I'm getting ready to go back to Cali and am going to build some time down there. Why are they're checklists so different than Canadian for example pre landing and shutdown. I've only flown in BC so I'm guessing they're the same across Canada

Flight schools in Canada love to have super long and elaborate checklists that are useless. Things like Primer --- Locked. Well if you have not touched it since you started the engine, its still locked. Circuit Breakers --- IN. If everything is working then there in, you'll notice if one has popped and if you don't the item is not that important! Landing Light --- On... unless you don't want it on, that's an airmanship item not a checklist item. A reasonably competent pilot aught to be able to fly a 172 with no checklist at all, its pretty well idiot proof. Remember to enrichen, and carb heat as required, and fly the speeds for you selected flap setting that's about it.

Yeah I guess that's true.

Airplanes manufactured since the mid 1970's include a checklist as a part of the approved section of the flight manual - so that checklist is approved. If there are any flight manual supplements applicable to that airplane, any checklist items in there are also applicable. It is not ideally convenient to open and read both (or all) of these, so it is reasonable to draft a single document which combines this information. The resulting single checklist, if transcribed correctly, would be considered approved as the flight manual is. That would be the totality of the approved requirement to operate that airplane.

Adding other items, particularly repeating them needlessly, on the checklist deviates from the requirement to operate the airplane in accordance with approved data. A pilot's skill and airmanship, supplemented by the use of a checklist to check that critical items have been accomplished, should be enough - if it's not, why not?

Too often, I have seen long home made essays in the role of a checklist. If you don't like it, put it in the seat pocket, and refer to the flight manual and its supplements. If anyone comments, ask them why it is not adequate to apply your airmanship, and use the approved flight manual checklist.

Long checklists are confusing, and distracting, particularly when the same action to the same item is repeated several times. Avoid.

Even though the checklist in an approved flight manual is de-facto approved, I don't detect any regulatory requirement to use an approved checklist.

The Canadian regulations require (602.60)

a checklist or placards that enable the aircraft to be operated in accordance with limitations specified in the aircraft flight manual, aircraft operating manual, pilot operating handbook or any equivalent document provided by the manufacturer;

As we all know by now, the limitations is Chapter 2 of the POH or AFM.

Going on:

A checklist or placards referred to in paragraph (1)(a) shall enable the aircraft to be operated in normal, abnormal and emergency conditions and shall include
(a) a pre-start check;
(b) a pre-take-off check;
(c) a post-take-off check;
(d) a pre-landing check; and
(e) emergency procedures.
(3) Emergency procedures referred to in paragraph (2)(e) shall include
(a) emergency operation of fuel, hydraulic, electrical and mechanical systems, where applicable;
(b) emergency operation of instruments and controls, where applicable;
(c) engine inoperative procedures; and
(d) any other procedure that is necessary for aviation safety.

And then

(4) Checks and emergency procedures referred to in subsections (2) and (3) shall be performed and followed where they are applicable.

I don't see any reason you can't rewrite your own checklists from scratch, if they meet those criteria. Of course you may be called to justify your decision-making later, but that's a different question.

Agreed, nothing says you can't write your own checklist for a particular plane, and this becomes a good idea if doing so logically combines required FMS checklists into one user friendly document. What to avoid is preparing a checklist which deviates from the format, repeats things or has many more items, so as to confuse or overwhelm the user. Keep it simple, it is a checklist, not an operating instruction. Your airmanship, combined with your knowledge of the limitations, normal and emergency operating procedures for the aircraft should result in your needing only a mind aid to assure that the most important items are as they should be.

One thing to consider - it is an appropriate habit, that if you are interrupted during your use of the checklist, that you restart from the beginning of that section when you resume. So it would be nice if only the five or six essential items were there, rather than an additional ten non essential items (and had that been the case, maybe you got all the way through the first time anyway!).

If you are presented with an unusually busy (compared to the flight manual version) checklist, it might be informative to ask the person who prepared or presented the checklist for use, how the additional items are handled in the original FM/POH/FMS checklist.

My plane's checklists were written by the previous owners and closely follow the format and content of the flying school that taught them (and me) to fly. They're on the long side.

I'm starting to write up new checklists. The old ones are lengthy and don't reflect some recent upgrades (GPS, engine monitor). The checklists in the POH are brief. Looking for that happy medium. I fly a Beech 23, not a Boeing 787.

...laura

lhalliday wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:15 am My plane's checklists were written by the previous owners and closely follow the format and content of the flying school that taught them (and me) to fly. They're on the long side.

I'm starting to write up new checklists. The old ones are lengthy and don't reflect some recent upgrades (GPS, engine monitor). The checklists in the POH are brief. Looking for that happy medium. I fly a Beech 23, not a Boeing 787.

...laura

You'd be surprised at how short a 787's checklists are, Preflight - 5 items, Before Start, 10 items, Before Taxi 4 items, Before take off 4 items, Descent 5 items, Approach 2 items, Landing 3 items, After landing, 5 items, Shutdown 6 items, Secure 4 items. 48 normal Checklist total!

I guess the difference between a 787 pilot and a 172 student pilot is the 787 pilot is only responsible for half the plane and has the knowledge from weeks of ground school, simulator, standard operating procedures and flows that allow you to capture dozens of items in one item on the checklist, plus a decade or more of flying experience... while the 172 pilot in his or her first lessons barely knows what a transponder or carb heat or the ATIS is.

It’s not just a flight school thing. The electronic checklist in my American aircraft is hillarious (and probably written by lawyers). I don’t think even the worst flight school checklist has Vr — Rotate on it!

iflyforpie wrote: ↑Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:43 am. while the 172 pilot in his or her first lessons barely knows what a transponder or carb heat or the ATIS is.

I don't think a checklist is the right place to teach a student what a transponder or carb heat or ATIS is. It's not a substitute for systems knowledge, either. A checklist should be short and written for the experienced pilot of the type. Then teach the student so they become an experienced pilot of the type.

I've had vastly different checklists and that's just between two different Canadian flight schools.

dgrosch wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 10:01 am I've had vastly different checklists and that's just between two different Canadian flight schools.

If they're vastly different then one must be very long and the other rather short - and that would be impossible. As a relatively new poster here perhaps you haven't read enough threads to realize that in the minds of many of the other posters here, all flight schools basically suck! And that goes for pretty much any topic in the Flight Training forum. Generalizations rule, especially the negative ones.