John Bent
At 08:36 AM 6/2/97 PST, you wrote:
>Hi, CRMers,
>
>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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>