What Rules to Follow?

[Gatordev]

As Robav8r mentioned, in VP we have some really long days. In the past, I have broken the 18 hour day a couple times due to real world operations. On those days we had over 15 hours flying.

Who the hell has an 18 hour crew day? I've worked many 18 hour days, but never when I was flying.

The standard is 12 hours (10 for night) in my community.

This is what I was getting at. Independent of a command SOP, you don't "break" an 18 hour day. It merely states what you SHALL be allowed IF you break the 18 hour day. So my original question to milky was how is he/his command regularly breaking this rule? Again, I'm not saying they aren't (I hear there's a war on), just curious to hear how in an aircraft that is somewhat limited by gas and bombs. Now breaking the 6.5 hours in a day I can understand.

FWIW, at my fleet squadron, we had the 12 on/10 off (10 on for NVG) rule in the SOP when at home, but it reverted to 3710 when deployed.

 

[docpup]

I'm glad this has sparked a relatively heated debate about SOP adherence, when to push, risk to benefit analysis, and good old common sense. I'm sure all of us agree with most of the information put out.

I asked these questions for specific reason. Has anyone looked at the "Redwing boot" thread on AW? Many personnel stated that even though they referenced the Safety Center, they chose to ignore the guidance for personal comfort issues or image. One post comes to mind regarding 30 (my assumption was VP-30). Some even gave gouge on where to get them, what pair are the most comfortable...etc.

There is no doubt from my years of flying that both enlisted and officers in the Naval Aviation community share what I refer to as a "Cookie Cutter Mentality". When placed in similar situations, with similar training, a similar product will be produced. SOP adherence, ORM/CRM considerations, and NATOPS guidance is rarely amended, and when it is guidance from the Preface of NATOPS is always stated.

My question was more posed towards the little stuff that is allowed to go on without being checked or in some cases is promoted by senior aviators and crewman.

Again so you don't think I am casting stones...here is a little story. I was sent to Sumatra with a Det form HC-5 for relief post 2005 Tsunami. Long story short, a picture was taken of me walking a civilian dude from the A/C to the hospital staff in Bahnda Ache. I was in PRIME fleet crewman form...sleeves rolled to the mid forearm, big dip in my mouth, and my HC-3 FRS instructor patch visible for all readers of All Hands and Navy News Stand to see. Prompt guidance came down via NATOPS model manager to CO to all of our dets that we had better adhere to ALL requirements for flight gear wear. Now...I was dumb and should have known better; cameras were going to be everywhere. I took liberties with what I was suppose to do based on what I thought was "Cool" and projected an image of a "Cowboy Saviour" here to scoop up the downtrodden and make everything OK. I never would have allowed my students while at 3 to do these things, but we were "In the FLEET" and this was an "Acceptable" behavior.

The guidance in ALL the publications is there for a reason. Some one smarter than me got a good deal of money to decide what was the safest way for me to do my job. OR...someone dumber than me made a mistake in judgement, procedure, or good old common sense; and we all had to pay for it (i.e. the famous action hero with the red cape). Before blasting, I am in no way comparing the stupid to the silly.

I guess the ultimate question would be, regardless of how minor our (again including myself) violations of seemingly stupid rules are...at what point do we become part of the grand scheme problem?

 

[robav8r]

My Red Wing Boots aside, there is a little blurb in NATOPS that addresses when good judgement shall trump established procedures. As for setting a good example and complying with myriad instructions, manuals, SOP's and directives, yes, we all have an obligation to adhere as best we can. I have always tried to apply whatever dilema/conflict I am facing in the context of "is it just affecting me? or the entire crew/mission?" I have always felt that my role as an officer and professional aviator grant me the wisdom to think about, process and then apply good, common sense. Enter my Red Wing boots. Granted, they may catch on fire and burn my toes off quicker than the "Mil Spec" Govt issued ones. But the comfort and benefit of wearing a great fitting pair of boots may ultimately lead to better on-station performance by me when I am pushing that 18 hour crew day. Make sense? Same thing applies to jet guys wearing gloves with the fingers cut out. I certainly don't want anything interfering with their ability to manipulate the 14,652 buttons and switches required to fly, fight, and recover their A/C back on the CVN. Just my .02c, but .02c earned nontheless !!!

 

[Harrier Dude]

Same thing applies to jet guys wearing gloves with the fingers cut out. I certainly don't want anything interfering with their ability to manipulate the 14,652 buttons and switches required to fly, fight, and recover their A/C back on the CVN. Just my .02c, but .02c earned nontheless !!!

This is an excellant example. I used to be religious about wearing gloves. I even wore them in the simulator because the controls/buttons "felt weird" without them. Then I became an FCF guy. Flipping through that damn stack of cards was too difficult with gloves on. Our flight equipment guys were told to re-issue any gloves with the fingers cut off. I started taking them off when doing FCFs. Then came OIF 1. The phonebook sized stack of crap (smart packs, comm plans, maps, etc) in our "paperless cockpit" became too much to manage with gloves on. It was then that I basically stopped wearing them altogether. The ironic thing is that I wasn't wearing gloves on the flights most likely to require me using them from an emergency standpoint (FCFs and combat). The alternatives are to either cut the fingers off (just as illegal), continue like I was doing (known to be illegal, but at least it worked OK), or try to get NAVAIR to spend eleventy bajillion dollars to design and produce gloves that had fine enough dexterity to enable the wearer to flip through pages of paper (not going to happen).

Like was said earlier, this exposed nobody else to risk but me, the PIC/sole crewmember, so that's what I do now. Does that make me a safety violator? Is that setting a bad example? I don't know, but it is just another example of folks getting by as best they can with what they have to work with.

 

[SemperGumbi]

Any guesses on how they do it now? (hint: being cynical doesn't mean that you aren't correct).

Use 6-10 Marines under a turning jet? Each carrying a laminated ORM card in one hand to ensure ORM is properly followed? But now, because they only have half the number of arms to use, you need twice the number of Marines. Yes, that MUST be the answer.

P.S. Gloves thing: I know a Tomcat guy who punched out with sleves rolled up and gloves off. He was A-O-K. I'm sure he laughed when we go briefs about how important gloves are in an ejection. But still had to sing along.

 

[Harrier Dude]

Use 6-10 Marines under a turning jet? Each carrying a laminated ORM card in one hand to ensure ORM is properly followed? But now, because they only have half the number of arms to use, you need twice the number of Marines. Yes, that MUST be the answer.

P.S. Gloves thing: I know a Tomcat guy who punched out with sleves rolled up and gloves off. He was A-O-K. I'm sure he laughed when we go briefs about how important gloves are in an ejection. But still had to sing along.

Is that the new "sarcasm" thing I've heard so much about?:icon_wink

In our last mishap the pilot was not only not wearing his gloves, but his sleeves were rolled up past his elbows. Not a scratch on him. That said, I've seen the gory standdown pics of guys that didn't fare so well. Be prepared to take your lumps if you choose not to wear them (you know, the whole cost/benefit analysis peice).