Narrative:

We took a 6 minute delay due to not being able to find a checklist. This is my third report on this new checklist. Having just written two reports I was pretty comfortable with new QRH and was instructing my two experienced first officers how to use it as they were a little unfamiliar. I told them in most cases the 767-300 is not in the QRH; just the 767-200 and the 767-400. I said in those cases we should use the flight manual. As an example; I told them to go to one engine approach and landing. Just as I said; there was no 767-300. So; we went to the flight manual. And guess what; there is no check list for a 767-300. This is totally stupid; made me feel like an idiot. I just instructed them how to use the checklist and then it's not there; go to the flight manual. So with one shoe in my mouth; I called the duty manager. I explained the situation to him and he looked for the checklist. He was dumbfounded as well and could not find the checklist. He eventually got me in contact with the training center and they said that if I went to the engine failure checklist; the one engine approach would be in the body of that checklist. Now how in the heck were we supposed to know that? Why is there a checklist for one plane and not the other? There is no continuity of anything in this checklist. It's a big mess. When I have to call the duty manager for every departure to figure out this check list and even he can't help me; there is a problem here. And we better get it fixed quickly before there is a hull loss. In addition; it takes the average pilot 25 seconds to find the engine fire procedure. Is that what we really want when we are on fire?

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B767-300 Captain reported that a recently revised QRH is very difficult to use because some items do not flow logically or are missing and the Flight Manual must be used to accomplish even abnormal and emergency procedures.

Narrative: We took a 6 minute delay due to not being able to find a checklist. This is my third report on this new checklist. Having just written two reports I was pretty comfortable with new QRH and was instructing my two experienced First Officers how to use it as they were a little unfamiliar. I told them in most cases the 767-300 is not in the QRH; just the 767-200 and the 767-400. I said in those cases we should use the flight manual. As an example; I told them to go to one engine approach and landing. Just as I said; there was no 767-300. So; we went to the flight manual. And guess what; there is no check list for a 767-300. This is totally stupid; made me feel like an idiot. I just instructed them how to use the checklist and then it's not there; go to the flight manual. So with one shoe in my mouth; I called the Duty Manager. I explained the situation to him and he looked for the checklist. He was dumbfounded as well and could not find the checklist. He eventually got me in contact with the Training Center and they said that if I went to the engine failure checklist; the one engine approach would be in the body of that checklist. Now how in the heck were we supposed to know that? Why is there a checklist for one plane and not the other? There is no continuity of anything in this checklist. It's a big mess. When I have to call the Duty Manager for every departure to figure out this check list and even he can't help me; there is a problem here. And we better get it fixed quickly before there is a hull loss. In addition; it takes the average pilot 25 seconds to find the engine fire procedure. Is that what we really want when we are on fire?

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.