Inappropriate use of CRM?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I once sought out the comments book so I could write about my experiences with security at ROC. They were pleasant, polite and helpful, in contrast to every other US airport I have used. Of course ROC is a small airport with limited passenger numbers so the security staff are less stressed and have a little more time to be pleasant.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mister Geezer
Were we on the same CRMI course? I remember something very similar. Brilliant course.
As for the subject, I was astounded when I saw the article. CRM is important to this issue, and it can help. However it is meant to be an aid to safety, not solution to problems caused by the avoidable, inappropriate decisions of politicians and bureaucrats. It is not a patch up for a problem that can be easily solved in other ways.
Were we on the same CRMI course? I remember something very similar. Brilliant course.
As for the subject, I was astounded when I saw the article. CRM is important to this issue, and it can help. However it is meant to be an aid to safety, not solution to problems caused by the avoidable, inappropriate decisions of politicians and bureaucrats. It is not a patch up for a problem that can be easily solved in other ways.
Threat and Error Management (TEM) is the new buzzphrase which seems to be the modern thing, and in my company TEM is becoming bigger that CRM, although you can argue there are common areas encompassed by both.
The security system is a threat which needs to be managed. The CAA are correct in saying that out training should alleviate some of the problems if they consider TEM rather than CRM. However, should this be allowed to continue? If there is a constant and persistant threat - it needs to be managed. And if the CAA don't have the ability to take it on as it stands at the monent, give them some ammunition.
ASRs are the way. "After a particularly stressful arrival at the aircraft due to airport security, the chain of events which led to.............were set in motion" etc.
The security system is a threat which needs to be managed. The CAA are correct in saying that out training should alleviate some of the problems if they consider TEM rather than CRM. However, should this be allowed to continue? If there is a constant and persistant threat - it needs to be managed. And if the CAA don't have the ability to take it on as it stands at the monent, give them some ammunition.
ASRs are the way. "After a particularly stressful arrival at the aircraft due to airport security, the chain of events which led to.............were set in motion" etc.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: With all the other nuts
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyro Picard,
I hear your sentiment, but it may not be possible to "take 5" and calm down a little after your "event" unless you want to miss your slot or put even more pressure on yourself when you finally do get to the aircraft.
I like to look them dead in the eye and advise them that I intend to take control of an aircraft
Chips
I hear your sentiment, but it may not be possible to "take 5" and calm down a little after your "event" unless you want to miss your slot or put even more pressure on yourself when you finally do get to the aircraft.
I like to look them dead in the eye and advise them that I intend to take control of an aircraft
Chips
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if we miss our slot due to security then perhaps that may reinforce that a problem exists! If we get buggered about by these individuals then it is quite simply not our problem if we get delayed. Crews should feel under no pressure to rush or feel under excessive stress to meet the schedule. I only get worried over delays that I can directly control and I can't control if Mr Jobsworth at Security has got out of the right side of bed the morning.
If your going to say:
I like to look them dead in the eye and advise them that I intend to take control of an aircraft
then your simply inviting trouble!
Dan... many of us have used ASRs but the CAA have no backbone in them to sort this out since they know there is a problem but they don't have the balls to tackle it head on.
Cheers
If your going to say:
I like to look them dead in the eye and advise them that I intend to take control of an aircraft
then your simply inviting trouble!
Dan... many of us have used ASRs but the CAA have no backbone in them to sort this out since they know there is a problem but they don't have the balls to tackle it head on.
Cheers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MG
That wasn't the same one as me, I was there a couple of weeks later. Different company too, as they didn't have a course scheduled then, so this must be a very common issue at the moment!
That wasn't the same one as me, I was there a couple of weeks later. Different company too, as they didn't have a course scheduled then, so this must be a very common issue at the moment!
Quote: "Dan... many of us have used ASRs but the CAA have no backbone in them to sort this out since they know there is a problem but they don't have the balls to tackle it head on."
There was a case of ASRs being ignored about five years ago. Pilots were submitting ASRs regarding a practice they considered unsafe, but nothing was being done. Until one day, a pilot who had a mate who was a journo had a word with that mate and the story was published in one of the national newspapers. The CAA took notice and the practice was stopped.
The power is in your hands. After all, journos aren't hard to find. I suspect at least five will have read this before the day is out!
I would love to help, but I fly in a region where crew are given priority and are subject to less checks than passengers and we really don't suffer the same problems that out US and UK bretheren. In this respect, the People's Republic of China is way ahead!
There was a case of ASRs being ignored about five years ago. Pilots were submitting ASRs regarding a practice they considered unsafe, but nothing was being done. Until one day, a pilot who had a mate who was a journo had a word with that mate and the story was published in one of the national newspapers. The CAA took notice and the practice was stopped.
The power is in your hands. After all, journos aren't hard to find. I suspect at least five will have read this before the day is out!
I would love to help, but I fly in a region where crew are given priority and are subject to less checks than passengers and we really don't suffer the same problems that out US and UK bretheren. In this respect, the People's Republic of China is way ahead!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look back on all the airline hi-jackings and bombings the vast majority (pretty much all) were carried out by young men of Middle Eastern appearance.
This is not racist. It is a statement of fact. Just like saying that the vast majority of people convicted of burglary in London were young white males. And hand-bag snatching goes to young black males. Fraud and corruption lies firmly at the feet of white middle class males.
Why do we subject every single passenger (or even worse, a random every 4th one) to the same level of security screening?
Is it because we don't want to offend an unknown/undefined minority ethnic group? Or the PC Brigade? I would rather travel with an airline that screens pax and searches accordingly, reducing delay and hassle for all concerned.
If you are offended, note paragraph 1 and choose to fly with an airline that will b*gger everyone about. El Al have been screening check-in for as long as they have existed, with very good reason. They are way down the hijack victim list.
It is laughable that, to protect the sensibilities of a vocal minority, the individuals flying the aircraft with fire axes strapped to the back of their seats are subjected to 'security checks'.
If this is in the interests of 'fairness', then why do MPs (public servants) get far more generous remittance per travel mile than other public servants. Just for one example.
Edited: I'm not an airline pilot, but nearly was. Just for a press to test: anybody try carrying a fire-axe through security, then pointing out the same item's available in the office you are about to occupy? So what is proven by confiscating said item?
This question should be directed at those who insist on the policy. Is it airline management or politicians? Should all politicians get the same treatment to enter parliament in case of a looky-likey parliament bomber?
Thought not.
Still a pound a pint in the Commons bar.
Bast*rds.
Come back Guy Fawkes, all is forgiven.
This is not racist. It is a statement of fact. Just like saying that the vast majority of people convicted of burglary in London were young white males. And hand-bag snatching goes to young black males. Fraud and corruption lies firmly at the feet of white middle class males.
Why do we subject every single passenger (or even worse, a random every 4th one) to the same level of security screening?
Is it because we don't want to offend an unknown/undefined minority ethnic group? Or the PC Brigade? I would rather travel with an airline that screens pax and searches accordingly, reducing delay and hassle for all concerned.
If you are offended, note paragraph 1 and choose to fly with an airline that will b*gger everyone about. El Al have been screening check-in for as long as they have existed, with very good reason. They are way down the hijack victim list.
It is laughable that, to protect the sensibilities of a vocal minority, the individuals flying the aircraft with fire axes strapped to the back of their seats are subjected to 'security checks'.
If this is in the interests of 'fairness', then why do MPs (public servants) get far more generous remittance per travel mile than other public servants. Just for one example.
Edited: I'm not an airline pilot, but nearly was. Just for a press to test: anybody try carrying a fire-axe through security, then pointing out the same item's available in the office you are about to occupy? So what is proven by confiscating said item?
This question should be directed at those who insist on the policy. Is it airline management or politicians? Should all politicians get the same treatment to enter parliament in case of a looky-likey parliament bomber?
Thought not.
Still a pound a pint in the Commons bar.
Bast*rds.
Come back Guy Fawkes, all is forgiven.
Last edited by Monty77; 23rd May 2008 at 17:17.
