Threat and Error Management
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Threat and error management is best taught in an aircraft by an experienced and capable instructor/training pilot. The current scenario of TEM designed by "degrees and PHDs" is a non sense and complete and utter waist of time.
Name 5 types of threats?
Define the term threat.
Name 5 types of errors?
Define the term error,
Well done you have pas see and are now much safer having attended this course.
BOLLOCKS
The way an individual reacts to a threat or error is not black and white either, OR is it?
Name 5 types of threats?
Define the term threat.
Name 5 types of errors?
Define the term error,
Well done you have pas see and are now much safer having attended this course.
BOLLOCKS
What is common sense? It is totally subjective, biased and individual and reflects our individual values and beliefs, therefore it is totally variable and vague.
Last edited by Skynews; 21st Mar 2011 at 01:01.
Personally I think TEM is a great way to structure something that has been done by experienced guys for years. Yes you lot who have been flying for as long as I have been alive probably do it better, more efficiently and in a more interesting way but you only got that way after many years.
As a relative new kid on the block it's given me a framework to think through that my experience lacks. It's like when you learnt to write, you had those lines to help get your letters the right size, you don't need them now, but they sure helped when you were new to it!
It also helps for the cowboys who think they don't need to do these things (either TEM or the common sense you guys are talking about). Basically everything CASA and the airlines are doing in Human Factors has come about because someone dropped the ball and it led to an accident. If we were all perfect, we wouldn't need it.
As a relative new kid on the block it's given me a framework to think through that my experience lacks. It's like when you learnt to write, you had those lines to help get your letters the right size, you don't need them now, but they sure helped when you were new to it!
It also helps for the cowboys who think they don't need to do these things (either TEM or the common sense you guys are talking about). Basically everything CASA and the airlines are doing in Human Factors has come about because someone dropped the ball and it led to an accident. If we were all perfect, we wouldn't need it.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a relative new kid on the block it's given me a framework to think through that my experience lacks. It's like when you learnt to write, you had those lines to help get your letters the right size, you don't need them now, but they sure helped when you were new to it!
It used to be the norm that training pilots and CFI wherethe most experienced and capable pilots available. In the modern organization that has changed to using the "company friendly" pilots, giving them a hand up the greasy pole. With this change I have noticed a distinct change in exchange of experience. This lack of experience is being supported by theoretical courses, again taught by the inexperienced.
How many people can effectively use a weather radar these days?
Not many. They may know the theory behind it, but the interpretation is completely lacking. How do we fix it, send out a useless video and run a TEM course. problem solved.
Well said McGrath.
It may be a waist of time for you but does that mean it's a waist of time to others as well? Is it possible that while you don't easily apply the theoretical concepts to your everyday situations that others can and do?
Statements like
and
and
remind me of something I read on the company intranet, it states "While attitudes towards CRM are not perfect predictors of behaviour, it is a truism that those whose attitudes show rejection of CRM are unlikely to follow its precepts behaviourally. These attitudes identified assessing the impact of CRM were the ones identified as playing a role in air accidents and incidents (Helmreich &Foushee, 1993).
Now before anyone gets upset because they think I am saying that they as an individual are likely to have an accident or incident, I am not, I am sure that you have ammassed a wealth of experience and skill and apply it to its best effect. I do wonder though if there is any truth in it in general. Personally I think there is because although the person who rejects the concepts is most likely very capable, they IMHO make their off-siders job more difficult by not recognising their experience levels and understanding that everyone works differently and some people do in fact get a lot out of CRM.
The current scenario of TEM designed by "degrees and PHDs" is a non sense and complete and utter waist of time.
Statements like
TEM 'Total Empty Mess'..........what a crock of sh1t!
It is a load of dung which stinketh...abide ye not.
The current scenario of TEM designed by "degrees and PHDs" is a non sense and complete and utter waist of time.
Now before anyone gets upset because they think I am saying that they as an individual are likely to have an accident or incident, I am not, I am sure that you have ammassed a wealth of experience and skill and apply it to its best effect. I do wonder though if there is any truth in it in general. Personally I think there is because although the person who rejects the concepts is most likely very capable, they IMHO make their off-siders job more difficult by not recognising their experience levels and understanding that everyone works differently and some people do in fact get a lot out of CRM.
Grandpa Aerotart
Do you teach this stuff trashie?
Fatigue? Mate we don't fly fatigued..who flies fatigued? Is not allowed.
mcgrath50 all good points...but would you be better served being taught how to 'manage threats' by the experienced training captains in the airline you just joined or by a tosser with a degree and no experience?
Further to that TEM will make virtually no difference to the international accident rate because 'good' airlines already teach new pilots what they need to be thinking about, and when, and bad airlines won't bother. For 'good' and 'bad' think 1st world and 3rd world.
TEM, like CRM and Cert 4 english proficiency, won't gain any traction in those areas of the world that have most of the accidents...Africa, parts of Asia, the Middle East and South America. There are cultural factors that no amount of western theories will fix.
Make no mistake, I think the concept of TEM is fine. I merely have a problem with the application. No doubt it started life as part of the Human factors curriculum but that is where the term should have stayed. Its an answer in search of a problem.
When you give someone a formula to work to several things tend to happen,
* People try to cram in every conceivable threat or error most of which are not real threats...a TS at 20nm on departure for instance...or terrain that would only be a factor in a Twin Comanche,
* It rapidly becomes too formalised and people stop listening,
* Other stuff that maybe more important gets missed.
I go to Manila and Jakarta a lot...how long before "The threats tonight are crap ATC, ****ty runway full of soft spots and slippery, storms, bad airport signage and lots of other aircraft crewed by people who didn't/haven't/couldn't pass english proficiency" becomes redundant, meaningless noise? Every pilot in the company knows that is the case already - a new pilot joining tomorrow will be taught that on line training and experience it constantly.
Why verbalise it in a formulaic way?
My understanding of threat and error management is being able to identify when conditions exist that make us more susceptible to making and error or commiting a violation (fatigue to just name one). It is also about being accountable for your actions and basing behaviour on sound principles of professionalism.
mcgrath50 all good points...but would you be better served being taught how to 'manage threats' by the experienced training captains in the airline you just joined or by a tosser with a degree and no experience?
Further to that TEM will make virtually no difference to the international accident rate because 'good' airlines already teach new pilots what they need to be thinking about, and when, and bad airlines won't bother. For 'good' and 'bad' think 1st world and 3rd world.
TEM, like CRM and Cert 4 english proficiency, won't gain any traction in those areas of the world that have most of the accidents...Africa, parts of Asia, the Middle East and South America. There are cultural factors that no amount of western theories will fix.
Make no mistake, I think the concept of TEM is fine. I merely have a problem with the application. No doubt it started life as part of the Human factors curriculum but that is where the term should have stayed. Its an answer in search of a problem.
When you give someone a formula to work to several things tend to happen,
* People try to cram in every conceivable threat or error most of which are not real threats...a TS at 20nm on departure for instance...or terrain that would only be a factor in a Twin Comanche,
* It rapidly becomes too formalised and people stop listening,
* Other stuff that maybe more important gets missed.
I go to Manila and Jakarta a lot...how long before "The threats tonight are crap ATC, ****ty runway full of soft spots and slippery, storms, bad airport signage and lots of other aircraft crewed by people who didn't/haven't/couldn't pass english proficiency" becomes redundant, meaningless noise? Every pilot in the company knows that is the case already - a new pilot joining tomorrow will be taught that on line training and experience it constantly.
Why verbalise it in a formulaic way?
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 21st Mar 2011 at 02:19.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Framer
You are not applying what I said to this discussion.
First, tell me how I apply the definition of a "threat" to an everyday situation? The "course" was a non sense.
I also said the guys who were new to the company believed they got some thingout of the course. I can't imagine hat, but hey, I accept we all learn in a different way. I also have o say, the guys that came out of the course believing they learnt something are the ones that could do with a good practical lesson on TEM in the aircraft by an experienced trainer, but they can define a threat so all is good.
It may be a waist of time for you but does that mean it's a waist of time to others as well? Is it possible that while you don't easily apply the theoretical concepts to your everyday situations that others can and do?
First, tell me how I apply the definition of a "threat" to an everyday situation? The "course" was a non sense.
I also said the guys who were new to the company believed they got some thingout of the course. I can't imagine hat, but hey, I accept we all learn in a different way. I also have o say, the guys that came out of the course believing they learnt something are the ones that could do with a good practical lesson on TEM in the aircraft by an experienced trainer, but they can define a threat so all is good.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC
I may have something to do with facilitating this stuff (not teaching) but it comes from 40 years in the industry and not from a PhD. Human factors, error management or what ever you like to call it should not be a tick the box exercise and the most appropriate facilitators are those that have made the mistakes or seen the errors and can quote from experience. HF is also not something you cover off every two years but should be continually reinforced and preferably by the Captain and crew. What is discussed these days in the cockpit on a long haul flight? Where would you divert to now if ------?. I doubt very much if this happens often.
The 380 incident in Singapore said a lot about CRM, experience and knowledge of the senior pilots on board. With 50 or more warnings the right decisions were made by drawing on the experience available to handle a unique situation. These types of scenarios are what should be used to create a greater understanding of HF and error management.
I may have something to do with facilitating this stuff (not teaching) but it comes from 40 years in the industry and not from a PhD. Human factors, error management or what ever you like to call it should not be a tick the box exercise and the most appropriate facilitators are those that have made the mistakes or seen the errors and can quote from experience. HF is also not something you cover off every two years but should be continually reinforced and preferably by the Captain and crew. What is discussed these days in the cockpit on a long haul flight? Where would you divert to now if ------?. I doubt very much if this happens often.
The 380 incident in Singapore said a lot about CRM, experience and knowledge of the senior pilots on board. With 50 or more warnings the right decisions were made by drawing on the experience available to handle a unique situation. These types of scenarios are what should be used to create a greater understanding of HF and error management.
* People try to cram in every conceivable threat or error most of which are not real threats...a TS at 20nm on departure for instance...or terrain that would only be a factor in a Twin Comanche,
* It rapidly becomes too formalised and people stop listening,
* Other stuff that maybe more important gets missed.
* It rapidly becomes too formalised and people stop listening,
* Other stuff that maybe more important gets missed.
I think TEM might be something that's benefits come with time. CRM seems stupid now but if you look at the change in 'gradient' (sorry to use a HF buzz word) between the LHS and RHS over the last 50 years I would imagine you would see a positive change.
The "course" was a non sense
Grandpa Aerotart
What is discussed these days in the cockpit on a long haul flight? Where would you divert to now if ------?. I doubt very much if this happens often.
If you seek to formalise that process then it will soon become counter productive. Its like Govt picking economic winners and losers - think pink batts. They get it wrong 100% of the time because the real world (people) is too complicated to micro manage.
What happens is a management pilot (who invariably rarely if ever flies the route) decides that you must do A. Then someone else says "Ok, well then we should make them do B as well". Before you know it you have a brain dead crew flying along without a care in the world because the whole sector has been micromanaged for them.
Its fine to teach HF and TEM as part of the theory courses a pilot will study for their CPL or ATPL. Its probably good to have that formal knowledge - but then you go out to the real world and experience it in a different and more practical way.
CRM is similar. Great to learn the limitations of human communication and how to ask questions in the right way...non threatening communications, open and closed questions etc...but annual re currency? It VERY quickly becomes a box ticking exercise of very limited value and just frustrates people.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 21st Mar 2011 at 05:13.
The Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators (Australian Region) have produced a TEM package which is still available, even though the courses ran some years ago. Designed to 'train the trainer', if anyone needs such a course they can contact [email protected]
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grandpa,
My grand daughter also calls me that and I melt immediately,
Back on the subject!
I am not avocating formalised "what if" type enroute training, but when I go back to my training in antiquity, our informal discussions on various airmanship topics and various scenarios provided me with a sound basis in regard to judgement, decision making and situational awareness. Technical discussions also provided me with the knowledge to make informed decisions in regard to engine and other systems problems and decisions associated with inflight emergencies. No one can envisage all emergency scenarios that may present themselves but the more knowledge that can be gained from both an operational and technical perspective will prepare aircrew to be more effective when confronted with an emenrgency situation, eg the Qantas 380.
I agree that any formalised training will become tedious and ineffective, and I have seen this when behavioural type education programs have been introduced and gradually lost their effect due to the regimentation and repetive nature of such programs (particularly in the maintenance environment).
My grand daughter also calls me that and I melt immediately,
Back on the subject!
I am not avocating formalised "what if" type enroute training, but when I go back to my training in antiquity, our informal discussions on various airmanship topics and various scenarios provided me with a sound basis in regard to judgement, decision making and situational awareness. Technical discussions also provided me with the knowledge to make informed decisions in regard to engine and other systems problems and decisions associated with inflight emergencies. No one can envisage all emergency scenarios that may present themselves but the more knowledge that can be gained from both an operational and technical perspective will prepare aircrew to be more effective when confronted with an emenrgency situation, eg the Qantas 380.
I agree that any formalised training will become tedious and ineffective, and I have seen this when behavioural type education programs have been introduced and gradually lost their effect due to the regimentation and repetive nature of such programs (particularly in the maintenance environment).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definately two distinct camps when it comes to these "touchy feely" topics.
I am a big believer in using all available tools to assist in reducing accidents/incidents and I believe TEM is just another of those tools we can use. It's not for everyone but neither is airline flying / military / GA etc, everyone has different needs based on their training and experience level.
For example, at my current work we regularly have 2 pilot crews with 600hrs total combined, flying twin turbo props into the flight levels and in and out of complex airpsace/CTAFs /mountainous terrain etc so i'm looking for every advantage I can give these guys to not kill themselves and other crew/passengers. If TEM gets through to just 1 person...job done.
I am a big believer in using all available tools to assist in reducing accidents/incidents and I believe TEM is just another of those tools we can use. It's not for everyone but neither is airline flying / military / GA etc, everyone has different needs based on their training and experience level.
For example, at my current work we regularly have 2 pilot crews with 600hrs total combined, flying twin turbo props into the flight levels and in and out of complex airpsace/CTAFs /mountainous terrain etc so i'm looking for every advantage I can give these guys to not kill themselves and other crew/passengers. If TEM gets through to just 1 person...job done.
My understanding of threat and error management is being able to identify when conditions exist that make us more susceptible to making and error or commiting a violation (fatigue to just name one). It is also about being accountable for your actions and basing behaviour on sound principles of professionalism
