 pm, tommytoyz > wrote:
>> The point is to not assume that you will never forget a vital
>> function, no matter how good a pilot you think you are.
>>
>> Or rather, that it is assured that at some point, everyone will forget
>> something ans so the importance of the checklist and that the ego in
>> us will always try to convince us the opposite.
>
> I don't think anyone questions the importance of checklists, the
> problem is how to enforce yourself to use it, and use it correctly.
> There is much higher chance to forget using a checklist, or skip an
> item in the checklist, than making any other mistakes. Especially the
> landing checklist, any distraction and the first thing to go will
> likely be the checklist. Any ideas how to make sure you never skip an
> item on the landing checklist?
>
Dymotape "WUF" (or whatever your acronym of choice is) onto the panel?

Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
with.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Tom Gardner]

On Dec 14, 3:52 pm, jeplane > wrote:
> Well, I'll be the one who didn't get it.
> This article is about intensive care, and how in modern times,
> medicine does wonders.
> But what does that has to do with soaring?

I think the parallels for 1,2,3 (below) between hospitals and gliding
are obvious.

1) experienced, highly skilled, and highly self confident people
2) those people doing similar (but slightly different) tasks over and
over again
3) unnecessarily high Bad Things happening

After...
a) introducing *multiple* checklists, one for each task
b) providing an atmosphere in which *everybody* *checked* the highly
skilled people followed the checklists every time
c) actually following the checklists
....Bad Things almost completely stopped happening

Overall, it was a well written article, unfortunately spread over 8
pages

[Ramy]

On Dec 15, 6:14 am, Martin Gregorie >
wrote:
> Ramy wrote:
> > On Dec 14, 3:20 pm, tommytoyz > wrote:
> >> The point is to not assume that you will never forget a vital
> >> function, no matter how good a pilot you think you are.
>
> >> Or rather, that it is assured that at some point, everyone will forget
> >> something ans so the importance of the checklist and that the ego in
> >> us will always try to convince us the opposite.
>
> > I don't think anyone questions the importance of checklists, the
> > problem is how to enforce yourself to use it, and use it correctly.
> > There is much higher chance to forget using a checklist, or skip an
> > item in the checklist, than making any other mistakes. Especially the
> > landing checklist, any distraction and the first thing to go will
> > likely be the checklist. Any ideas how to make sure you never skip an
> > item on the landing checklist?
>
> Dymotape "WUF" (or whatever your acronym of choice is) onto the panel?
>
> Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
> glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
> with.
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah, but my point is, how can you make sure you will follow the
checklist on the panel when something goes wrong or distructs you.
After all, this is when we get in trouble, when something else goes
wrong.

Ramy

[309]

On Dec 16, 12:12 am, Ramy > wrote:

> Yeah, but my point is, how can you make sure you will follow the
> checklist

T-R-A-I-N-I-N-G. P-R-A-C-T-I-C-E.

As Henry says: "Take the tow."

As Pete says: "Take the CFIG." At least once a year.

Practice your emergency procedures (no flap landings, no spoiler
landings). What do you think the military pilots do most of the
time? What do commercial pilots expect when they take their simulator
rides (at least once a year, sometimes twice a year)?

Make your own checklist. I've gotten in the habit of doing that for
each airplane (and each glider) I fly. As a Flight Test Guy, this
saves lives, saves money and makes the difference between success and
failure. The sun is setting on these items, but how many diamonds
would have been ACHIEVED if the checklist (the usually non-existent
checklist) had included the following two items:
1.) Wind barograph.
2.) Load film in camera, wind camera.

How many lives (and gliders) would have been saved if these had been
on the checklist?
A.) Positive Control Check - Elevator
B.) Positive Control Check - Rudder
C.) Positive Control Check - Aileron Left
D.) Positive Control Check - Aileron Right
E.) Positive Control Check - Spoiler Right
F.) Positive Control Check - Spoiler Left

Yup, I've been a dummy: took off once with the static ports still
taped over. Knew what to do: turned it into a pattern tow and a
practice "emergency" landing. Untaped the statics, did a (more
thorough) complete walk-around (preflight), got in line and took the
relight for a damn fine flight. And statics got added to the
preflight checklist!!! BTW, that's not the only time I've been a
dummy -- those that know me ...

A checklist is no substitute for airmanship. RAS posting is no
substitute for getting current AND competent in your machine. It
seems that too many of us get one or two flights in at the beginning
of the season, and then go striking out hunting diamonds (yeah, me
too). We should spend more time locally, with or without the Constant
Flight Interruptor aboard. We should practice more landings, short/
soft field with obstacle landings...simulated landing out landings.

After you use a checklist for a while, you'll find that they're
terrific security blankets, and help you relax more during the
flight. Keep the mnemonics (USTALL, TWA, GUMP) as safety nets. When
you forget your checklist, and feel brave enough to fly without it,
make sure you touch and say every item within your reach (spoilers,
release, flaps, gear, relief tube...).

The pros fly with checklists. The FAA condones the discipline. Many
accident investigation reports cite, as one of the causes, the crew's
failure to follow the appropriate checklist.

It's at least as important as your parachute. Hopefully, you'll use
the checklist more often.

-Pete
#309

[Cats]

On Dec 15, 7:50 pm, Tom Gardner > wrote:
> On Dec 14, 3:52 pm, jeplane > wrote:
>
> > Well, I'll be the one who didn't get it.
> > This article is about intensive care, and how in modern times,
> > medicine does wonders.
> > But what does that has to do with soaring?
>
> I think the parallels for 1,2,3 (below) between hospitals and gliding
> are obvious.
>
> 1) experienced, highly skilled, and highly self confident people
> 2) those people doing similar (but slightly different) tasks over and
> over again
> 3) unnecessarily high Bad Things happening
>
> After...
> a) introducing *multiple* checklists, one for each task
> b) providing an atmosphere in which *everybody* *checked* the highly
> skilled people followed the checklists every time
> c) actually following the checklists
> ...Bad Things almost completely stopped happening
>
> Overall, it was a well written article, unfortunately spread over 8
> pages

One of the key things seemed to be empowering the nurses to prompt the
doctors where necessary - they often knew the doctors were not
following the procedure but for various reasons didn't intervene. (In
fact I read it that they ended up with a 'checklist' nurse who checked
it all on a clipboard as the procedure was executed) The same occurs
on the flight deck - there have been accidents with commercial traffic
where the FO has realised something is wrong and either not told the
PIC or been overruled. The same attitude of humility is needed there,
and of course in a 2-seat glider.

[Ian]

On 15 Dec, 07:31, Ramy > wrote:

> I don't think anyone questions the importance of checklists, the
> problem is how to enforce yourself to use it, and use it correctly.

There's also a question about when they are appropriate. Would anyone
here use a checklist for thermalling? I once had someone try to
convince me to use a check list for a winch launch cable break -
is that a good use of the couple of seconds available for reaction?

Then, of course, there is the question of what we mean by a check
list. Is it a piece of laminated card which we take out of its pouch
and work through? Or is it just an acronym - in which case, how long
can it reasonably be? I've had people recommenend a downwind
WWULFSSTALL check - by the time you've done that lot you could have
landed the bloody thing, derigged it and started dinner.

Ian

* NARSTI: Nose down, Assess, Release Cable, Speed check, Trimmer set,
somethingbeginningwith I

[Ian]

On 15 Dec, 14:14, Martin Gregorie > wrote:

> Dymotape "WUF" (or whatever your acronym of choice is) onto the panel?

Or just a picture of a dog?

> Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
> glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
> with.

U

You shouldn't need a checklist for Lookout and Trim...

Ian

[Ian]

On 16 Dec, 08:44, 309 > wrote:

> Yup, I've been a dummy: took off once with the static ports still
> taped over. ... And statics got added to the
> preflight checklist!!!

> After you use a checklist for a while, you'll find that they're
> terrific security blankets, and help you relax more during the
> flight.

Security blankets are not necessarily a Good Thing. After all, it
seems you may have missed your taped over static ports because they
weren't on your check list ... what's going to be next? Not that I'm
knocking the whole idea, you understand - I have a nice laminated list
of rigging and derigging stuff.

> The pros fly with checklists. The FAA condones the discipline. Many
> accident investigation reports cite, as one of the causes, the crew's
> failure to follow the appropriate checklist.

The pros are flying vastly more complicated aircraft and have vastly
more time available to read checklists.

Ian

[J a c k[_2_]]

Ian wrote:


> The pros are flying vastly more complicated aircraft...

True, though the pilot/aircraft interface gets simpler all the
time--until you get to the programming part.



> ...and have vastly more time available to read checklists.

False. Though we may have a crew to share the load, it takes more time
to work with a crew. The time available to provide a solution is often
inversely related to the size of the problem.

In single-seat aircraft you are generally going very fast, have even
more complexity, and often feel that you don't have enough hands to do
all the things that need to be done in the time available, which can be
so short as to seem virtually non-existent. That's why there are
ejection seats--wonderful "zero/zero" rocket-powered seats.

If the above sounds to some like an argument against reliance on
checklists, in fact my position is that checklists must be first and
foremost practical--short, sufficient, and sometimes memorized--but they
should always be used.

Checklists work, and AOA works. Though the use of each must be adapted
to the ship, the mission, and the circumstances, I suspect those who
avoid or deride either one do so for their own emotional reasons and not
out of a real understanding of their value.


Jack

[Ian]

On 16 Dec, 11:28, J a c k > wrote:
> Ian wrote:
> ...and have vastly more time available to read checklists.
>
> False. Though we may have a crew to share the load, it takes more time
> to work with a crew. The time available to provide a solution is often
> inversely related to the size of the problem.

The pros flying commercial jets /do/ have more time to deal with check
lists because (a) the person flying the aircraft doesn't necessarily
have to have anything to do with the checklisting (b) they have
autopilots and (c) they don't need to look out.

I'm basing this on a few jump seat trips (in the Good Old Days), but I
have never had time in a glider to take my hands off the controls,
focus wholly on the inside of the cockpit and go through a seventeen
point check list...

Incidentally, you say that "checklists ... should alway be used". Do
you have a checklist for joining thermals? For thermal centring? For
stall recovery? For dolphin flying?

Ian

[jcarlyle]

Pete, what does the mnenomic TWA stand for?

-John

On Dec 16, 3:44 am, 309 > wrote:
> Keep the mnemonics (USTALL, TWA, GUMP) as safety nets.

[user]

I spoke to a doctor who recently attended a medical seminar during which
cockpit communications between pilot/copilot/engineer were used to
demonstrate the hazards of misused terminology and too much deference to
authority during incidents and accidents.


"Cats" > wrote in message
...
> On Dec 15, 7:50 pm, Tom Gardner > wrote:
>> On Dec 14, 3:52 pm, jeplane > wrote:
>>
>> > Well, I'll be the one who didn't get it.
>> > This article is about intensive care, and how in modern times,
>> > medicine does wonders.
>> > But what does that has to do with soaring?
>>
>> I think the parallels for 1,2,3 (below) between hospitals and gliding
>> are obvious.
>>
>> 1) experienced, highly skilled, and highly self confident people
>> 2) those people doing similar (but slightly different) tasks over and
>> over again
>> 3) unnecessarily high Bad Things happening
>>
>> After...
>> a) introducing *multiple* checklists, one for each task
>> b) providing an atmosphere in which *everybody* *checked* the highly
>> skilled people followed the checklists every time
>> c) actually following the checklists
>> ...Bad Things almost completely stopped happening
>>
>> Overall, it was a well written article, unfortunately spread over 8
>> pages
>
> One of the key things seemed to be empowering the nurses to prompt the
> doctors where necessary - they often knew the doctors were not
> following the procedure but for various reasons didn't intervene. (In
> fact I read it that they ended up with a 'checklist' nurse who checked
> it all on a clipboard as the procedure was executed) The same occurs
> on the flight deck - there have been accidents with commercial traffic
> where the FO has realised something is wrong and either not told the
> PIC or been overruled. The same attitude of humility is needed there,
> and of course in a 2-seat glider.

[Bill Daniels]

The problem with "check lists" is that 99% of the time they are used as "do
lists" as in "shopping list".

They are not called "do lists" for a reason. You are supposed to be able to
perform all tasks on the list from memory and then check yourself with the
list. This way, in an emergency when you don't have time to find a list and
read it, you are likely to do the right things.

Used as "do lists" they are just a crutch. Used correctly as check lists,
they do add to safety.

I do my lists from memory and then scan the checklist to make sure I haven't
forgotten anything.

Bill Daniels




"Ramy" > wrote in message
...
> On Dec 15, 6:14 am, Martin Gregorie >
> wrote:
>> Ramy wrote:
>> > On Dec 14, 3:20 pm, tommytoyz > wrote:
>> >> The point is to not assume that you will never forget a vital
>> >> function, no matter how good a pilot you think you are.
>>
>> >> Or rather, that it is assured that at some point, everyone will forget
>> >> something ans so the importance of the checklist and that the ego in
>> >> us will always try to convince us the opposite.
>>
>> > I don't think anyone questions the importance of checklists, the
>> > problem is how to enforce yourself to use it, and use it correctly.
>> > There is much higher chance to forget using a checklist, or skip an
>> > item in the checklist, than making any other mistakes. Especially the
>> > landing checklist, any distraction and the first thing to go will
>> > likely be the checklist. Any ideas how to make sure you never skip an
>> > item on the landing checklist?
>>
>> Dymotape "WUF" (or whatever your acronym of choice is) onto the panel?
>>
>> Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
>> glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
>> with.
>>
>> --
>> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
>> gregorie. | Essex, UK
>> org |- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah, but my point is, how can you make sure you will follow the
> checklist on the panel when something goes wrong or distructs you.
> After all, this is when we get in trouble, when something else goes
> wrong.
>
> Ramy

[309]

On Dec 16, 7:08 am, jcarlyle > wrote:
> Pete, what does the mnenomic TWA stand for?
>
> -John
>
> On Dec 16, 3:44 am, 309 > wrote:
>
> > Keep the mnemonics (USTALL, TWA, GUMP) as safety nets.

TWA = Traffic, Wind, Altimeter (or Altitude)
GUMP = Gas, Undercarriage, Mixture, Prop (obviously for Power)
USTALL = Undercarriage, Speed, Trim, Airbrakes, Lookout, Land
see http://www.soaringsafety.org/images/ustall.jpg for a USTALL poster

I find myself using GUMP even in my 1-26...obviously completing that
checklist is very quick...and it prompts me to remember the other
two...which are similarly quick (Trim on a 1-26 is of marginal utility
on approach).

Nevertheless, they get me set up for safe landings...whatever I'm
flying!

-Pete

[Tom Gardner]

On Dec 16, 9:33 am, Ian > wrote:
> There's also a question about when they are appropriate. Would anyone
> here use a checklist for thermalling? I once had someone try to
> convince me to use a check list for a winch launch cable break -
> is that a good use of the couple of seconds available for reaction?

Probably not. But it probably *is* useful as part of the
last E in cb-sift-cbe.

[Tom Gardner]

On Dec 16, 9:00 am, Cats > wrote:
> One of the key things seemed to be empowering the nurses to prompt the
> doctors where necessary - they often knew the doctors were not
> following the procedure but for various reasons didn't intervene. (In
> fact I read it that they ended up with a 'checklist' nurse who checked
> it all on a clipboard as the procedure was executed)

Yes, exactly.

> The same occurs
> on the flight deck - there have been accidents with commercial traffic
> where the FO has realised something is wrong and either not told the
> PIC or been overruled.

A famous such crash occurred near to me - the PapaIndia Trident
crash at Staines. Cause was overbearing P1 that was subtly
incapacitated by a heart attack; P1 overruled the P2 and the Trident
entered a deep stall.

[jcarlyle]

Thanks, Pete. I use USTALL on every approach set-up, and have heard
GUMPS, although as a non-power pilot I've never used it. But I've
never run across TWA, and I wonder why - it seems very, very important
for any landing! Thanks for educating me, and giving me a checklist
I'll be doing on all future approach set-ups.

-John

On Dec 16, 11:52 am, 309 > wrote:
> TWA = Traffic, Wind, Altimeter (or Altitude)
> GUMP = Gas, Undercarriage, Mixture, Prop (obviously for Power)
> USTALL = Undercarriage, Speed, Trim, Airbrakes, Lookout, Land
> seehttp://www.soaringsafety.org/images/ustall.jpgfor a USTALL poster

[[email protected]]

Great discussion so far.

A couple points...

In soaring we DO have crew particularly in the staging, take-off, and
tow phase. We sometimes have crew during landing as well if there is
a ground crew with radio. So, crew resource management has great
value in soaring operations and should be utilized.

One of the jobs crew can perform is making sure pilots complete their
checklists; Critical Assembly Checks, Positive Control Checks, and, if
done out-loud, pre take-off checklist. Teach your ground crew not to
hook-up a towline until they hear the pilot complete the checklist.

In-cockpit checklists for glider ops should be done from memory (pre
take-off, landing, off-airport landing) WUFSTALL can be completed
easily in 20 seconds if done from memory and at the approapriate time
during the approach.

CBSIFTCB plus WET (wind, emergency procedures, traffic) takes less
than a half a minute to SAY OUT LOUD and verify or touch each item. I
teach to say "Emergency below 200 ft lower the nose land ahead, above
200 lower the nose, land ahead or behind". Anything more is either
too much, takes too long, or just simply too confusing for the reptile
brain that will be trying to accomplish it during a real emergency.

On the last item, Traffic, make eye contact with the ground crew who
should now be patiently waiting at your wing tip and say TRAFFIC and
look around to remind them to look around for you. This is crew
resource management. It takes no extra time and gets everyone
watching each others back. There is no excuse for taking-off with
canopys unlatched, controls not hooked-up.

Look for other ways in which CRM can be utilized in soaring operations
and share them with others here.

Matt Michael

[J a c k[_2_]]

Ian wrote:

> Jack wrote:

>> False. Though we may have a crew to share the load, it takes more time
>> to work with a crew. The time available to provide a solution is often
>> inversely related to the size of the problem.
>
> The pros flying commercial jets /do/ have more time to deal with check
> lists because (a) the person flying the aircraft doesn't necessarily
> have to have anything to do with the checklisting (b) they have
> autopilots and (c) they don't need to look out.

Those are all very nice things to have--some of them are even true. Of
course there are checklists, and then there are checklists--and many
different kinds of problems to be encountered. We do in fact make an
effort to slow things down and create more time to do checklists, both
written and mental, when possible. The study of crew coordination, and
use of all the crew's resources, has become a science--and a new respect
for the art of cockpit resource management permeates the industry. It
appears you believe the foregoing is somehow an argument against using
checklists in other types of aircraft. I think it should, for those with
open minds, describe the importance to professionals of defining the
proper use of check lists and training oneself and others in using
checklists appropriately.

(a) The removal of the flying pilot from the checklist loop is not a
smart idea, though he cannot give full attention to it. He must be aware
of what is happening with regard to the problem-solving process and
participate in it to an appropriate extent, without ever being
distracted from aircraft control. Doing the checklist is the easy part.

(b) The autopilots usually work--but not always. There was no checklist,
as I remember it (retired now for five years), for loss of all autopilot
function. What do you suppose we would do then--possibly refer to a
mental "checklist" of things which must be approached in a different
manner in order to insure a successful outcome?

(c) There are times when less visual clearing is necessary than at other
times. You may have seen a crew paying less attention to what's going on
outside periodically during the high altitude cruise portion of a
flight. That too is human nature, but there are very few times when it
is appropriate to ignore what's happening outside for more than a few
seconds. There are some quite infamous examples where that has been
disastrously demonstrated.


The best glider pilots I have flown with do use checklists appropriate
to gliders and use them in a manner which enhances the safety and
efficiency of glider operations. And I base my evaluation of their
abilities on far more than their use of checklists, by the way--in case
you perceive me as some sort of anal procedural-minded robot. I doubt
that those I have flown with would agree with such a perception.

Though it has been decades since I last flew a military fighter (the
F-100) it is my understanding that military pilot training has adapted
in similar fashion and parallels airline training with regard to use of
checklists and resource management. These principles are not new
however, only the system's acknowledgment that the scientific approach
to resource management is superior to the old model is new (relative to
the mindset of a half-century ago).

When there is only one crew member, no autopilot, and very little that
can possibly go wrong with the ship, what is different but the number of
checklists and their length? Do the principles change? I think not.



> I'm basing this on a few jump seat trips (in the Good Old Days), but I
> have never had time in a glider to take my hands off the controls,
> focus wholly on the inside of the cockpit and go through a seventeen
> point check list.

Of course, I don't have the advantage of a perspective on these matters
gained from a few jump seat trips. I've spent far too many hours in
jump-seats, though perhaps just the right amount of hours in right- and
left- and only-seats. And it is possible I've encountered a
seventeen-point checklist along the way, but I don't remember any. I do
remember very well the efforts to shorten the checklists, as well as to
reduce the number of items which must be committed to memory. That was,
and is, a good thing.

If you have never had occasion to remove your hands from the flight
controls in a glider, perhaps you should try to relax more. The ship
sometimes does better on its own, at least for me.



> Incidentally, you say that "checklists ... should alway be used". Do
> you have a checklist for joining thermals? For thermal centring? For
> stall recovery? For dolphin flying?

I think one could answer, "Yes", to your question, but only in the most
pedantic sense. You will, upon rereading, perhaps note that I did not
say that there should be a checklist for every action--nor every
consideration--that a pilot undertakes. I do have both mental and
written checklists for certain phases of flight. The written ones are
very few, and very short. The challenge is to use them, always, because
it is my nature, as with most humans, to think in the moment that I
don't need them. Flying a glider is, I'm sure you will agree, a very
simple sort of flying. It can be deceptively so. One needs only to
forget a single item to ruin ones day.

If a checklist is defined for a given phase of your operation, then use
it--or not, since we are unlikely ever to fly together, or even in the
same area. If I was instructing and/or giving check-rides in gliders I
would require the use of a written checklist for certain aspects of
pre-flight, in-flight, and post-flight operations. You would likely not
be pleased to be in the other seat, but I can live with that.


Jack

[Ian]

On 16 Dec, 19:19, J a c k > wrote:

> I think it should, for those with
> open minds, describe the importance to professionals of defining the
> proper use of check lists and training oneself and others in using
> checklists appropriately.

We are in complete agreement, you know. I don't think either of us
would substitute "indiscriminately" for "appropriately", would we?

> The best glider pilots I have flown with do use checklists appropriate
> to gliders and use them in a manner which enhances the safety and
> efficiency of glider operations.

How would you define "best glider pilots" there? I have flown a few
times with a world champion, and he did not ask for any more than the
usual two BGA mnemonics.

> When there is only one crew member, no autopilot, and very little that
> can possibly go wrong with the ship, what is different but the number of
> checklists and their length? Do the principles change? I think not.

That's perhaps a little evasive, since the number and length may
change drastically in such circumstances. But yes, the principal of
"use checklists when appropriate" holds good!

> I think one could answer, "Yes", to your question, but only in the most
> pedantic sense. You will, upon rereading, perhaps note that I did not
> say that there should be a checklist for every action--nor every
> consideration--that a pilot undertakes.

We agree there as well.

> If a checklist is defined for a given phase of your operation, then use
> it--or not, since we are unlikely ever to fly together, or even in the
> same area. If I was instructing and/or giving check-rides in gliders I
> would require the use of a written checklist for certain aspects of
> pre-flight, in-flight, and post-flight operations. You would likely not
> be pleased to be in the other seat, but I can live with that.

I'm a bit worried by this "if there is a checklist, use it" approach.
Now that I've told you about the NARSTI checklist for winch cable
breaks, will you always use it?

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not agin' the things - but I am agin'
unquestioning acceptance of anything while flying. Except spin
recovery!

Ian

[Ian]

On 16 Dec, 18:13, wrote:

> One of the jobs crew can perform is making sure pilots complete their
> checklists; Critical Assembly Checks, Positive Control Checks, and, if
> done out-loud, pre take-off checklist. Teach your ground crew not to
> hook-up a towline until they hear the pilot complete the checklist.

One club I fly with has a column in the launch log for "positive
control checks completed" and won't launch you until this has been
done (once per day) at the launch point. I think that's a jolly good
idea.

> I teach to say "Emergency below 200 ft lower the nose land ahead, above
> 200 lower the nose, land ahead or behind".

How accurate are your altimeters during a winch launch?

Ian

[Ian]

On 16 Dec, 15:39, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> The problem with "check lists" is that 99% of the time they are used as "do
> lists" as in "shopping list".

Absolutely. I was taught "put the wheel down when you decide to land,
no matter how high" and "check that it's down in the circuit". I am
amazed at the number of people who wait until the last minute or two
of flight to put the wheel down, and I have seen one serious crash as
a result.

Ian

[[email protected]]

Good point Ian. This is specific to aero tow launch which I did not
specify. Most are taught to call out 200 ft on aerotow to mark that
critical alt. It is a general benchmark.

My limited experience with ground tow launch which I haven't done in
some years, reminds me that the tow failure response is different.
IIRC it's more along the lines of, Lower the nose, confirm airspeed,
decide where to go (which is often site specific) pull release, and
maneuver to land.


> > I teach to say "Emergency below 200 ft lower the nose land ahead, above
> > 200 lower the nose, land ahead or behind".
>
> How accurate are your altimeters during a winch launch?
>
> Ian

[J a c k[_2_]]

Ian wrote:

> How would you define "best glider pilots" there?

They were better than the other glider pilots I've flown with.


> I have flown a few times with a world champion, and he did not
> ask for any more than the usual two BGA mnemonics.

Sounds appropriate to me. I don't advocate papering the cockpit with
checklists.


> I'm a bit worried by this "if there is a checklist, use it" approach.
> Now that I've told you about the NARSTI checklist for winch cable
> breaks, will you always use it?

Undoubtedly not. I've not seen a cable launch and don't expect to see
one. I'd certainly use the checklist recommended by my CFI, until I
developed my own.


> Please don't get me wrong. I'm not agin' the things - but I am agin'
> unquestioning acceptance of anything while flying. Except spin
> recovery!

Unquestioning acceptance not spoken here.


Jack

[Cats]

On Dec 17, 2:57 am, J a c k > wrote:
> Ian wrote:
> > How would you define "best glider pilots" there?
>
> They were better than the other glider pilots I've flown with.
<snip>

Defining 'best' as 'better' is not very helpful IMHO. What exactly
made you feel he is better than the other people you've flown with? I
mean without using terms like 'best', 'better' and so on...

[309]

On Dec 16, 1:39 am, Ian > wrote:
> Security blankets are not necessarily a Good Thing. After all, it
> seems you may have missed your taped over static ports because they
> weren't on your check list ... what's going to be next? Not that I'm
> knocking the whole idea, you understand - I have a nice laminated list
> of rigging and derigging stuff.

Okay, Ian, I'll fess up: that static port episode was before I
religiously used checklists in anything that weighed less than 4,000
pounds. It became one of those pivotal (thankfully non-fatal and
inexpensive) events that convinced me that it doesn't matter how
simple the aircraft is. As Max Stanley is quoted: "The Piper Cub is
the safest aircraft in the world -- it can just barely kill you."

Religious use of a checklist doesn't necessarily mean plastering the
sides of your cockpit, and spending more time looking at the paper
than the scenery: Reviewing a checklist prior to the flight (even the
night before) can re-etch the memory of how to do it right, and
quickly. And frequently, you go through the motions (using cranial or
muscle memory) and then REVIEW the checklist -- and sometimes catch
the item that was forgotten.

P.S.: The mere act of WRITING a checklist helps you truly understand
the aircraft systems (simple or not), the proper operating procedures
(and perhaps a better "flow" of the steps than the manufacturer
originally suggested). The benefit of this remains -- although less
so -- even if you never use the list again. Look at pilots &
instructors who fly multiple types of aircraft: They use checklists
(sometimes very short ones that are referred to as "cheat sheets") so
they refresh their mind that this aircraft has a best L/D speed of y
and a min sink speed of x (or for power, Vx, Vy, Vglide, VLE, VLO,
Vfe, Vmc, Va, Vne, Vno). The "best" instructors share their cheat
sheets with their students, but implore (or force) their students to
fabricate their own.

P.P.S.: Jack is right: Big Iron Crews do NOT necessarily have more
time. Especially in Flight Test, I have witnessed where pre-briefing
a checklist made the difference between incident (safe return) and
disaster. During most normal operations they do have more time -- in
part thanks to orderly and well arranged checklists!

P.P.P.S: Yes, there's a checklist for thermalling: Somebody's
already in thermal: follow his direction of turn. Nobody else? Try
my luck to the left...

Last note: I haven't seen it quite so much with the major airlines
(except for basic aviation skills), but in the military there are
Emergency Procedures and there are BOLD FACE EMERGENCY PROCEDURES:
All pilots flying a given type are required to memorize Bold Face
procedures!

Okay, final note: If you look in all of the manuals, there is never
any additional procedures or writing after the word EJECT.

-Pete
#309

[309]

On Dec 16, 1:41 pm, Ian > wrote:
> > I teach to say "Emergency below 200 ft lower the nose land ahead, above
> > 200 lower the nose, land ahead or behind".
>
> How accurate are your altimeters during a winch launch?
>
> Ian

My recollection of winch training suggests that the trained response
to a cable break is to lower the nose. Once that is done and the
glider moves 32.8 feet (10 meters), the altimeter should be as
accurate as anywhere else in the envelope. And as other posters have
pointed out, that's where the decision time begins.

Good food for thought.

-Pete

[309]

On Dec 16, 10:13 am, wrote:
> On the last item, Traffic, make eye contact with the ground crew who
> should now be patiently waiting at your wing tip and say TRAFFIC and
> look around to remind them to look around for you. This is crew
> resource management.
> Matt Michael

My first Glider Instructor taught me a simple pre-takeoff checklist:
A
B
C
C
C
D

I added another D.

Another instructor implored me to add E

A-Altimeter
B-Belts
C-Canopy
C-Controls
C-Cable (in that order!)
D-Direction of Wind
D-Dive Brakes (spoilers to some)
D-Dummies In The Patter (my way of categorizing "traffic")
E-Emergency Procedures and Plans.

The good Big Iron drivers BRIEF every takeoff (heading, speeds, what
to do in an emergency).

The great Big Iron Test Pilots pre-Brief every takeoff, and who's to
do what when (not if) something goes wrong...even for a normal non-
test takeoff. Taking an unfamiliar FAA Test Pilot with us once, the
captain briefed the FAA pilot "If something goes wrong, YOU fly the
airplane, and I'll deal with the emergency, since I'm more familiar
with the aircraft/systems/etc." We can do this with our ground crews,
too, as Matt has suggested.

Some of us treat our checklists like we treat our parachutes: like a
talisman. If we take care of them, have them and know how to use
them, they will perform the function of a good luck charm, and ward
off emergencies, ramp checks and embarrassing appearances on the five
o'clock news.

-Pete

[Ian]

On 17 Dec, 09:04, 309 > wrote:

> P.S.: The mere act of WRITING a checklist helps you truly understand
> the aircraft systems (simple or not), the proper operating procedures
> (and perhaps a better "flow" of the steps than the manufacturer
> originally suggested).

I wrote my rigging and derigging instructions on the basis that
someone someday might have to take my glider apart while I was
elsewhere (in hospital? under arrest? dead?). It was quite instructive
to commit to writing all the wrinkles I had developed myself.

> The benefit of this remains -- although less
> so -- even if you never use the list again. Look at pilots &
> instructors who fly multiple types of aircraft: They use checklists
> (sometimes very short ones that are referred to as "cheat sheets") so
> they refresh their mind that this aircraft has a best L/D speed of y
> and a min sink speed of x (or for power, Vx, Vy, Vglide, VLE, VLO,
> Vfe, Vmc, Va, Vne, Vno).

I had the pleasure of working with Anne Welch some years ago. When she
was in the Air Transport Auxiliary during the Second Big
Unpleasantness she wrote many of the single sheet briefing notes
designed to let a (good) pilot do a basic delivery flight in a new
type safely. They make fascinating reading - who operating manuals
stripped to the absolute minimum. Undercarriage up with three pulls on
this lever, down with five pumps on that. Take off vacuum and rpm so,
cruise so, landing so.

All BGA gliders have a placard giving Vne, Vwinch, Vaerotow and
Vroughair, and I make it my policy /always/ to reread that before /
every/ launch. Good grief, I'm a checklist user!

Ian

[kirk.stant]

> Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
> glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
> with.

I finally settled on WWW (Wind (direction&strength), Water (dumped, or
if not, adjust speed), Wheels (down before touchdown is good...)).
Those are specific to landing, and missing one of them could cause
something to break. Everything else is basic airmanship.

Kirk

[Ian]

On 17 Dec, 17:02, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> > Now, if somebody could come up with a good acronym for a dry, unflapped
> > glider.... ULT (Undercarriage, Lookout, Trim) is about all I can come up
> > with.
>
> I finally settled on WWW (Wind (direction&strength), Water (dumped, or
> if not, adjust speed), Wheels (down before touchdown is good...)).
> Those are specific to landing, and missing one of them could cause
> something to break. Everything else is basic airmanship.

I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
lookout.

Ian

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

Ian wrote:
>
> I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
> lookout.
>
Yes I agree too, Ian. Its just that "U" looks a little stark and
unmemorable to be a decent acronym.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Ian]

On 17 Dec, 19:50, Martin Gregorie > wrote:
> Ian wrote:
>
> > I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
> > lookout.
>
> Yes I agree too, Ian. Its just that "U" looks a little stark and
> unmemorable to be a decent acronym.

Hmm. What about Approach, Airbrakes, Round out, Ground effect, Hold-
off? For a winch launch we could have Wheel (balance on), Hold level,
Ease back, Establish climb.

Yours for memorable mnemonics,

Ian

[Dan G]

On Dec 17, 5:56 pm, Ian > wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 17:02, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> > I finally settled on WWW (Wind (direction&strength), Water (dumped, or
> > if not, adjust speed), Wheels (down before touchdown is good...)).
> > Those are specific to landing, and missing one of them could cause
> > something to break. Everything else is basic airmanship.
>
> I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
> lookout.

We *shouldn't*, but we *do*, otherwise there wouldn't be accidents
from people getting too slow in approach or colliding with other
aircraft in circuit.

Anyway that wasn't what I came here to say, this is: few weeks ago I
had a ride in a light plane whose owner and pilot is a senior long-
haul airline captain. I was quite surprised that this very experienced
pilot was using a checklist of all of about four items on what was
already his second flight of the day. The OP's article explains that
well. Even though the checklist was so basic and performed so
frequently, the pilot only needed to forget one step once to kill
us... so he


Dan

[Ian]

On 17 Dec, 23:27, Dan G > wrote:
> On Dec 17, 5:56 pm, Ian > wrote:

> > I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
> > lookout.
>
> We *shouldn't*, but we *do*, otherwise there wouldn't be accidents
> from people getting too slow in approach or colliding with other
> aircraft in circuit.

Checklists are good for sequences of actions which have to be carried
out relative infrequently, like preparing to take off. Anyone who
needs a checklist to tell them to trim and lookout would have to cycle
though it constantly. Do /you/ have a printed checklist in your
cockpit saying "Look out"?

Ian

[brtlmj]

On Dec 17, 3:37 pm, Ian > wrote:
> Anyone who needs a checklist to tell them to trim and lookout would have to cycle
> though it constantly. Do /you/ have a printed checklist in your
> cockpit saying "Look out"?

I've been taught to use a "LUST" checklist before landing. Lookout,
Undercarriage, Speed, Trim. And while nobody who does not remember
about lookout should be sent solo, I think the "L" in the checklist
makes a perfect sense. Why? Because the lookout changes when you are
about to land. You are supposed to look at the entire pattern now. Is
there someone a kilometer away flying parallel to you? You are going
to meet head-on pretty soon. Is someone about to launch? What are the
chances of the two of you trying to occupy the same point of space at
the same time? What if he has a rope/cable break?

Bartek

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

Ian wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 19:50, Martin Gregorie > wrote:
>> Ian wrote:
>>
>>> I agree. We really shouldn't need a checklist to tell us to trim or
>>> lookout.
>> Yes I agree too, Ian. Its just that "U" looks a little stark and
>> unmemorable to be a decent acronym.
>
> Hmm. What about Approach, Airbrakes, Round out, Ground effect, Hold-
> off? For a winch launch we could have Wheel (balance on), Hold level,
> Ease back, Establish climb.
>
> Yours for memorable mnemonics,
>
Both are well matched to their stage of the flight: I'm sure their
recall will be effortless.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Ian]

On 18 Dec, 19:20, Martin Gregorie > wrote:
> Ian wrote:

> > Hmm. What about Approach, Airbrakes, Round out, Ground effect, Hold-
> > off? For a winch launch we could have Wheel (balance on), Hold level,
> > Ease back, Establish climb.
>
> > Yours for memorable mnemonics,
>
> Both are well matched to their stage of the flight: I'm sure their
> recall will be effortless.

I certainly find no difficulty with either. They spring almost
unbidden to my lips.

Ian

[Ian]

On 18 Dec, 17:55, brtlmj > wrote:
> On Dec 17, 3:37 pm, Ian > wrote:
>
> > Anyone who needs a checklist to tell them to trim and lookout would have to cycle
> > though it constantly. Do /you/ have a printed checklist in your
> > cockpit saying "Look out"?
>
> I've been taught to use a "LUST" checklist before landing. Lookout,
> Undercarriage, Speed, Trim. And while nobody who does not remember
> about lookout should be sent solo, I think the "L" in the checklist
> makes a perfect sense. Why? Because the lookout changes when you are
> about to land. You are supposed to look at the entire pattern now. Is
> there someone a kilometer away flying parallel to you? You are going
> to meet head-on pretty soon. Is someone about to launch? What are the
> chances of the two of you trying to occupy the same point of space at
> the same time? What if he has a rope/cable break?

That's a fair point. I was taught to check while on base leg that
there is nobody making a straight in approach, and always do. It's
just that "lookout" seems to generic. "Traffic" would be better, I
think.

Ian

[J a c k[_2_]]

Cats wrote:

> On Dec 17, 2:57 am, J a c k > wrote:

>> Ian wrote:

>>> How would you define "best glider pilots" there?

>> They were better than the other glider pilots I've flown with.

> Defining 'best' as 'better' is not very helpful IMHO. What exactly
> made you feel he is better than the other people you've flown with? I
> mean without using terms like 'best', 'better' and so on...


Oh no you don't, my friend. If you really want to know what it's
supposed to look like, then go out and spend fifty years figuring it out
for yourself. You may be willing to take the time to read and absorb a
distillation of all that, but I haven't the time to write it, nor can
you afford my rates.

Besides, it's already been done so much better by Bach, Berent, Buck,
Boyne, Collins, Fowler, Gann, Imelson, Kern, Kershner, Langewiesche,
Plourde, Saint-Exupery, Shilling, Taylor, Webb, Yeager, and a hundred
more. It doesn't come easy, cheap, or fast, but those fellows can point
you in the right direction, and you'll often be entertained enough along
the way to want to stick with it.


Jack