I have been lurking in the background and reading the opinions on CRM for
months now, and finally had to stick my head up and contribute to the discussion. I agree with Vince and Tony 100% when they say we have to go
back to basics.
I have been a CFI and Pilot Examiner for more years than I care to think
about, and I believe that good judgement, pilot skills and situational awareness are best taught and learned at ground zero level. I can only
speak to general aviation, as that is where my experience lies, but I
got out of the pilot examination business after 20 years when I found
the skill level of GA pilots was decreasing over the years rather than
increasing. Please recognize I'm not being negative, I'm stating facts
as I perceived them.
In general aviation and in the universities, a youngster can major in
"Aeronautical Technology" or some other "Pilot Course" and get all the
certificates and a degree so some airline requirements are met.
Qualifications yes, real world experience, NO. To be blunt, many CFIs
today are amateurs teaching amateurs to be amateurs. The majority are
brand new to aviation themselves, and are building time until they can
get the magic airline job with the commuters to build their experience,
and then on to the nationals. How many "Airline Training Universities"
are there who hire their graduates as instructors to teach the next generation of students. It is a closed loop. I am not denigrating the system
that birthed me, I'm speaking the truth.
If you examine the GA accident rates, you'll see that there are a lot of
"Fender Benders" or in the words of the NTSB, "Pilot failed to maintain
directional control." The reason for this,IMHO, is the instructor didn't
teach the basic airmanship that was required to correct the situation the
pilot found themselves in.(In many cases the instructor wouldn't have the
experience or the ability themselves.) I found the vast majority of
applicants (in my 5000 + flight tests administered) were terrified to
fly the airplane at minimum controllable airspeed. Why? I found the
applicants who lost control during their flight test would invariably
spin to the left in a "take off and departure stall" ( power on stall).
I can't remember any that spun to the right! I found that placing a
tricycle gear pilot in a tail wheel airplane for a check out was a life
threatening experience. Invariably I'd have to take over to maintain
directional control, and was amused by the comments of the trainee,
"It's going left!" (A comment ON the situation, instead of controlling
the situation!) The commonality in all these scenarios is failure to use
the rudder to maintain control on the vertical axis. My question, which
states the obvious would be, "Why are you surprised when the airplane
yaws left in a nose high pitch attitude?" "Why are you surprised when
the airplane pitches down and yaws right when power is reduced? Why
would you not anticipate this reaction?" At gut level, isn't this
situational awareness?
If a student is not shown all aspects of airmanship, they must learn them
on their own, and the programming can be terribly flawed.
We fail to what we first learned. (or didn't learn) The laws of Primacy
and Exercise rule. In computers we say GIGO (Garbage in, Garbage out)
You play the way you are trained. You'll fly the plane like you fly the
Sim. FIFO (First in, First out)
I don't have the answers, but I firmly believe that situational awareness
is the key to this discussion, and until we TRAIN FOR REAL WORLD EVENTS,
there will always be problems. Until we return personal accountability and responsibility to the individual, we will continue to be surprised by
the results we are getting.
I don't believe there can be CRM or CLR or TQM or whatever acronym we use
until the an individual takes complete responsibility for their actions.
Instead of ignorant enthusiasm, wouldn't it be best to have them be able
to realize that the most important thing is the next thing, and the thing
after that? And in the middle of all this confusion, to remember to fly
the airplane. If flying the airplane was paramount, crashing it would be
abhorrent. Where have we lost sight of the priorities?
Since I've dealt with PIC applicants for all these years, and you guys
deal with teams, I offer these old sayings for your perusal: "A chain is
only as strong as the weakest link." and "For want of a nail, the shoe
was lost, for want of a shoe, the horse was lost, for want of a horse,
the man was lost, etc."
Enough for now, thanks for the ears, and Stay in Condition Yellow!
//Chas Harral
Harral Institute, Inc
chasharral_at_juno.com