A breath of fresh air at last. One pilots view of CRM
 

"Why CRM Changes Nothing".

Flight International published the following letter in the 28 February-5 March issue.

"I am probably going to get murdered for this - but I must do it. Crew resource management (CRM) is a fraud.

I was an airline captain for 28 years, and only during the last five was I forced to spend - once a year - the most useless eight hours of my life. Did CRM change me? No. And did I learn anything? No. And all of my colleagues agree with me. CRM wastes money as well as the time of crews who should be flying instead of listening to some guy saying nothing of interest.

Does anyone really believe that a pilot who is rude, stubborn or prone to cause conflicts in a cockpit is going to modify his attitude because of CRM? And, if he is a captain, is he going to listen more to his first officer - and vice versa? Is the pilot who tends to cower going to become more assertive? No way.

Perhaps CRM will have some effect on five-year olds - but not on normal adults."

Ronald Neves.
............................................................ .............................................

I could not agree more. For this Ppruner, reading that letter was like a breath of fresh air. At last someone has the bottle to put in print, what so many pilots deep down, think is true - but risk getting howled down by the aficionados of CRM. Full marks to the writer and to the editor of Flight International for publishing it:ok:

If five annual eight-hour lectures/seminars are all this pilot has encountered CRM-wise, his view is not very astonishing IMHO (but not very convincing either).

As an ex QANTAS pilot once said to me, as we endured day three of a week long course, (albeit in a nice hotel in Penang!), "All CRM does is make stroppy FOs into even more stroppy FOs"!

Truthfully, I think it may encourage a timid FO to speak up and that is good, but I do agree with some of what Mr Neves says also.

A flying school manager colleague agreed fully with Ronald Neves's CRM letter. but told me his hands were tied by the regulator who has mandated CRM courses for those under their authority. He was being pragmatic when he said the spin-off was that CRM courses bring in much needed money to the flying school and that was the real bottom line. Someone once remarked that CRM was a cottage industry that pulls in millions of $ world wide.

My view of this subject is that you cant obviously change the mind of a captain who has been flying as long as 40 years without even knowing what crm could be. But it is possible to doctrinate new pilots into this topic so he will always fly understanding the purpose of the CRM.

pjac
 

I agree with Tee Emm however, the problem is, CRM is required as part of the operator's insurance coverage. Those on the CRM team are obviously in disagreement of any view that the process is useless. Some people are good communicators and some are not and in an aircrew/flight deck situation, the rank of captain-in-command, there will always be the potential of misadventure-by lack of communication, leadership and the failure on each crew member, to identify a problem or failure. Correct and sensible sessions of "LOFT" and similar, exercises, go further to addressing this/rather than CRM.

I hate that word "Doctrinate" 777BR, it is our ability to stay flexible that means so much.
Possibly, but unlikely. I would like to see the insurance agreement between underwriter and clients that stipulates this, maybe for a small operator but not for an airline.

Is CRM training in airline practice really still restricted to tedious classroom lectures? Just asking because IIRC in an article by Robert Helmreich, this kind of conveying CRM knowledge and skills was associated with the "first stage" of CRM training which was (understandably) disparaged by pilots, while newer teaching methods based on LOFT apparently are not only more informative but considerably more accepted by flight crews.

A more accurate description is "Brainwash". :ugh:

CRM isn't simply about addressing those with borderline personality problems, it is about assisting the rest of us to be as good as we can be in this discipline. We don't train every six months just for the benefit of those who only just meet the minimum standard, it is also for the more able to get even better.

Sounds like your CRM courses aren't being very well prepared/presented, and that's a shame, but it doesn't give cause to denounce the whole enterprise.

BTW I don't teach or manage CRM, and have no axe to grind, but I acknowledge that my interactions with others are sometimes well handled and other times could have been improved. Anyone who doesn't say the same of themselves REALLY needs CRM.

One day CRM classes may not be effective but the central tenets of CRM, or effective non technical skills are without doubt a major contribution to flight safety. Things like effective communication, shared SA, open decision making...
Anyone who thinks these things are not of value is misguided. We train these skills in the sim and they work.

Every bloody CRM module I ever done opened with the bloke
saying "write down the definition of Leadership". Used to just
drive me up the wall to the point where I used to invent the
definition with a skewed sexual theme. Stiff **** if the rabid
PCers didn't like it.

Some bits of CRM I found were useful - the CLEAR rule and in
problem-solving that the entire group is usually stronger than
the individual, but that's about it.

How many real captains need to learn about managing errors
or spend a boring whole afternoon on how to resolve conflicts
with a Purser who's having a period, or a little 200hr arrogant
wonderbrat?

CRM should be taught instead to the CEOs, beancounters and
other execs possessing PhDs and other useless degrees which
in no way gives them any bloody knowledge on how to run an
airline and its employees properly.

Not that it'd do any good.


PS - I believe Ron Neve was ex-AN.

The OP's reference is to a Ron Neves.

There was a Ron Neve in AN with whom I flew on quite a number of occasions on the Mouse and held in very high esteem. I suspect that the latter's view of CRM matters was/is probably a little more balanced than the former's.

As I recall the AN Ron skippered the first AN aircraft into DRW post- Tracey .. which, in turn, possibly means that the OP (who was amongst the first into DRW post-Tracey with another - non-airline - operator) and Ron had a yarn over a beer at the time ...

As a CRM ground instructor, I feel that some statements need clarification.

Very far from the truth. If your airline is still teaching such things please advise your Human Factors department to update the CRM syllabus as these teachings have been abolished years ago.

Threat & Error management is the order of the day and except for the initial course or OCC really don't see why one should waste time dwelling on subjects like Leadership (unless for an upgrade course) Communication or Fatigue etc etc.

One good module of TEM should suffice as it covers the whole spectrum of CRM. TEM should be supported with good case studies and a healthy class room discussion. My slides usually comprise of a photo or a maximum of 4 words and it's all to the individual. TEM just gives you the right tools for a safe flight and not the tools on how to fly the plane.

Add to the session some LOSA or FDM findings how one has one lively CRM session

Talked to a pilot who had undergone a TEM course. Part of the briefing was that lined up for take off in a twin jet he should say: The "Threat" is the runway. The runway is wet. I shall manage the threat by using normal take off thrust -not reduced thrust. The next "Threat" is Cb ahead on radar at 30 miles. I shall manage that threat by selecting the radar to the 80 mile range using 10 degrees tilt up. One airborne I shall further manage the "Threat" by asking you to call ATC for approval to track 10 miles to the left of the weather. Any questions?"

What a load of absolute codswallop. But all this went into the CVR which is just what the operator needed to arse cover. :mad:

T M...that's what I heard from a friend who works at Korean. During an audit flight, he was debriefed by an expat auditor that he did not articulate the " threats " as such, pre-takeoff! The sore point was that earlier during the take off briefing he had pedantically briefed about the weather, the runway surface conditions, higher flap selection, possible full thrust takeoff with V1 reduction if it rained heavily, yada, yada, yada. However since he did not reiterate those considerations during the busy pre-takeoff period, the auditor saw it fit to give him a mild dressing down!

IMHO, this CRM/TEM thingy really helps in empire building for some highly " inadequate " blokes.

CRM and TEM are great concepts which we should all endeavor to get to grips with, especially if it doesn't come naturally. But unfortunately I totally agree with the above quote.

These things are management skills, and management skills can only be effectively taught by well trained managers, of which there are very few in any business.

Well said Tee Emm but don't forget when the 200hr kid is the
threat.

"The landing will entail a 25kt crosswind and 8kt tailwind on a
short wet runway at MLW. For this reason I will take control of
the aircraft at a thousand feet AGL and you will revert to PNF
duties. Any questions?"

"But but.... its MY sector and I want the challenge!"

"You can do all yer bloody challenges with captains who want
to risk losing their job. Besides, what would be your actions if
the spoilers fail to deploy on touchdown?"

"...What?"

"If you did the landing what will you do if the spoilers fail to
deploy on touchdown?"

"Well um....ahh...I guess..."

"Exactly."

It sounds like a lot of people are getting the wrong type of training that is then compounded by it being badly applied by management for all the wrong reasons. When done well, by a good instructor, as part of a company wide safety programme that involves everyone from the management down it actually becomes something worth listening to.

One question I always like to know from pilots is how often does their safety department come back to them with feedback after they submit an occurrence report. Bad things happen to good people with the best of intentions, sharing them so others don't fall down the same hole is vital. If the training isn't relevant and applicable to the people being trained, why bother?

Slasher
 

Just for the record what happened next.....


glf