framer, re “…
a common mis understanding of what CRM is.”
But doesn’t your version of CRM consider that a different viewpoint might involve
your mis understanding of CRM?
Differing views and implementation of CRM is a major issue for the industry, heightened by the oft touted ‘poor CRM’, without explaining which particular aspects are poor or how they might be improved. Furthermore, in some versions, aeronautical decision making (and cognition in general), is treated as an add-on to ‘social / interpersonal’ focused ‘CRM’.
So what is 'good CRM' ?
Mimpe, I still do not understand the meaning of ‘A’.
I would have debated whether ‘GRADE’ is of any practical value as it only describes a process (used as an explanation in training), and one which is not necessarily in agreement with research views of actual decision making.
I would also differentiate between problem solving – a strategic process with different / more information; and ‘tactical’ decision making with many constraints particularly of time.
Did the A320 ditching really have only one solution?
I think not, there were several solutions involving varying degrees of ‘success’:- the level of safety. A satisfactory solution was chosen within the many ‘tactical’ constrains, but was this the first option chosen and then evaluated, or was there an iteration. There are some indications of iteration, but not of judging options against each other; e.g.
1. return to departure airfield – ‘no’ (R/T) insufficient distance. (Note that this was accomplished without reference to EFIS track / green arc computed information – expert vs novice behaviour?)
2. land at an alternative airfield – ‘no’ (R/T), as above but a more closely balanced evaluation.
3. off-airfield landing - ‘it’s the Hudson’ (R/T), water was the better option vs a city area.
However, was the ‘city’ considered and rejected, thus water was the only other option, or was water the initial naturalistic choice, and all of the apparent iteration was confirmation that the 'initial' option was viable.
Perhaps the choice of ditching in the Hudson has been labelled optimum or as the only (ideal) solution due to hindsight. Consider how other pilots might have judged the situation – any turn back towards the departure airfield would most probably eliminated viable options, and thus a reasonable choice of alternative landing sites. Therefore that initial situational evaluation and ‘decision’ was critical to the success of the event – ‘it’ made sense; how do we make sense of things.
From a medical view, any thoughts on this:-
http://www.pprune.org/medical-health...ml#post7864244
.