Lets talk about SOP's

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Rockie »

True North wrote:Please enlighten me.
Glad to.

In a mom and pop float service there's a mistake in one of their operating procedures so mom sits down at her computer in the evening and changes it. Presto-chango it's done.

In a large airline you have to first:

a) Convince the person with the power to change the SOP that it needs changing, then;
b) You have to convince that person the change needs to happen quickly, then;
c) That person has to consult their fleet training/checking and standards to see if there are unforeseen reasons to not change it, then;
d) The change has to be measured for consistency against the rest of the fleets because in a large company you want to make individual fleet SOP's as consistent as possible, then;
e) The change has to be wordsmithed to match the intent, then;
f) Transport Canada has to approve the change, then;
g) The change has to be communicated to the crews, possibly with an activation date depending on the nature of the change.

By the time all that's done the mom and pop place has gone out of business.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5930
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by digits_ »

Increasing or decreasing initial approach speed for traffic is one way where you deviate from the SOPs. Your company might have a clause that explicitly says this is allowed, but not all do.

I also used to work for a company that had multiple airplanes with different equipment. In one airplane it was impossible to follow the SOPs (something about setting up the radio aids etc).

Small things really, trivial almost. But since you are asking for examples.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

Rockie wrote:
True North wrote:Please enlighten me.
Glad to.

In a mom and pop float service there's a mistake in one of their operating procedures so mom sits down at her computer in the evening and changes it. Presto-chango it's done.

In a large airline you have to first:

a) Convince the person with the power to change the SOP that it needs changing, then;
b) You have to convince that person the change needs to happen quickly, then;
c) That person has to consult their fleet training/checking and standards to see if there are unforeseen reasons to not change it, then;
d) The change has to be measured for consistency against the rest of the fleets because in a large company you want to make individual fleet SOP's as consistent as possible, then;
e) The change has to be wordsmithed to match the intent, then;
f) Transport Canada has to approve the change, then;
g) The change has to be communicated to the crews, possibly with an activation date depending on the nature of the change.

By the time all that's done the mom and pop place has gone out of business.
Nice try.

We are referencing your contradictory example. You claim to have had an SOP state something on one page and contradict it on another page. First of all, in a large airline the chance of that actually happening is very slim. If it were actually true, the fix is simple. As soon as it is noticed - and in a large airline it will be noticed right away - the chief pilot or fleet captain, whom ever is responsible for the document is going to get a phone call. Even if it is 03:00 on Christmas day. An amendment is drafted and a quick call the your TC POI will get it approved right away. If it really is Christmas day you might have to wait until boxing day. Then there are various vehicles available for getting the information to the crews in a timely manner.

I was a chief pilot for the greater part of my career. I took those phone calls.
---------- ADS -----------
 
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

digits_ wrote:Increasing or decreasing initial approach speed for traffic is one way where you deviate from the SOPs. Your company might have a clause that explicitly says this is allowed, but not all do.

I also used to work for a company that had multiple airplanes with different equipment. In one airplane it was impossible to follow the SOPs (something about setting up the radio aids etc).

Small things really, trivial almost. But since you are asking for examples.
I don't follow digits_. Speeds are adjusted for traffic all the time. How could you possibly have an SOP that says you must fly the initial approach at a specified speed? Obviously there are target speeds but that is all they are, a target.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Rockie »

True North wrote:You claim to have had an SOP state something on one page and contradict it on another page. First of all, in a large airline the chance of that actually happening is very slim.
Yet it did and does.
True North wrote:As soon as it is noticed - and in a large airline it will be noticed right away - the chief pilot or fleet captain, whom ever is responsible for the document is going to get a phone call. Even if it is 03:00 on Christmas day. An amendment is drafted and a quick call the your TC POI will get it approved right away.
I've explained it to you once, if you don't believe it explaining it 12 more times won't help.
True North wrote:I was a chief pilot for the greater part of my career. I took those phone calls.
Which one were you, mom or pop?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Zaibatsu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Zaibatsu »

True North wrote:As soon as it is noticed - and in a large airline it will be noticed right away - the chief pilot or fleet captain, whom ever is responsible for the document is going to get a phone call. Even if it is 03:00 on Christmas day. An amendment is drafted and a quick call the your TC POI will get it approved right away.
:lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

Rockie wrote:I've explained it to you once, if you don't believe it explaining it 12 more times won't help.
You didn't explain anything. You made up a bunch of bullshit to try and make it look like you know what you're talking about. It's what you do. Unfortunately for you, I have actually done the job. I've written SOPs and I've dealt with the regulator so I know how the system works.

It's like I'm having a conversation with a three year old. :roll:

I'm out but carry on. I know you like to have the last word.
---------- ADS -----------
 
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

Zaibatsu wrote:
True North wrote:As soon as it is noticed - and in a large airline it will be noticed right away - the chief pilot or fleet captain, whom ever is responsible for the document is going to get a phone call. Even if it is 03:00 on Christmas day. An amendment is drafted and a quick call the your TC POI will get it approved right away.
:lol:
What is it that amuses you Zaibatsu?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Rockie »

True North wrote:You made up a bunch of bullshit to try and make it look like you know what you're talking about.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Anyone have any constructive comments.....
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4427
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Bede »

+1 for BPF & Rockie,

I'll give a couple examples:
1) SwissAir 111- land overweight or hit the water.
2) Sometimes errors are made in the SOP and EVERYONE has this figured out and for some reason it never got changed. For example, at my company, the checklist for Before Start below the line calls for it to be done when cleared to start. The Before Take-Off below the line calls for the checklist to be done once clear for take-off. Everyone, including chief pilots, does these checklists cleared to push, and lining up, respectively. I have no idea why it never got changed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4427
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Bede »

True North wrote:If it were actually true, the fix is simple. As soon as it is noticed - and in a large airline it will be noticed right away - the chief pilot or fleet captain, whom ever is responsible for the document is going to get a phone call. Even if it is 03:00 on Christmas day. An amendment is drafted and a quick call the your TC POI will get it approved right away. If it really is Christmas day you might have to wait until boxing day. Then there are various vehicles available for getting the information to the crews in a timely manner.
Yeah, that's exactly how it works...
---------- ADS -----------
 
goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by goingnowherefast »

SOPs are for multiple pilots flying an airplane together. As soon as the plane breaks and you are on the ground with a snag in the book it's now maintenance's plane. The mechanic now has the time and resources to look at schematics, maintenance manuals, talk to fellow mechanics, pilots and come up with a process to diagnose, repair and/or ferry the plane back to home. There is very little that is standard about broken planes, nevermind a standard "repairing" procedure.

The thread in question was about starting and ferrying broken planes back to a maintenance base for proper repair (change a battery, started, whatever). Then Cat Driver got involved with his derrogatory remarks and taking SOPs out of their context to belittle them.
Cat Driver wrote:Yup, and we didn't need to have someone reading the SOP's in the background. :smt040
Often planes break in non textbook ways. The crew has to decide what, if any SOP applies in that situation. The flaps in a King Air stick half way between approach and landing. Do your SOPs have a procedure for intermediate and unknown flap positions? The crew needs to adapt the established procesures and their experience to come up with a solution.

You are 200 agl on final and the fire light goes off. You you call for max power and run the full fire drill? Or do you acknowledge the warning, land normally then deal with it on the ground?

I'll go back to king airs with the stupid photo sensor for engine fire detection. What do you do on a beautiful sunny day when both engine fire warnings go off at the same time? Can't shut both engines off, especially when there's no other evidence of a fire.
---------- ADS -----------
 
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

Bede wrote:+1 for BPF & Rockie,

I'll give a couple examples:
1) SwissAir 111- land overweight or hit the water.
2) Sometimes errors are made in the SOP and EVERYONE has this figured out and for some reason it never got changed. For example, at my company, the checklist for Before Start below the line calls for it to be done when cleared to start. The Before Take-Off below the line calls for the checklist to be done once clear for take-off. Everyone, including chief pilots, does these checklists cleared to push, and lining up, respectively. I have no idea why it never got changed.
Let's make a distinction here. Under normal operations there should be no need to deviate from SOP. SOPs cannot possibly be written to cover every conceivable emergency situation and SwissAir 111 is a perfect example. Fly around in a burning airplane or land overweight. Not much to discuss there.

Your second example of what is going on at your company is more normalization of deviation than ignoring SOP, in other words it sounds like it has become de facto SOP. It also sounds like it has zero impact on flight safety which is perhaps why it has not received any attention.

Rockie's claim that contradictory SOPs can exist is completely different. His explanation of why they would exist and why it would take so long to change is entirely wrong. The process he describes could be a fairly accurate description of how SOPs are developed at an airline, and is exactly why the possibility of contradictory SOPs is so unlikely. There are lots of eyes on it during the development process. After being thoroughly reviewed by the people tasked with writing them, and then by the company's certificate holder, they are reviewed by TC, usually the POI. The POI then has to sign off on them before they can be put in place so he has now exposed himself to liability. If a contradictory SOP is discovered and if it could have any impact on flight safety TC will approve the amendment in a heartbeat to mitigate the risk to flight safety, and limit their exposure. So yes, that is exactly how it works.
---------- ADS -----------
 
dogfood
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by dogfood »

I remember a previous job that the sops were strictly enforced by management but they were so poorly written it was frustrating so most pilots just did there own thing. The PC12 sop were pretty much cut and paste from another aircraft in the fleet and it actually prohibited single engine taxing.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4427
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Bede »

True North wrote: Let's make a distinction here. Under normal operations there should be no need to deviate from SOP. SOPs cannot possibly be written to cover every conceivable emergency situation and SwissAir 111 is a perfect example. Fly around in a burning airplane or land overweight. Not much to discuss there.
Yes, but SwissAir SOP's said dump fuel. They followed the SOP to the letter- right into the water. This wasn't a case where there was an emergency and there wasn't an SOP for the situation.

The way I see it, safety of flight is #1. If I need to interpret an SOP to make a certain situation more safe, I'm going to do it. I'll never give up a safety advantage to blindly follow an SOP.
---------- ADS -----------
 
True North
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 6:39 pm

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by True North »

Bede wrote:
True North wrote: Let's make a distinction here. Under normal operations there should be no need to deviate from SOP. SOPs cannot possibly be written to cover every conceivable emergency situation and SwissAir 111 is a perfect example. Fly around in a burning airplane or land overweight. Not much to discuss there.
Yes, but SwissAir SOP's said dump fuel. They followed the SOP to the letter- right into the water. This wasn't a case where there was an emergency and there wasn't an SOP for the situation.

The way I see it, safety of flight is #1. If I need to interpret an SOP to make a certain situation more safe, I'm going to do it. I'll never give up a safety advantage to blindly follow an SOP.
Flight safety is always priority one and again, SOPs can only go so far when things go really, really bad.

I have no knowledge of SwissAir's SOPs but I would have a tough time believing that with an onboard fire, their checklist didn't state land as soon as possible. I'm getting old and my memory isn't what it used to be but it seems to me the crew initially underestimated the severity of their situation.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by confusedalot »

I must have had a charmed life since I have not run into an SOP that led you down the garden path but anyways........

I think there is something to be said, as many have pointed out, about following an SOP, which is an objective how to document, pain old airmanship, and command decision, when the how to book does not address a specific situation.

It's not just about an SOP, you need to utilize all three elements to operate adequately. I will leave it there and let each individual determine whether they use airmanship and decision making in their day to day processes.

Had a guy start to slow down and configure for approach 30 miles away because he was about to intercept the localizer, which was his interpretation of SOP compliance.......

Had another one tell me it was airmanship to taxi around on the ground with the overhead light on at night so that you could be seen outside of the aircraft!

Ah, the mysteries of the human mind.

And of course, a non SOP action by pulling up the flaps one notch that saved the day for British Airways with the dual flameout on final. Brilliant.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Rockie »

True North wrote:Rockie's claim that contradictory SOPs can exist is completely different. His explanation of why they would exist and why it would take so long to change is entirely wrong. The process he describes could be a fairly accurate description of how SOPs are developed at an airline, and is exactly why the possibility of contradictory SOPs is so unlikely.
Nice theory True North but yet it happens, and it is in fact the way SOP changes are done at a major airline. I happen to know this from experience at a major airline, where does your assertion about how major airlines change their SOP's come from?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Lets talk about SOP's

Post by Rockie »

True North wrote:I have no knowledge of SwissAir's SOPs but I would have a tough time believing that with an onboard fire, their checklist didn't state land as soon as possible.
Much was learned and both attitudes and procedures were forced to change as a result. For example thanks to smoke testing SwissAir did in their simulators afterwards the smoke checklist in the QRH's of all aircraft were printed in bold because it was discovered crews couldn't read them with smoke and smoke goggles on. They also added the line that essentially says "if at any time the situation becomes uncontrollable land immediately". That means right now whether there is pavement underneath you or not.

Just another example of how tragedy informs our procedures.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”