CRM summed up

[Smudger]

I hate to sound like an old fart, but in the early seventies when I first started pilot training in the RAF (no, please don't switch off, hear me out) we actually had classroom lectures on something called "Airmanship", during which we discussed all sorts of situations which might require crew management and/or decision-making by a Captain/Aircraft Commander. As the years go by and flying experience is amassed, one learns how best to manage a crew, no matter how large or small (in number, not size!) to the best effect, in order to achieve the task in hand safely and efficiently. In my humble opinion, 'CRM' is not something that can be learned on an "approved course", but is learned by experience, and is but only a part , albeit an important part, of a much bigger aspect of flying, called airmanship.

[Khaosai]

Hi maximum, I was thinking along the lines of turning around in the seat and introducing yourself using your first name. The co pilot does the same, simply because it would sound funny being addressed as first officer. Nice and relaxed, a good start to the day, with the dispatcher, let's call him John, on your side. Rgds.

[Spearing Britney]

Now come on Maximum you are twisting it! Yes an FO (or Captain) must speak up if they are uncomfortable but they are all taught that correctly calculated chart performance is reliable and that visual perceptions are often not; so I stand by my statement that the FO you describe is foolish! He should not have been uncomfortable and if he was he should have known why and at most re-confirmed that you (the crew) were happy you had correctly calculated the performance. Does that explain my statement?

As for the real world issue, I must say I entirely fail to see your point. CRM is real world and applies to it perfectly well, in applying it we seek to create a real world that is also ideal. You brought the ideal world up in relation to both pilots being on the same page and the pre/during/de briefing of issues. I still maintain that if a crew fails to do this then the crew and its CRM is failing, there is no reason crews cannot do this. I ask again do you really disagree that any issue on which a confusion/disagreement emerges should ideally have been pre-briefed, if not forseen then real time briefed and in the exceptional situation of this not being possible should be de-briefed? I'd love to hear that you agree with this...




In reply to your second story. Well obviously the brief didn't go too well and your charts aren't handy to confirm the SID so the CRM has gone wrong already but to humour you:-

First option, simply say 'continuing turn' and if required add 'I have control' and immediately ask the FO to confirm the turn direction with ATC -readily available, independent and reliable second source of info and one which employs the wider scope of CRM. Meanwhile apply max power to make best rate available so if you are wrong (any you may be) you mitigate the error.

Second option, use EGPWS display to confirm correct turn direction.

Lastly, if other options not available then that’s why we have a Commander whose head rolls if he gets it wrong.




I fear that the point you are trying to make is that you feel that your FO’s are not worthy to question you, the Captain. All I am trying to say is that they must question the Captain when things happen that their body of training tells them may not be good, if they don’t its a single crew operation – at best Man and Dog. The manner in which they question should be constructive, non-combative, and beneficial to both parties. That is what CRM tries to teach.

[fernytickles]

An interesting discussion. I hope it doesn't deteriorate into a slanging match because there are some very valid and interesting points being introduced.

I think that so far, only Bealzebub has compared the crew situation to a managerial situation, and it struck me that although we do CRM and all those lovely technical exams, at no point are we given any real "people managing" training. I suppose one assumption could be that life's experience should have given us enough practice at working with, and managing people, but you don't have to look too far to realise that is not often the case.

I very much support a well presented CRM course - anything that makes us look at the mortality and fallability of ourselves, other pilots and passengers and makes us think a little bit about what we would have done or how we would have reacted in similar circumstances is invaluable. But perhaps, included in the command course, there should be a course introducing managerial skills, in greater depth than a CRM course does? Regardless of the number of crew the future captain will have to manage. Not everyone is a natural leader, but with a little help, many people can become very good leaders. With maturity and learning on the job, hopefully those skills will be honed, eventually, but in our line of work, "eventually" is not always the best approach for the captain.

Of course, this can go wrong, just as some of you are saying that the CRM is going wrong, but that shouldn't stop the thought from being developed. Isn't it often the complaint that the pilot who moves from flying the line to management has no formal management skills because flying is all they have ever done, and it shows through. This is not aimed at all management pilots, but it is a complaint I have heard often enough for it to stand out.

Just as a well done, well thought out CRM course can be of huge benefit, I believe a well done, well thought out management course could also be a benefit. I have never been on any kind of management course, and would be interested to try, having watched how others have benefited from them.

[Maximum]

Khaosai

I'm not sure I understand your point. Sorry.

Spearing Britney

I'm sure we're starting to wear everybody down! But at the risk of repetition. My observation would be that you keep denying the real world - you say that the f/o in my example "should not have been uncomfortable" with the intersection take-off. But the simple fact of the matter is that he was - just one of those unexpected things you're faced with from time to time.

And my second example did happen. You say

Well obviously the brief didn't go too well and your charts aren't handy to confirm the SID so the CRM has gone wrong already but to humour you:-

Well....it was about 0400 after a long night. Delayed departure at other end. Very busy turnaround. Usual hassle with manual loadsheets, fuel late to turn up, one baggage handler, well meaning but slow handling agent etc......Finally pax on board, very tight slot. As we start to taxi out, wind backs 180 degrees. Runway change. Taxi out very difficult on extremely dark taxi ways, very poor lighting. Some closed due work in progress just to complicate matters. Poor old f/o has to start getting performance books out, find new SID page on chart, re-programme FMC, copy new ATC clearance from controller with poor English and two cans with a string for a radio. In addition he has to try and monitor Captain's new taxi route in the darkness. Meanwhile the slot looms ominously. If we miss it, we're advised delay could be more than two hours and we'll be out of hours. But, despite this, I ignore the pressure of the slot, sod that, and applying good MCC principles I tell ATC we aren't ready, and bring the aircraft to a stop. We then review the performance, and the SID, check all the bugs, re-set the nav aids, check the FMC, I do a brief, he says he's happy, and finally we line up, just in time. Trouble was, he still got confused once we we're airborne. Flying's like that sometimes isn't it? A lot had gone on in the proceeding five minutes, and he suddenly found he was still catching up. My experience helped me I reckon, but the fatigue at 0400 and the high workload had confused him. Who can blame him? He's only human after all. But I had to sort it out when part of his MCC training kicked in, and he started hollering about turning the wrong way. That's the real world, and it happened. Asking ATC would have been next to useless, as their English was poor, they had no radar, and they wouldn't have understood the question properly in all probability. Anyway, by the time they did answer, it might have been to late - that high ground was mighty close. Also, whose to say the answer would have been right?!

Max power wouldn't have helped - it was a big lump of rock and we were close. Our aeroplane didn't have EGPWS. My head wouldn't have rolled if I'd got it wrong - it would have been flat as a pancake with a couple of hundred men, woman and children swiftly following.

So there you have it. We did the briefings, etc etc. But real life s**t still happens. As I said before, I'm mostly in agreement with you, but there is a touch of the evangelical in your postings which seems to deny the valid viewpoint of experienced Captains on this subject.

As I asked you before, haven't you found situations on line in your own airline like this?

[Spearing Britney]

Sorry to appear evangelical, that wasn't my aim and I freely admit that I get it wrong sometimes when doing lots of things, including flying. I'll even admit that sometimes I don't even like to admit it!

In answer to your question, i.e. have I found situations like those you describe - well no, not to that extreme (I think you might just be tearing it to make a point) but yes I do know what you mean.

I certainly don't seek to deny the valid viewpoint of experienced Captains on this or any other topic but as I said I feel this thread needs (needed!) some Devil's Advocate. However, I do seek to point out that CRM is valuable, that FO's can be right and Capatain's can be wrong, even both crew can be wrong and its always worth asking anyone else who might be able to help.

I'll leave others to be judge and jury on the examples we have discussed but you say that I am ignoring the real world, may I extend this to suggest that maybe you have stopped reaching that extra bit in the hope of touching the ideal one?

[411A]

Smudger has very good advice for those rather younger inexperienced First Officers who, having sat thru a few CRM courses, really do feel that they have the upper hand.
Suspect these folks would not know 'airmanship' if it bit 'em in the backside.
They should also appreciate that many airlines have their line Commanders fill out a First Officer assessment form each month with the guys/gals they fly with...and being an overbearing co-pilot will certainly not win many brownie points in the fleet managers office.

[Captain Sand Dune]

One wonders what type of Captain these “rather younger inexperienced” and “ stroppy/arrogant/chip on their shoulders” First Officers will turn out to be.
Why do I get the feeling that the more things change, the more they stay the same?
Smudger – spot on mate!

[Khaosai]

Maximum, sorry captain, try not to feel too sorry. Rgds.

[alf5071h]

‘Airmanship’ Smudger? How quaint and old fashioned, but I fully agree. As one of the ‘old school’, I was taught Airmanship every day. At the time I probably did not appreciate what I was being taught or what airmanship was and it has taken the last 40 years to gain at least some understanding. However, whatever ‘it’ is, it enabled me to get this far – retirement, without too many mishaps.

It would be foolish to expect that the ‘old way’ would still apply in a complex world; therefore what has changed that prevents the well founded principles of our profession being heeded today?

At each stage of my training, and throughout my professional career there were hurdles to be overcome, examinations passed, licenses and ratings to be earned; today the young graduate is ‘empowered’ with a frozen “captain’s” license, given the belief that within a few hours he (she) too can become a captain. Not so, captaincy requires airmanship that has to be developed though continuing education and experience. Now-days there may be fewer regulatory examinations during this progression, so greater the need for self examination and criticism.

The skills required in aviation are far more than stick and rudder, yet the license and the image focuses on the physical. A newly qualified pilot is safe – the regulators say so, they cover themselves. However, operators require safe but also effective pilots in a crew. Effectively has to be learnt and developed, which transforms into efficiency, - someone who can become a captain, who in turn must then strive for precision and expertise. These qualities are not bestowed, or bought; they have to be learnt through time and with considerable effort.

The qualities involved in monitoring and intervention are those of airmanship and once gained they have to be employed constructively. I often met pilots who had little knowledge of how or when to alert the captain, latterly I found a good reference for these – P.A.C.E. Probing for a better understanding; Alerting Captain of the anomalies; Challenging suitability of present strategy; Emergency Warning of critical and immediate dangers. It appears from this thread that many younger pilots are forgetting step 1 – Probing for information, for reasoning and understanding. Similarly Captains must provide the answers; the basis of this is good communication.

The principles of airmanship still apply in a CRM world. Airmanship defines an individual; discipline, skill and proficiency, knowledge, awareness, and judgment. Many of the examples given in this thread identify failures in one or more of these areas. Most of these areas depend on self discipline, a rarely taught and often lost commodity in modern life. Discipline also involves respect, both for those above and below. The pressures on the modern industry make the development process all the harder; less stick and rudder flying, less time for explanation, and fewer debriefs. The ‘automated’ world implies less need for knowledge, fewer courses, lower standards of understanding, and narrowing of subjects; but there is growing evidence that the very opposite is required. How or where are awareness, thinking, and judgment taught? All of these require experience, not taught, but gained. Experience requires time, situation, and opportunity, but so often not available today.

Life’s expectation is for instant gratification, instant profits, at minimum cost or investment. Yet in high risk industries this may not be possible. Note those industries where rapid progression results in top jobs in the early thirties, then what? Disillusionment, complacency; this problem will affect our industry as well. Try management? But that too requires all of the qualities of airmanship. Indeed all of our industry requires these qualities; engineering, dispatch, cabin, and management; take note, CRM is coming (is here), but what is actually required are those personal qualities contained in the definition of airmanship.

CRM is a relatively modern or a relabeled older tool for maintaining professionalism and safety in the industry. Its mentor Robert Helmreich readily accepts that that CRM is in it’s sixth phase; mix this with the three major cultures in flying (national, organisation, and profession), and then flavor with biased or uneducated viewpoints, then it is no wonder that few people understand what CRM is. CRM is promoted as a tool, a method, a process of maintaining safety through threat and error management. However, like most tools, methods, or processes, if their purpose is not understood, if misidentified, employed with inadequate instruction, or misused, then mistakes are inevitable.

Airmanship depends on experience; experience is what you get when you don’t get what you expected. The industry and particularly the regulatory authorities are just gaining experience of CRM.

[hec7or]

fully agree with alf5071h, just been looking at my company training manual and found that "airmanship" does not appear anywhere on the company recurrent paperwork - not for a line check, a 6 monthly sim check, an annual sim, nor for a command assessment, so it seems it is no longer a company requirement!

glad the autopilot knows its place

[calypso]

Maximum,

considering the gloomy departure scenario that you have painted what do you suggest the Fo should have done:

1.- Said nothing (the cpt must be right, after all he has lots of experience and he does not make mistakes).
2.- Forced the situation at the holding point and request sufficient time to get himself up to speed with the changes. (possibly missing the slot in the process)
3.- Given up flying as he is so obviously not up to the task
4.- Any other suggestions people may like to make

Is there anything that you think you may have done differently in both situations that you mention that may have prevented them from arising.

We can all roll out stories when the other guy was about to do something and we prevented him, etc this is the bread and butter of flying and only proves that we are all fallable. I beleive it is therefore imperative to speak out. To be both assertive and receptive. This must be done with politeness and sensitivity. Nobody should take ofence at a polite question :

Cpt do we have sufficient performance for this intersection?

Yes we did work it out remeber?

Ok

Are we turning in the right direction?

etc.

Aviation is full of accidents that would have been prevented if this had happened. Do we all agree on this?

[James T. Kirk]

Doesn’t this come down to mutual respect?

I am currently flying with a bunch of F/Os who break down into two camps interestingly enough, divided roughly along linguistic lines. One lot work as part of the team and understand that we both take a turn at steering. The others assume that you haven’t just given them the sector but handed over command.

I welcome any advice, observations and help – I need all the help I can get! As for questions I would certainly risk missing a slot to clear up a query on a potentially dangerous matter. I heard some very good advice once. It said “Go through the accident report in your head. If you sound like an idiot change your plan.” I would not like the last words on the CVR to be “Of course we can take the intersection – SOI”

I do however object to being taught to fly again by a junior pilot with 1000 hours or less. Usually the over baring ones (left and right seats) are the ones who can’t demonstrate superiority and so have to claim it.

Why don’t we just treat each other with respect while remembering that the Captain carries the can when it all goes tits up?

On the subject of “Call me Captain” I heard a great CRM related tale. An airline used to send crews off on week-long freighter missions on the 74 classic. Multi-sector, multi-night stop trips. The Captain on this trip was very much of the old school and insisted on calling everyone by “P2”, “P3” etc. On about the fourth night stop when “P3” was asked if he wanted a drink in the bar he replied, “Come on Captain, we know each other well enough now, you can call me P.”

Kirkout…

[Maximum]

To Calypso and others who seem to (in my opinion) taken my comments as a criticism of all f/o's, I suggest you re-read my posts. Dare I suggest you appear a tad sensitive? A little touchy perhaps?

In no way am I putting f/o's down. In no way am I denying that MCC and CRM techniques contribute to flight safety.

All I am saying is that it's incumbent on new f/o's (and their MCC facilitators) to recognise that the application of these techniques can in certain situations dramatically increase the workload of the Captain.

And it must also be recognised that they cannot replace basic deficiencies in airmanship.

In the departure scenario I gave, you seem to making a major assumption. That I, the Captain, when queried, was 100% sure which way to turn. Well, I wasn't, I'm only human (what this is all about), and as soon as I was confronted with a very forceful demand to turn the other way, obviously the seeds of doubt were sown in my mind. So one of us was right, but which one? Precisely because I do listen to my f/o's, I was presented with a difficult situation, that needed to be solved rapidly. And obviously that's when I earned my money.

So all I'm saying, in a nutshell, and all I have ever been saying, is that when they need to speak up (and I'm all for that) f/o's must do it with an awareness of how it effects the operation overall, and how it can influence the Captain's workload.

I think some high horses need dismounting.

[ANVAK]

I'm reminded of something I use when facilitating CRM sessions: "Its not what we fly that counts, but how we fly it... Its not the position we occupy that counts, but how we occupy it..."

Just another thought for some of our more senior left seaters:
An NTSB study showed that in a/c accidents investigated between 1978 and 1999: (1) in 80% of the accidents surveyed the captain was flying; (2) in 73% of the cases it was the f/deck crew's fist day of operating together; (3) 44% of the time it was their first leg together; (4) 55% of the time the flight was behind schedule....

So I still submit that if we treat one another professionally and respectfully, we'll create the correct environment for a safe flight

[coorong]

A good thread......I concur with those who think CRM and Airmanship are much the same thing. However, for all the stuff printed in company policies/ops manuals about CRM theory, it should be remembered that you have to actually practise it EVERY time you fly and an important part of this is according everyone else [pilots/crew/atc etc. ] the same consideration and respect you expect for yourself.
I recollect a few years ago in South America [Cali?] an American Airlines [I think!] Boeing 7*7 crashed after some confusion about where they were in relation to an airport. The crew were not working together as well as they should have been. Apparently, the previous week the crew had attended a CRM theory refresher course back in Stateside .
The culture of the air operator/country/crew all play a big part in determining if CRM/Airmanship are effectively and routinely utilised.

[jigsawjockey]

oh dear

Dear Sir Discretion, i suggest that if the commanders authority is being eroded, then it is down to the individuals fault, rather than the systems.
Surely a captain should have respect from his fellow workers because they appreciate the job he is doing, just as he or she appreciates the job everyone else, from the baggage handler to the SFO, is doing?
The moment Captains start to assume that they have God given rights to respect because of their position, is the moment that the system deservedly falls apart!
PS I'm writing this as a current Captain!

[fireflybob]

jigsawjockey, agree with your comments 100%.

It does, however, take two to tango, as they say. Just as the commander needs good communicatiion skills, the second in command also has to learn to do the same. Good commanders will make some allowance for this and coach their fellow colleagues in a non confrontational style.

Its all really a question of a bit of "give and take" by both parties. I am reminded by a comment from a highly respected CRM teacher (one of THE originals actually!) who said that the foundations for achieving the task (successfully) are laid when the task is NOT being worked on.

It's when the crew are not actually working at the job, as it were, when we have time to build rapport and find some common ground. Dare I say it but this might be over a drink at the bar or a meal at a restaurant etc or particpating in anything together which has nothing directly to do with the task. Given current lifestyles in many airlines this can be more difficult to achieve but its an area well worth working on and airline managements also have a key role in this area.

This is a highly chalenging area since we are dealing with human beings! Find out what yout employees are doing when they are NOT working and you will be amazed by their considerable skills and talents. It is just very sad that find that these creative skills are not encouraged at work due to the current culture. The companies that can capitalise on these skills and use peoples talents will be around for a lot longer than the other ones.

[Mowgli]

Good point Fireflybob - while many other industries send their people away on expensive courses to "team-build", we in the airline industry who have a tradition of social "interaction" have fewer opportunities to do this.

Has CRM gone too far? If we let it yes. As a facilitator myself, I try and encourage people to realise the importance of keeping the right balance on the flight deck - some may know it as the authority gradient. If we all strive for that then we should all be going the right distance CRM wise. i.e a young and low experience FO would be unprofessional if he/she was making the Capt feel that every decision was questionable. There are ways of making points: it is correct for an FO to ask a question if he/she feels concerned, but the tone and manner of the question is important so that "authority" is not questioned, but a point of airmanship is. I have never flown with an FO because I am one! I adjust my manner and bearing according to who I am flying with and the general situation of the flight, but at all times I try to behave in a manner which enhances the "correct" gradient. Some people are better at this than others, and no doubt there are times when people need to be put in their place. If a Capt needs to remind someone who's boss then that's fine by me - CRM isn't about being "fluffy" it's about getting the best out of people to ensure a safe operation. As FireflyB alluded to, it isn't going to be easy because you are dealing with people.

[buttline]

As a newly qualified FO going staight onto a medium jet I can definitely say that basic JAA training to fATPL does precious little to prepare you for the multi-crew environment.

Throughout basic training you do everything yourself - radios, nav, fly, plan make decisions. Whilst this is probably a good thing I definitely think there should be more of a bridge to the real multi-crew world. The MCC course doesn't quite cut it as it's usually 2 newly qualified pilots together for the course so the gradient is contrived / unrealistic. That goes for much of conversion training too.

I've asked the question of 'what are the qualities of a good FO' to most of the Training Capts I've encountered so far. Here are some of the responses I found helpful..

'Be supportive of the Captain'

'Make sure safety is your No 1 boss'

'Asking a question can be a better way of highlighting a potential problem than stating it in the first instance.'

'Be on time and come prepared always'

'Don't try to go for promotion by acting like the Captain. The best way to get promoted to Captain is to be a good FO.'

'Be aware of your issues as a person. If you have a tendancy to be abrassive or passive for example (we all have something), be aware of it and constantly compensate for it - keep looking in your personal mirror'.