Single pilot CRM

[The Nr Fairy]

And there's you all thinking I've not managed to find one yet !! Not quite - after a fair bit of dicking about getting the thing organised, a single pilot CRM course took place at Cabair's Elstree offices on 26th June. There were three fixed wing attendees, and four rotary people there - I know for a cert that all the fling wings are PPRuNers cos that's how they found out about the course !

Laurie Benn, of London Metropolitan University, was the instructor on the day. Laurie's background is ex-RAF multi-engine, but as a saving grace he's got 30 hours on helicopters.

First off, there was a quick review of HPL - an "honorary pass" was awarded to all, even those who'd answered the questions just before Laurie shouted out the correct answer.

The rest of the day was taken up with the CRM side. The basics of the human information processing system's workings, a short disccusion on error chains and stress and stress coping strategies was followed by a video of an F28 accident in Canada. Discussion afterwards about "where would you have stopped it" shows the multiple opportunities the crew had to prevent the accident, but didn't.

CRM was defined into four major areas - Leadership/teamwork, Communication, Situational awareness and Decision-making.

A longer case study of an accident to a Saudia L1011 in 1980 followed. A video (World in Action drama-documentary) and a synopsis of the accident report highlighted some major failings of the crew to meet any of the four main areas in CRM.

After this case study, each of the four main CRM areas was covered in detail. Then followed another case study - this time Kegworth (BMI 737-400 which ended up on the M1). I must admit, the analysis changed my mind - I thought the crew were short-changed by their training and the aircraft design, but now I think they could have done better. But hey, I wasn't there at the time !

The last item of the day was about a decision making process called "GRADE". Here goes :


G - Gather ALL available information.
R - Review the information
A - Analyse the alternatives, determine which are safe
D - Decide and DO
E - Evaluate the outcome, i.e. start the process over again


To me that was the most important thing I got out of the day - a take-away personal decision making tool which I'll try to employ ! If you read about me in an accident report, you know it hasn't worked too well.

We (the r/w group) were lucky - the course was £90 per person as we shared the cost with Cabair. If you find a course, then it may well differ from that. Although the course material was biased towards a multi-crew fixed wing environment, the only difference in a single crew rotary situation is that you're responsible for checking your thought processes - if you can be scrupulously honest with yourself and pedantic about process and procedure then you stand a good chance of applying CRM principles with a degree of success, and as far as I'm concerned that is as simple as staying alive.

Lastly, check out the UK CAA's CAP 737 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP737.pdf) - apparently it's rare because it's published by the CAA but still useful !

[Whirlybird]

Nr Fairy,

Excellent summary, and I personally thought it was a good course.

[ATPMBA]

Some main topics from a helicopter ground school syllabus.



X. Cockpit Resource Management

Implemented for single-pilot GA, Crew Resource Management is used by airlines or other multi-crewed operations.

PIC must take charge, take responsibility, be proactive.
Passengers can be utilized, look for traffic, point out of the ordinary things.

Main Areas

Knowledge – knowing and understanding

Skills – apply the knowledge.

Ability – using skills to accomplish something.


POH – read cover to cover, know and understand limitations.

Knowledge of Instruments and CB’s


Preparation

Check weather, routing, TFR’s, delays. Pressure and density altitudes at departure and arrival points, can we hover ?
Prepare a navigation log for a XC flight.

Preflight

Condition of the aircraft and equipment, is it legal to go ? Annual inspection, 100 hour, when done, when due (hours remaining). Transponder, altimeter checks.


Departure

Note hover power and maximum power available for temperature and altitude. Is there at least 1” of manifold pressure difference as to allow takeoff.

Visualize the anticipated departure path and climbout for obstacle clearance.
Enroute

Keep a lookout for traffic, fly, navigate, monitor systems, get weather updates.
Keep navigation log updated, keep tabs on fuel usage.


Be aware of changing or unforecast weather conditions (report to flight watch)
ASOS and AWOS can be source of local enroute and ground wind information.
Flight Following can be requested.

Descent

Plan the descent with care, be aware of CFIT. Day and Night can be treated differently especially over unfamiliar terrain.

Arrival

Uncontrolled versus controlled airports (appropriate radio calls). Avoid the flow of fixed wing traffic unless certain patterns are depicted on charts, NOTAMS, Airport Facility Directories. Use ASOS, AWOS, ATIS.

Approach and Landing

Determine landing direction and active runway. Make required radio calls.
Be prepared for a go-around.


To Do – Fly the aircraft, navigate, and then communicate.






XI. Situational Awareness

Crew’s perception of facts and conditions affecting the safe outcome of the flight. Situational Awareness is seeing the big picture.


Clues to the level of situational awareness:

- Failure to meet targets
- Use of undocumented procedures
- Departure from standard operating procedures
- Violating minimums or limitations
- No one flying the aircraft
- No one looking out the window
- Communications breakdown
- Ambiguity
- Unresolved discrepancies
- Preoccupation or distraction
- “Bad feeling”

Accidents are usually a result of a chain of events, one needs to break a link to end the chain.

[The Nr Fairy]

During the course of my search for a course, I came across contact details for lots of people who allegedly run such courses. One of those listed below may be able to help you. I've no connection with any of them, except for the fact I've actually been on the LMU course ! Some of the numbers may have changed, and email addresses may also be wrong.


Hitec Resources - 01427 668043
LGU - 020 7320 1757 - [email protected]
LMQ - 1342 893168 - www.lmq.co.uk
Hunton Associates - 0116 2705993 - www.huntonassociates.com
London Heli Centre - 01737 823514 (contact Peter Abbott)

[INDI TREES]

The NR Fairy.

Call me Mr Thicky if you will, but CRM indicates to me that there is more than one in the cockpit.
After all the English Dictionary defines "crew" as "ship's aircraft's company;gang (of workmen, people)."

So single pilot CRM is all about talking to yourself then is it :confused:

Even after reading all the points above I cant but think that they all belong under the good old heading of AIRMANSHIP.

Just a passing thought! :D

[Thomas coupling]

Mr Thicky:
Crew Resource Management, also referred to as:
COCKPIT Resource Management.

One presumes, that the complement for that a/c, occasionally includes other persons: passengers /crewmembers, etc. This requires some form of MANAGEMENT.

Irrespective of this, a single pilot a/c still requires environmental, ergonomic, logistical management, too

Do the course first then comment on it, perhaps?
:)

[The Nr Fairy]

INDI :

You're right, Airmanship is part of single pilot CRM, and vicky versy.

And I was, according to Laurie Benn, behind the times until I was put straight last week. CRM was "Cockpit Resource Management", then "Crew Resource Management" and now it's "Corporate Resource Management".

[INDI TREES]

The Nr Fairy,

:O Ok, Nice one you got me.

I guess I fell down a bit on my TLA's.

It's been a bit since I did my last CRM course, however, is this not just a gimicky way of re-packaging those traditional skills of professional airmanship that all pilots, single crew or not are encouraged to aspire to?

A good instructor should be able to instill all the required skills in a new pilot, so that the student has the "BUG" to keep learning long after he/she is left alone in the cockpit.

IMHO, courses can get you the ticks in the boxes, but there is no substitute for actualy getting out there and gaining the experience that is necessary for good Cockpit Resource Management.


" Looking out is good, Looking down is ESSENTIAL"



:ok: :ok: :ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

Ah but, the person who has done a well constructed course usually learns from experience much quicker and more effectively than somebody who hasn't.

G

[Thomas coupling]

Indi, I'd guess you are of maturing years, perhaps a significant number of hours under your belt?
I'm possibly in that area too!
The lesson I'm trying to teach myself is that because I am getting "very experienced" in what I do, now; doesn't necessarily mean that there is not a better or more effective way of doing it.
I try my damndest to remain 'available to change', open to ideas, though sometimes one has to bite one's tongue.........

The old ways are not necessarily the best, methinks?

[Heli-Ice]

So thats what this single pilot CRM thing all about, never did find out.

I talk a lot to myself so this sure is the way to learn to do it right!

I have had trouble with me not being sensitive enough to myself leaving me very emotional after a hard days work or discussing sensitive matters.
:D

[CarryOnCopter]

The Crew Resource Management Swindle

So you fly single pilot, you have to waste time and money on it, you have no choice if you want to keep working.

As my Chief Bannana said at the time after a protracted moan on my part

"just do it but if I ever hear you argueing with your self when you jump out the helicopter your sacked":ooh:

[paco]

The stuff I do is a bit different from that - does it not occur to some people that if you use a GPS rather than a map, that that is bad CRM? Or not using a perfectly good landing spot when all a customer has to do is walk 50 yards?

How do you deal with bullying customers anyway, or bullying management? How do your eyes really work when it comes to focussing on a load at the end of a longline? It's all relevant!

It's all very well to sneer, but in my experience the people who do are the people who need it most, although it is fair to say that those in authority seem to hasve lost their way a bit

Phil

[NickLappos]

As a Charter Member of the "I Hate the Acronym of the Week" Club, let me tell you, Paco, why the things you list are being a bad pilot, or being a bad human or just being a pain in the ass.

None require a new acronym, and a new Way Of Thinking (that's WOT for those who need acronyms!)

Thinking that a single pilot needs CRM is silly.

[matador]

I might be loosing some part of Nick message, but being a single pilot crew, doesn't mean only one person on board, so my crew includes a pilot and a winch operator and even some times also a rescuer on board, so I would be more than happy to asssit to one of those courses where some experience and thoughtfull guy makes me look and some good advices about what is going on in the cockpit, that if we talk Crew .....
If we talk Cockpit R....... also would like to listen to good advice on how to handle all the equipment on board as well as other staff (maps, gear, etc).
If we talk Corporate R....... also would like to know some approches on how to handle pressure from customers,staff and operation itself.
In case you fly alone it's a good thing to do it as if your loved ones where on board so you don't fool around too much, so you're never really alone.
For all those reasons I would be more than happy to hear what Paco has to say about all that.
Anyway it's just my opinion.
BTW I have a great respect for Mr. Lappo's proffesional work in and out of this forum.
Buen vuelo:hmm:

[NickLappos]

Matador,

You are right, when there is a crew, CRM is valuable, and a winch operator or medical crew is absolutely a member of the team. I was quite wrong to fail to mention that distinction.

This brings up that ancient thread, where police observers are not members of the crew, per se. So, does one need CRM when they are just sitting there and not "crew"? ;-)

[paco]

Thinking that a single pilot *doesn't* need CRM is silly - single pilots are the ones taking off in overweight beavers and helicopters and flying into mountains in bad weather. They are the ones with no feedback from their peers as to whether what customers or management are wanting is normal or not (see my last article in Vertical on that one).

Actually, my acronym stands for *Company* resource management, and I encourage them all to join in. At our place, we pretty much know what each other's problems are, engineers and observers included, and there sure ain't no friction. The job gets done smoothly and efficiently with no BS and we all go home safe and sound. If it comes to that, observers are the most important members of our team :)

Phil

[joedirt]

Paco, I agree with Nick, it is silly. In the States what your teaching/lecturing is common sense. Stupid pilots don't use a loadsheet and still fly into cumulus granitus for two reason only.....they're stupid or educated badly. Any pilot in the states ( in general) are taught the basic theory WHILE they're flying, where Europe tends to seperate the two, creating no link between what is taught in the classroom and "real life", probably creating a need for your type of course. I'd love to see your course directed at the Asian marked...they tend to do whatever management tells them to purely out of "company spirit"....:O

Then again, Nick might be wrong :uhoh:

[Bomber ARIS]

It is disappointing today that people are dismissive of CRM due only to what they believe the letter "C" may or may not stand for.

Over the decades,CRM has metamorphosed into an all encompassing philosophy pertaining to the way we interact with others on the ground/in the air, how we interface with our aircraft and the technology onboard; it relates to accident prevention, medical factors, personality profiles/problems and much more besides.

It may be argued that much of CRM should come under the heading of Airmanship; even Nick implies that only bad pilots need this remedial tuition. It is far too easy to write off CRM as some tree-hugging, pinko, Californian irrelevance to the real men of the flying world. Sadly, the same old problems/accidents/errors continue with tedious regularity.

Whatever the perfect pilot ought to be, the majority of us clearly are not.

Unlike the medical profession, we have shown that we can lose much of our famed arrogance and take an honest, inward look at ourselves with a view to solving/avoiding the perennial problems (think CFIT for starters).

It is undeniable that CRM is of value, but I believe it is has outgrown its three letter past. To evolve from the petty semantic chatterings, let's rename this concept.......................

[joedirt]

I'll have a go at it......airmanship :hmm:

[Shawn Coyle]

CRM for single pilots is not a bad thing. It's a bit like taking a refresher in Defensive Driving - with the right attitude, you'll learn something. With the wrong attitude you won't.
On a hopefully related note, I just read of people failing the test for being a forestry-approved pilot because they were unable to complete a weight and balance form within 30 minutes... Doesn't that say something about some of the resources we all need - like training?

[flyer43]

I'm a firm believer in CRM (Cockpit or Crew Resource Management), whether multi pilot or single pilot is immaterial. And it does work in the far eastern culture, I've seen it first and second hand.

Sadly, unless the C for Company is also attended to, things can still end up going badly wrong. The aircrew, and that includes cabin crew, winchmen and anybody remotely connected to the safe operation of the aircraft, need the full support and trust of the Company in order to safely complete their tasks.
C also stands for Conflict of interest ............... until we can do away with that C, there is little hope for some of our fraternity.

[paco]

I don't think the word airmanship, though close, cuts it any more, and after 9 years in Canada, I can tell you that most of what happens is not common sense on that side of the water. The single pilots who fly overweight into hills in bad weather are doing it in North Alberta/BC - it's the reason why the Beaver has an inordinately high insurance charge even though it's one of the best aeroplanes that was ever made.

Airmanship won't help you on the 42nd day on duty without a day off, and you have chronic fatigue, or stop the person who hands over an instructor certificate on payment of $150 without even a training course (Canada/USA, respectively), or allow somebody who is barely literate to pass a pilot licence (UK). I am sick and tired of insurance companies and "consultants" putting us in the position of having to hire people who have the right numbers in terms of hours but who are nevertheless total idiots who will overtorque the machine at the earliest opportunity.

Almost universally, pilots are expected to fudge duty hours, loadsheets, get the job done, etc etc, and when you try to look after the company or the customer by refusing to do unsafe things you are run off the job. I am not the only one who will not work for the oil patch any more, and I know many who used customer attitude as a good reason to retire.

But then, it's always been my view that management and customers should be the ones on CRM courses anyway.

I agree with joedirt, however, on the training - the European authorities could learn a thing or two from Canada and USA on relevance, and I have the highest respect for the integrity of Transport Canada examiners.

Phil

[[email protected]]

Sadly it is the sort of course that should be mandatory periodic training for crews and management but unless the CAA legislates for it that won't happen. The military have a tri service Flight Safety setup that runs regular courses for all levels of experience (and not just for aircrew) and includes training for senior officers who make the big decisions just like company management.
Any course that raises awareness of Flight Safety issues and gets people thinking about how easy it is to have an accident but also how easy it is to prevent one, has got to be worthwhile.

[paco]

Sometimes you just have to explain things in words with one syllable.

Actually, for those who don't know, the single pilot CRM thing is about to become mandatory, if it hasn't already - JAR OPS 9.43 has it all in there.

Phil

[JimL]

Paco,

The reference is JAR-OPS 3.943 and has been incorporated since April 1st 2004. Whether or not it is mandated is dependent upon the member State as, up to the time that EASA adopts JAR-OPS 3 (or the amended version EU OPS 3), it is reliant upon each State incorporating the text (or pointing to the text) in its regulations.

As you may have seen discussed on other threads; Germany has only translated the first edition; France has adopted and translated a slightly amended version; the UK has encouraged its operators to comply (against an exemption from the various clauses of the ANO - all done in the operator's AOC); and Italy is in the process of amending its regulations to take account of the requirements of JAR-OPS 3.

Norway on the other hand is ahead of the game and is considering adopting parts of the not-yet-issued NPA-38 for its offshore operations (due to recommendations from a Parliamentary Commission).

Jim

[paco]

Thanks for that - that last post was a verbal barf. I got the impression from that last CRM conference that it was all in the process of being tidied up, but maybe that isn't the case.

JAR OPS is confusing anyway - on the one hand it says that there shall be no unsupervised line flying without a CRM course, and about two paragraphs later it says that new hires have a year to do a course - the CAA tell me that the latter will prevail but quien sabe?

Phil

[tripletach]

The problem now with the term 'CRM' when you are talking single pilot ops, is not what is in the course, but what people think the course is about when it is called a 'CRM' course. The old types of CRM courses with lots of personality type theory and useless Jargon like 'Synergy' may have been interesting, but had little practical application.

A modern 'CRM' course is more about recognising the limitations and short comings of all humans (yes all, not just the ones with so called poor airmanship) and provides tactics to combat the errors and poor decisions that occur from being human.

Anyone that thinks they get all the training in this area that they need at flight school is kidding themselves.

Some of these training concepts can have huge improvements in operator safety. PHI introduced Aeronautical Decision Making training in 1986. By 1988 their company accident rate had reduced by 54%. Bell helicopters, US Navy, USAF, Transport Canada Civilian Cadets, all saw similar improvements when implementing this type of training.

I think it just needs a new name.:ok:

[paco]

You're quite right - the Canadians call it Decision Making, and this is indeed what I concentrate on out of all the subjects available, but if I called it that nobody would think it was relevant!

It's unfortunate that the concept was ruined by picking up a lot of psycho baggage along the way, although it is true that some part of the aim is to help people get along a little better and take the ego out of the cockpit. The single pilot still has to talk to engineers and customers

Phil

[Tigs2]

Paco
You are not very clued up on JAROPS, thats ok, unless you stand talking to people charging £120 per day per person, then you really should know the rules and regs surrounding CRM. Tradition has it on PPRUNE that you can contact the advertising section to publicise things of a commercial interest, instead of trying to use the forum to pull people in for free.

[paco]

As for JAR OPs, well, nobody is very clued up on it, especially when they contradict themselves so much, as paragraph .943 proves. I meant to put the decimal point before the 9 in my previous reference, because the same paragaph is relevant in JAR OPS 1 and 3.

I say again, having finished with multi-crew, the CAA are now turning their attention to single crew, hence the last conference in Gatport Airwick about mandating it. The original intent was to have it all formalised around October last year, but that seems to have slipped a bit

Phil

[JimL]

Paco,

Your previous reference was concerned with training; the absolute requirement for CRM is contained in JAR-OPS 3.940 - there can be no confusion here as it appears to be absolute.JAR-OPS 3.940 Composition of Flight Crew

(a) An operator shall ensure that:

(7) For crew members serving the operator as a commander, initial operator’s Crew Resource Management (CRM) training shall be completed before commencing unsupervised line flying.I think that you will find that the intitial paragraph of 3.943 is intended also for multi-crew operations (which includes crew members who are other than flight crew) and, in that sense, JAR-OPS 3.940(a)(7) is the defining rule. The reason that the text differs between JAR-OPS 1 & 3 is that, in JAR-OPS 3, the applicability date (2002) was already past before the amendment became effective. A comprehensive reading of the other amended rules (see the [] brackets and dates) in Subpart N will indicate that an integrated revision has been conducted.As for JAR OPs, well, nobody is very clued up on it...I'm sure a number of esteemed readers and contributers to this forum would disagree with that broad statement.

Jim

[paco]

Thanks once again - but paragraph 3.943 still contradicts 3.940 - as you say, the requirement for CRM training is absolute in this paragraph, but it just says that commanders shall not fly unsupervised line flying without initial CRM training (although it doesn't specify where that training comes from, as long as it is presumably approved). 3.943 then says that new employees, which presumably includes the aforesaid commanders, have a year to do initial training. 3.943 doesn't mention multi-crew at all.


I can't help feeling that all this will be redundant anyway once EASA changes everything

Phil

[JimL]

Paco,

I'm not sure you are correct in your assessment of the future of JAR-OPS 3; recent indications are that EASA will accept a modified (in the same way as EU OPS 1) JAR-OPS 3. The stated intent is to remain in compliance with ICAO Annex 6 Part III - it is that which drives the content of regulations.

There is an amendment of Annex 6 Part III in the system which is likely to include the introduction of Exposure (a la JAR-OPS 3) along with Risk Assessment. Expect also some simplification of SARPs - I would say it will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

With regard to single pilot CRM; most of what has been said here is correct, in North America Aeronautical Decision Making, in Australia Risk Assessment, in the past Airmanship and now CRM all have as their aim increased pilot awareness of his likely failings. I think that tripletach has it about right:A modern 'CRM' course is more about recognising the limitations and short comings of all humans (yes all, not just the ones with so called poor airmanship) and provides tactics to combat the errors and poor decisions that occur from being human.

Anyone that thinks they get all the training in this area that they need at flight school is kidding themselves.

Some of these training concepts can have huge improvements in operator safety. PHI introduced Aeronautical Decision Making training in 1986. By 1988 their company accident rate had reduced by 54%. Bell helicopters, US Navy, USAF, Transport Canada Civilian Cadets, all saw similar improvements when implementing this type of training.Jim

[paco]

Don't mind me, I was just getting depressive about it all :(

Yes, others are right, the name does need changing, and I think the Australians and Canadians both have good ones. As mentioned, I concentrate on the decision making, and it seems to go down well, which is more than I can say for the jokes

phil

[tgilson]

Need to do crm course for single pilot public tranport , so I can safely talk to myself !!!! Have phoned around but all very minty ..... anyone got any leads ? This is my first message so hello to anyone who recognises my name.

[Hummingfrog]

Check your PMs

HF

[paco]

My next one is in about a week's time

Phil

[VeeAny]

Paco is indeed the man for single pilot CRM courses.

I've never done one with him, however I know he speaks sense, and one of my (ex)students has just done one with him and he comes highly recommended.

V.

[tgilson]

Thanks VeeAny , Hummingfrog and paco for your replies on crm . Paco , can I get more details - price , where , how long and more dates . Not sure if I can make next week so when next one. Did one with Bond back in 97 , so will a refresher do ?

Thanx guys .

[Thomas coupling]

LIFE SKILLS CONSULTANCY
3 Largent Grove, Grange Farm, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP5 2YX

Pete McArthy is the guy who does us. Ex Pongo though!!

[paco]

1 day, 120 quid per person, dates to be determined month- to-month as people need the course - I'm thinking around the end of May at the moment, in the Bristol area next. I do get around so keep checking the web site.

The full cycle should be over three years, so you need a full one, but for single pilots, this will count in full, and comply with JAR OPS/CAR OPS and Transport Canada specifications

Phil

[tgilson]

Thanks a lot phil , that all sounds great . End of May would fit perfectly , as would Bristol as I am based in Swansea . Will stay in touch .

Regards , Tony Gilson.

[offshoreigor]

I think that the requirement is for a PDM (Pilot Decision Making) Course. Similar to CRM.

CRM is not only a Crew Resource Management skill specifically, but a Cockpit Resource Management utilization, in the case of a single pilot.

Whether you are Single or Multi Pilot, you must always make use of all resources available to you in the case of a single pilot, Cockpit and in the case of Multi Pilot, Crew.

Hope that helps.

:eek: OffshoreIgor :eek:

[paco]

In Canada it is PDM, in Europe CRM, although the Canadian name is better, since CRM facilitates PDM, and most of the mistakes we make come from within ourselves and not from crew interaction specifically.

yes, we should all use it.

Phil