4 minutes ago, LRBS said:

It's interesting that an open-door indication before reaching V1 requires an abort, unless it is under a deferred item and has been cleared by maintenance and visually checked by a pilot before the flight. That's why videos without clear descriptions can be quite problematic, as people might misinterpret them. Unfortunately, a few videos lead airlines and pilots to get an interview with some authorities as possible violations. For this reason, at our airline we are prohibited from taking even pictures, let alone small video clips.

 

Interesting.  We wouldn’t even get a DOORS indication on the ATR because it’s inhibited at takeoff, so we wouldn’t see the light or get a master caution until gear up is selected.  

6 hours ago, The Flight Level said:

Just to confirm, this 777 content exposure was unplanned as admitted by Mathijs of PMDG. 
https://www.thresholdx.net/news/p777ma

Hard to take this article seriously when the author is named Rick Astley 😂

36 minutes ago, ATRguy said:

Interesting.  We wouldn’t even get a DOORS indication on the ATR because it’s inhibited at takeoff, so we wouldn’t see the light or get a master caution until gear up is selected.  

Interesting indeed, as an example on a747, 777, and 380  if an open door is detected, the crew will receive a clear EICAS/ECAM warning and the SOP is to abort before V1.  Also as you mentioned, minor door issues like door seal warnings and others are inhibited. Regarding the ATR, I can't comment as I did not fly it, so I'll take your word for it.

17 minutes ago, LRBS said:

Interesting indeed, as an example on a747, 777, and 380  if an open door is detected, the crew will receive a clear EICAS/ECAM warning and the SOP is to abort before V1.  Also as you mentioned, minor door issues like door seal warnings and others are inhibited. Regarding the ATR, I can't comment as I did not fly it, so I'll take your word for it.

Yeah we go into takeoff inhibit mode just before the power comes up, so you wouldn’t get one say if a door came unlatched during takeoff.  Of course, we see them open on the ground, closed when the ground crew/FA closes up and we test them to make sure they’re closed before starting engines.  

2 hours ago, LRBS said:

Interesting indeed, as an example on a747, 777, and 380  if an open door is detected, the crew will receive a clear EICAS/ECAM warning and the SOP is to abort before V1.  Also as you mentioned, minor door issues like door seal warnings and others are inhibited. Regarding the ATR, I can't comment as I did not fly it, so I'll take your word for it.

Is it an SOP? To reject for a door below V1 I expect it depends for many operators if it’s above 80 kts or not. Eg below 80 kts you’d reject but above you’d likely continue. 
 

Apologies if I’m missing your point though. On the 777 what doors message do you mean on take off? 

Edited May 20, 20242 yr by g-liner

39 minutes ago, g-liner said:

Is it an SOP? To reject for a door below V1 I expect it depends for many operators if it’s above 80 kts or not. Eg below 80 kts you’d reject but above you’d likely continue. 

We can skin the cat in many ways, it boils down to each airline's SOP. As I mentioned, I am not aware of any airline getting an EICAS/ECAM WARNING MESSAGE  to not abort before V1, regardless of 80 KTS.  

Yes, there are malfunctions, some non-emergency, and some airlines like to speculate and use this 80 KTS as a marker. Some of them have a long list of ongoing issues that sometimes it's hard to keep track of, and they still can't cover all of them. I prefer not to rely on memory techniques and subjective interpretations like before 80 kts we do this, after 80 kts we do this, before V1 we do this, after V1 we do this, etc. I just prefer to observe EICAS/ECAM WARNING MESSAGES. It's important to act efficiently and according to demonstrated procedures. While these methods have worked for many, it's important to note that each airline may have its own unique procedures.

8 hours ago, eslader said:

Hopefully they've considered VR on that feature. Camera moves not associated with user head movement is the quickest technique to make people hurl.

 

Just to clarify, the camera shake settings were all separate options in the FMC, so they can be entirely disabled if they don't play nice with your setup.

1 hour ago, g-liner said:

Apologies if I’m missing your point though. On the 777 what doors message do you mean on take off? 

You didn't miss anything. As an airline option, some have what is called INHIBIT EXEMPTIONS, and part of them are CABIN ALERT, DOORS (bringing up the synoptic for doors)....These are from the moment you apply T/O THRUST up to 400 FT. This bypasses the 80 KTS the MASTER CAUTION LIGHTS, BEEPER, ADVISORY ALERTS .....So this is where it gets interesting, with each airline, the options they go for, and SOP. As an example, many have DIFFERENCES MANUAL, there are variations within the type, and we have included notes in the dispatch release regarding additional checks to be conducted before the flight. 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

We can skin the cat in many ways, it boils down to each airline's SOP. As I mentioned, I am not aware of any airline getting an EICAS/ECAM WARNING MESSAGE  to not abort before V1, regardless of 80 KTS.  

Yes, there are malfunctions, some non-emergency, and some airlines like to speculate and use this 80 KTS as a marker. Some of them have a long list of ongoing issues that sometimes it's hard to keep track of, and they still can't cover all of them. I prefer not to rely on memory techniques and subjective interpretations like before 80 kts we do this, after 80 kts we do this, before V1 we do this, after V1 we do this, etc. I just prefer to observe EICAS/ECAM WARNING MESSAGES. It's important to act efficiently and according to demonstrated procedures. While these methods have worked for many, it's important to note that each airline may have its own unique procedures.

Are you an airline pilot? 

My airline has lots of conditions for reject below 80 kts

activation of the master caution system
system failure(s)
unusual noise or vibration
 tire failure
abnormally slow acceleration
takeoff configuration warning
fire or fire warning
engine failure
predictive windshear warning
the airplane is unsafe or unable to fly

 

and only 4 above 80 kts.
 

fire or fire warning
engine failure
predictive windshear warning
the airplane is unsafe or unable to fly

 

”unsafe or unable to fly” would be something like a blocked runway, we make a clear distinction between a low and high speed reject as obviously above 80kts your chances of an overrun or excursion on a reject increase hugely. 
 

I thought most  manufacturers made a distinction (with a speed) between a high speed and a low speed rejects (often linked to rudder effectiveness etc) and a recommendation that you’d only reject in the high speed phase for the most serious failures? 
 

Do you have a call during the take off from PM of a speed or anything like that marking the transition or is it just a check to see if the PF is alive? 
 

on the 777/787 the inhibits would mean you wouldn’t get a door warning above 80kts so that’s where the differences in the before and after 80 kts make sense also. 
 

think the basic Boeing 777 QNH says that the reasons to reject at the high speed end (80kt- V1) of the take off are s 1) fire or fire warning 2) engine failure 3) predictive windshear warning and 4) if the aircraft is unsafe or unable to fly. 
 

which is mirrored in my airlines SOPs 

 

talking specifically about doors though on the 777/787. . . . 
 

 Below 80 knots : if the Caution light comes on - stop. Above 80 knots, the Master Caution system is inhibited, so we don't stop.

A passenger entry door or a large cargo door indicating unlocked will generate a Caution message. That message is inhibited above 80 knots, but the condition will lead to a takeoff configuration warning - CONFIG DOORS. which isn't inhibited above 80 knots. 

Personally I don’t think the CONFIG DOORS above 80s would justify a high speed reject, I.e, mean the aircraft was “unsafe or unable to fly”, I’d rather continue with the take off and land back again.

Others might disagree though.

Edited May 20, 20242 yr by g-liner

2 hours ago, g-liner said:

Are you an airline pilot? 

My airline has lots of conditions for reject below 80 kts

activation of the master caution system
system failure(s)
unusual noise or vibration
 tire failure
abnormally slow acceleration
takeoff configuration warning
fire or fire warning
engine failure
predictive windshear warning
the airplane is unsafe or unable to fly

 

and only 4 above 80 kts.
 

fire or fire warning
engine failure
predictive windshear warning
the airplane is unsafe or unable to fly

 

”unsafe or unable to fly” would be something like a blocked runway, we make a clear distinction between a low and high speed reject as obviously above 80kts your chances of an overrun or excursion on a reject increase hugely. 
 

I thought most  manufacturers made a distinction (with a speed) between a high speed and a low speed rejects (often linked to rudder effectiveness etc) and a recommendation that you’d only reject in the high speed phase for the most serious failures? 
 

Do you have a call during the take off from PM of a speed or anything like that marking the transition or is it just a check to see if the PF is alive? 
 

on the 777/787 the inhibits would mean you wouldn’t get a door warning above 80kts so that’s where the differences in the before and after 80 kts make sense also. 
 

think the basic Boeing 777 QNH says that the reasons to reject at the high speed end (80kt- V1) of the take off are s 1) fire or fire warning 2) engine failure 3) predictive windshear warning and 4) if the aircraft is unsafe or unable to fly. 
 

which is mirrored in my airlines SOPs 

 

talking specifically about doors though on the 777/787. . . . 
 

 Below 80 knots : if the Caution light comes on - stop. Above 80 knots, the Master Caution system is inhibited, so we don't stop.

A passenger entry door or a large cargo door indicating unlocked will generate a Caution message. That message is inhibited above 80 knots, but the condition will lead to a takeoff configuration warning - CONFIG DOORS. which isn't inhibited above 80 knots. 

Personally I don’t think the CONFIG DOORS above 80s would justify a high speed reject, I.e, mean the aircraft was “unsafe or unable to fly”, I’d rather continue with the take off and land back again.

Others might disagree though.

Yes, I am. Previously qualified on 777/787, now on 748.

I agree with all the above. Unfortunately, I had to change a few airline and faced with so many "airline options" and differences between the same type. To answer the 

"Do you have a call during the take-off from PM of a speed or anything like that marking the transition or is it just a check to see if the PF is alive?" 

we finally have a quiet cockpit, we just call the abnormals, or deviations from normal SOP, not FMA changes, etc. During t.o. roll they have an interesting call based on the ND regarding wind trend and velocity, if the wind direction and speed is more than 15KTS as a tail component and approaching the last 3,000FT and not a Vr yet, we have to push up the power to the max allowed by EECs. Somehow they got a scare during t.o. with a derate and almost got the lights on the other end. So for the last 5 years, this has been their big thing across the whole fleet.

So, I do perfectly understand your dilemma, as I changed airlines I came to understand that even though we have the same type-rating and fly the same airplane there are so many differences that make us wonder where did this come from. 

 

14 hours ago, LRBS said:

It's interesting that an open-door indication before reaching V1 requires an abort,

I've never flown any airplane for any airline where a doors caution requires a high speed abort.  This, honestly, seems like questionable risk assessment.  A high speed abort creates a FAR higher risk than simply going flying with an unlatched door (worst case, but you know it's likely a spurious message anyway) and boxing it back around to land.  

The saying I have always embraced and taught is that you only perform a high speed abort for "fire, failure, fear or shear".  That's any fire, an engine failure, windshear, or the PIC having doubts (fear) that the aircraft will be able to fly.

An open door fits none of those.  I would not even consider aborting for a doors caution in the high speed regime.

18 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Doors may give false open indications (a common issue with 777 because of dirt around the sensor, opening and closing are usually fixed)

I'm not familiar with the quirks of the triple, but I really hope this isn't similar to the godawful spurious doors cautions they've modeled on the 73, that only ever happened for a matter of months before fixed in reality, and never on the -900ER model which didn't even exist during that time, but which PMDG seems to think should throw these ridiculous exit door warnings on every other takeoff.

1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

I'm not familiar with the quirks of the triple, but I really hope this isn't similar to the godawful spurious doors cautions they've modeled on the 73, that only ever happened for a matter of months before fixed in reality, and never on the -900ER model which didn't even exist during that time, but which PMDG seems to think should throw these ridiculous exit door warnings on every other takeoff.

Is there an option to turn it off?

1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

I've never flown any airplane for any airline where a doors caution requires a high speed abort.  This, honestly, seems like questionable risk assessment.  A high speed abort creates a FAR higher risk than simply going flying with an unlatched door (worst case, but you know it's likely a spurious message anyway) and boxing it back around to land.  

The saying I have always embraced and taught is that you only perform a high speed abort for "fire, failure, fear or shear".  That's any fire, an engine failure, windshear, or the PIC having doubts (fear) that the aircraft will be able to fly.

An open door fits none of those.  I would not even consider aborting for a doors caution in the high speed regime.

Don't shoot the messenger guys. We only share information, not opinions or personal preferences.  If we are unfamiliar with procedures at different airlines or believe there may be a risk involved, many training departments have different decisions and procedures despite our preferences. 

 

As I mentioned, airlines can request different options from the manufacturer, some of which we have heard about and some we haven't. 

 

I had the same reaction/opinion when an unlatched door during takeoff run before V1 can trigger a Master warning and they expect an abort. I had to look on the FCOM vol I  and this is the breakdown of the scenario and their decision-making process:

 

• An unlatched door during the takeoff run and before V1 (decision speed) will trigger a Master Warning in the cockpit. This warning is a critical alert designed to get the crew's immediate attention.
• • Decompression in the cabin, causing oxygen deprivation and other physiological problems for passengers and crew.
  • Loss of control due to aerodynamic instability.
  • Damage to the aircraft structure from wind and flying debris.
•  

 

9 minutes ago, UAL4life said:

Is there an option to turn it off?

No. Though I'm getting this only on maybe 1 out of 30 takeoffs, and if it does happen I either reject at very low speed if I'm in the mood for something slightly abnormal or just ignore it.