CCC, CRM and MCC for helicopter

[FlightOops]

Hypothetical situation to prompt disussion over CRM methods in the cockpit ... please also indicate if you already fly multi-crew (be interesting to see if views differ):

Scenario:

Pilot A - Owner of aircraft, PPL, considerable experience, right hand seat flying pilot, VFR only machine
Pilot B - CPL, limited experience, left had seat pax, duals fitted

Gradually deteriorating weather is forcing the cruise alt lower and lower. Pilot B first raises concern over weather and tries to discuss alternatives.

Pilot A quotes "local knowledge" and that "it normally improves at the end of this valley". Pilot B is unhappy but elects to refrain from further comment.

Aircraft is now in / out of low cloud (200'), more out than in and in sight of ground for 95% of time.

Pliot B is now getting more nervous but assumes this is a lack of experience and concentrates on accurate position fixes for Pilot A.

A handful of minutes later the aircraft is now full IMC, 100' AGL, close proximity of high-tension cables running parallel to track, road below appearing just long enough to confirm alt and position. Pilot B now has alarm bells ringing as this goes against all training Pilot B has received so far.

Between Pilot A flying on instruments, Pilot B map / gps monitoring, instrument checking and itching to come on to controls, workload in the cockpit is HIGH and discussion limited to information necessary for safe continued flight: "Powerlines coming up on the nose, 500m... you are now facing next waypoint... jeez, watch these cables on the left".

With a sigh of relief the aircraft returns to base without incident.

Summary:

Having read many accounts in accident reports how these situations turn out differently, would anyone care to comment?

- Did Pilot B over-react when Pilot A clearly knew where they were and were able to cope with flying the machine well in IMC (although not IR'ed)
- Should Pilot B have voiced concerns earlier and insisted on a different course of action?
- Should Pilot B have assumed control of the aircraft and landed prior to full IMC?
- Would the best course of action have been to climb not press on in IMC?
- Was Pilot B correct once it was clear the flight was continuing to put aside concerns and concentrate on getting out of the soup or should Pilot B have insisted on landing or turning around?
- Have any of you found yourselves in this position ?
- Do more solo rotary-wing hours as a PPL make for better experience than fewer hours but mostly dual for a CPL (i.e. trained to a higher standard)?

I am really after a balanced view here from any pilot whether you are a low hour PPL or high-time IR, Multi-crew ATPL, and would welcome all of your comments.

Thanks,
FO

[helmet fire]

It is invariable that CFIT accidents have always been preceeded by considerable unease or discomfort from one or all members of the crew. Pilot A seem blissfully unaware of this.

Pilot B voiced his concerns appropriately but could have escallated them, and then did well by concentrating on getting out of the poo by prioritising his communications to elements that would save them. But it is very hard without actually being there and knowing the personalities and the culture of the organisation or flight (was the owner holding a job over the newbie??), etc to be able to ascertain if Pilot B was forcefull enough. Easy for me to say he should yell, scream, take over and save himself earlier, but I wasn't there. Still, on alot of CFIT tapes it is suprising how polite a crewmember can be, even when he is fearing for his very life. It is almost as if the loss of face for the captain is more important than the consequence the crewmember fears!

Pilot B needs to learn the the trump card: "Land now, I am getting out. You can see if it gets better ahead by yourself"

Pilot A can then become a statistic all by himself.

[996]

I realy do not think the issue of crm is the important thing here. I rather think that the flight should have been aborted by the Captain of the aircraft at a much earlier stage, or perhaps should not have taken place at all at that time.

[paco]

Yes, 996, quite right IMHO, but I think there is a CRM issue somewhere.

The CPL only really covers a higher standard of technical knowledge and/or ability - it does not legislate as to whether you have any common-sense or not. I have known stupid people in many "intelligent" trades, which includes doctors and solicitors, and there are many stupid pilots out there as well.

In practice, if Pilot B wants to take over and A doesn't want to hand over the controls, there's not a lot that can be done, since taking hold of them in such a marginal situation may just make matters worse. If he was going to do anything, it should have been done much earlier - of course Pilot A should have found the nearest landing spot much earlier as well.

"The least experience press on, whilst the more experienced turn back, to join the most experienced, who didn't take off in the first place."

Phil

[flyer43]

I realy do not think the issue of crm is the important thing here.

Don't forget that CRM starts on the ground!
Did either pilot actually check the en-route weather or was it a case of "it looks OK outside right now, so let's go!"?
True CRM means that ANY member of the crew who has concerns, before, during or after a flight should react immediately.

A question I have on this hypothetical case is: Is this really a two crew flight or is it just coincidence that both front seats are occupied by qualified pilots and dual controls are fitted?

[pulse1]

In my experience there are often added dangers when two pilots of different experience levels fly together. Usually as the less experienced pilot I have often found myself in situations I would have not got into on my own, trusting that the more experienced pilot was happy and could sort it out if it got too much for me.

In the hypothetical example, the pilot could have assumed that, as the more qualified pilot had said nothing, everything was OK.

Nothing to do with helicopters but this report has always left its mark on me as to the importance of sorting it out on the ground BEFORE you fly.

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/cm...pdf_503038.pdf

[jeepys]

Firstly pilots need to be aware of their own limitations and that of the aircraft also. Flying IMC without holding IR (was the a/c IFR equipped?) is dangerous business, just look at the statistics.
And yes it is a CRM issue. If you have two qualified pilots in the heli then you should work together in difficult times even if you are not flying dual crew. The PPL pilot should respect the inexperienced CPL views and take note. Dont become another statistic!

[SASless]

Preflight agreement about the conduct of the flight including the "One Dissenting Vote Rule" would have prevented that problem. ODV rule means one vote to turn around, go home, land out, terminate the flight.....wins.

As soon as the aircraft entered cloud.....in deteriorating conditions....it is time to activate ODV. Go for the better vis and cloud height and make further decisions that only improve the situation.

There is no flight that has to be done today....none. When you hit yer limits...quit and come back again when you can maintain your limits or better.

[verticalhold]

Good problem this one:

SASless I believe you are absolutely right. I fly a lot in a hight tec twin with the ppl owner. The deal we struck on day one was that at any time I was unhappy with what was going on then he had to listen to my concerns and justify his actions if he could. Likewise if when I am flying and he is worried the same rule applies.

We ignore our relative experience and work on the theory that I may know more than him, but that doesn't stop me missing something when I'm flying and that if I'm uncomfortable when he's flying then something is almost certainly wrong.

This way we have avoided scaring ourselves (so far) and our respect for each others' abilities grew far faster as a result.

[The Rotordog]

I think The Scenario is probably more common than we're willing to admit. Without a pre-discussed plan, it's difficult for lower-time guy to second-guess a higher-time guy, especially when he's the owner of the ship and has "done this before" (how many times have we heard [i]that![i]).

In this particular case, the flight is well and truly screwed up if indeed it is IMC at 100' agl. Bad, bad place to be, "familiar with the area" or not. That's no excuse. It's not good practice, it's not safe, and it's not a situation I ever want to find myself in.

So helmet fire has it right: The NTPIC (not the pilot in command) must assert himself loudly and diplomatically. "Look man, I am REALLY uncomfortable here. Land this thing NOW and just let me out. You can go ahead and kill yourself if you like, but not with me in here."

The PIC will probably roll his eyes and call you a wussie. But he'll probably relent. And so you get out. And maybe the guy takes off again, and maybe he makes it to his destination while you have to scrounge up a ride. Who's the dummy now? (Hint: It ain't you.)

On the other hand, we've all found ourselves in bad weather. I'm not to proud to admit that there have been times when I've been sitting there sweating, heart pounding and saying (not out loud though), "Dear God, please get me out of this and I promise that I'll *NEVER* do it again! In fact, if you get me out of this, I'll start going to church on Sunday and stop touching myself so much...well, I'll cut back a little," all the while maintaining that calm, cool, kind of bored, ops normal demeanor to my pax.

The problem with aviation is that often there are no clear-cut responses. One man's "I can make it" is another man's declaration of emergency, which is tough when they're both in the same cockpit. Sometimes the former guy crashes; sometimes he makes it through okay, which only reinforces his willingness to try it again next time.

At the end of the day, SASless is right- things need to be sorted-out prior to take-off. But that's no guarantee, because even with such an agreement, the go/no-go line can become arguable...let's say "discussable." It is why I do not like flying with other pilots in single-pilot a/c - even in good weather.

[FlightOops]

Thank you all for the comments so far - as hoped, it has brought out similar views but subtly differing emphasis, and prompted discussion.

For the purposes of the discussion, lets assume:
- the owner was holding a job over the "newbie"
- the flight was NOT twin crew, merely coincidence that both pax were licence holders
- the aircraft was not specifically equipped for IFR but had an HSI, AH etc. suitable for "inadvertant IMC".
- the wx forecast was appropriate (i.e. above minima) for the entire flight
- poor conditions in the final phases of flight were localised and not forecast

That way we keep the discussion focused on the cockpit environment as things were deteriorating (not simplifythe argument by stating they should've checked the wx before leaving).

Please also do mention what your perspective is as I'm interested to see whether there is any bias towards pilots experienced in flying in a multi-crew environment.


There have been a lot of valuable lessons / tips from the clearly more experienced members, which may prove useful to the less experienced pilots and I thank you for sharing them.

Is it not arguable that this sort of discussion also contributes to CRM training ?

FO

[SASless]

VH,

Anyone that has flown "corporate" understands the situation...."I/we just have to make this meeting....no matter what we just got to be there...a lot is depending upon this meeting....mindset."

Call it CRM or just plain old commonsense...if one is to err....do it on the side of safety. The "doing" of that is where the problems come in.

Diplomacy and deference can only go so far in these situations and at some point if it gets to that point where one must hoist the BS flag.....run it up the flagpole in a very smart (as in quickly with elan) military fashion.

I always assumed when the other pilot asks what I think of the weather....he really is making a declarative statement and not an interrrogatory. I rarely said things were right as rain but usually suggested I was having second thoughts as well, thus making his decision much more likely to be the cautious one.

We can learn from others.....but one must make sure the bolder way is within good safe parameters.

[flyer43]

- the owner was holding a job over the "newbie"

FlightOops, with criteria like that you are more or less declaring that CRM is a non-starter as the owner is not going to listen the newbie on principal.

Let's cancel that particular criteria and leave it as with your initial statement on the two chaps. i.e experienced PPL owner and limited experience CPL "passenger/co-pilot"

I have extensive experience both in single and multi pilot operations, offshore, onshore, basic instruction, training captain on multi engine and some corporate work.
The scenario you described fills my heart with horror as I am sure that it happens all too frequently. It's easy for me to say now that if I had been the CPL "passenger" I would have made it very clear that I was not happy with the situation and request strongly that we should turn back towards the better weather making certain that one of us monitored the instrumemnts closely to ensure that we didn't become a statistic.
In your scenario, it seems too much to hope that the "co-pilot" would find it easy to question the captain, let alone take control of the helicopter if the Captain refused to divert to more suitable conditions.

Had the owner been on his own, I believe that he might well have diverted from the worsening conditions. In the event, a certain amount of bravado probably came into it as he wouldn't want the CPL "co-pilot" to believe that he wasn't capable of making it.

- Did Pilot B over-react when Pilot A clearly knew where they were and were able to cope with flying the machine well in IMC (although not IR'ed)

If I was Pilot B I would not have been so confident that Pilot A "clearly knew where he was" due to local knowledge. Many years ago, Graham Hill died, probably as a result of relying on his local knowledge when going home in poor weather conditions.

- Should Pilot B have voiced concerns earlier and insisted on a different course of action?

Pilot B should have indeed voiced his concerns earlier and should have suggested some alternatives available.

- Should Pilot B have assumed control of the aircraft and landed prior to full IMC?

Provided Pilot A was responding to sensible suggestions and not blundering blindly on, Pilot B was helping more by map reading, giving advice "niece"

- Would the best course of action have been to climb not press on in IMC?

Provided you have sufficient instrumentation to maintain IFR, climbing might very well be the preferred option, provided you know what height is needed to clear the highest obstruction along and close to the route. However, under the stated circumstances I think that I would have preferred turning back towards known better weather and returning to our departure point or a suitable alternate.

- Was Pilot B correct once it was clear the flight was continuing to put aside concerns and concentrate on getting out of the soup or should Pilot B have insisted on landing or turning around?

Under these specific circumstances, Pilot B was probably best to turn his attention to planning the way ahead as insisting on landing or trying to take over control may well have caused increasing tension between the two pilots, reducing the overal control of the helicopter. Splitting the workload is one of the key requisites of good CRM.

- Have any of you found yourselves in this position ?

Yes, but during a single pilot flight on a multi engined helicopter to get a senior company member home at the end the day. He was most insistent and I perceived the implied "job threat", so we went.
Reducing cloud base as we neared the destination eventually meant that I had to climb to a safe height and then set up an instrument let-down to hopefully break cloud and fly VFR to the destination." I was a single pilot IFR rated ATPL/H at the time so was not daunted by climbing through the clouds.

- Do more solo rotary-wing hours as a PPL make for better experience than fewer hours but mostly dual for a CPL (i.e. trained to a higher standard)?

You could argue that a PPL with lots of experience is more capable than a CPL with limitied hours. CPL training should be to a higher standard and has substantially more Instrument Flying training included. The experienced PPL may have flown on instruments for many hours, but might not have had the structured training in this practise that the CPL rated pilot had. Even if I was a low hours CPL holder, I think that I would have felt more competent than the experienced PPL.

[paco]

As far as CRM goes, and concerning corporate stuff, and this is what I teach in my courses, this is one business where the customer is not always right, and there needs to be a fine line drawn (politely!) between the requirements of the customer, the management and the pilot.

Why should the fact that the customer stands to lose 100K (or whatever) if you don't get him to a meeting on time become part of your problem? Your problem is to get him there safely - the consequences of that don't come into it, assuming you've done your job properly and advised him that there are no guarantees and that he will still be billed for an abortive flight.

I had to struggle a bit at Alton Towers to get that established, but there was no problem at JCB, or any other place that I worked.

The sooner we stop taking on customers' problems as well as our own, the better off we will all be.

In declining something, offering an alternative solution is a good way of sweetening the pill.

Phil

[Neerg rN]

Stupitiy

Its not a case of CRM, it's a case of stupidity. Rocks and wires don't differentiate between low time pilots and corporate movers and shakers (or who think they are). Heard the story about the aircraft carrier captain and the light house keeper!

[flyer43]

CRM

The sooner we stop taking on customers' problems as well as our own, the better off we will all be.

Paco - I couldn't agree with you more! My own situation arose many years ago when I was a snotty nosed newbie captain. I vowed never to let that happen again, and kept to it!!
Times have changed and so have my thought processes as far as letting somebody edge me towards risking my neck. (Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?)

Although offering an alternative is a good way of sweetening the pill, in most cases the alternative would be "I'll locate a good hotel locally for you and we can look at it again tomorrow". When a big wheel wants to get home, this would seldom appease him/her..........

[DBChopper]

FlightOops - great thread.

I hope you are going to come up with a few more plotlines - as an inexperienced PPL(H) / studying CPL(H) this kind of discussion is invaluable and gets the grey matter working.

I've been sat in the back seat with two PPL(H)s up front and have found myself uttering the phrases, "Hmm... look, there's airfield X down there to the left," as we boldy busted their ATZ, then after an, "Unidentified traffic," comment by a radar unit mistaken by the PIC to refer to a fixed wing out to our port side, had to point out to him that the comment was aimed at the plank and was referring to us, listening in but not partaking of the service.

Great stuff.

[paco]

Ah well, that's what situational awareness is all about!

Neerg rN - as far as I am concerned, anything that requires wall-to-wall counselling is a CRM issue!

Phil

[Neerg rN]

The Ladies Lunch Committee

If I was de-briefing this crew I would be talking about the decision making process long before I would discuss the CRM issues. If you intend to wander around the sky hoping for the co-pilot, ATC, a passenger or some sort of voting system to keep you out of trouble - good luck then because you are going to need it.

[Teefor Gage]

If I was de-briefing this crew I would be talking about the decision making process long before I would discuss the CRM issues.

Methinks you don't really understand what CRM is really all about. With two crew operations the decision should be jointly agreed. SASless has it right with his statement "One Dissenting Vote Rule". However, this is not as NeerG rN would have it a "voting system", in this case it means if either pilot is not happy with a situation you should get out of it soonest and discuss the problem later over a cold beer........

NeerG rN - other than being a reversed indication, you aren't by any chance an ex- military pilot?