You ask a very good question. Everyone who has an interest in the
development of CRM and human factors training to enhance aviation safety
is welcome to participate in these discussions. Perhaps the word has
not goten out to that part of the industry that these discussions are
available.
While we have several members who represent the flight attendant and
maintenance technician interests in these discussions, we have not been
successful in gaining consistent participation from a broader cross
section of the industry. We would love to have a much higher level of
participation from all members of the aviation community. To support
that, we have the ability to start additional discussion lists if it
would be useful for the various team positions to have dedicated
discussion areas.
Hollywood producer and director Woody Allen once said that 80 percent of
success is showing up. I'm sure that if we can get enough flight
attendants and maintenance technicians to show up here, that we will be
even more successful.
Best regards,
Neil Krey
neilkrey_at_mail.airmail.net
http://web2.airmail.net/neilkrey/
-----Original Message-----
From: Elliott, Kim <Kim_Elliott_at_sterling.com>
To: 'crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu' <crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu>
Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 9:00 AM
Subject: RE: FMS Programming Duties
>
>Why do you folks not include professional flight attendants in your
>conversations? We are trying to make corporate aviation safer.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Larry Steele [mailto:lksteele_at_ibm.net]
>> Sent: Friday, June 19, 1998 12:07 AM
>> To: 'CRM Developers'
>> Subject: FMS Programming Duties
>>
>> All,
>>
>> In searching for improvements to our flightdeck management, the
>> question of FMS programming duties has come up. In our flight
>> department ( a larger corporate flight department) our practices
allow
>> considerable flexibility in which pilot programs the FMS. Exploiting
>> the fact that we are a small, stable group of pilots and our
>> automation "learning curve" demand has been gradual, we have been
>> satisfied with our traditional methods. However, we are moving
towards
>> a mixed fleet of aircraft with different automation systems and at
the
>> same time hiring new people and losing our experienced pilots. Many
of
>> us are cross-qualified.
>>
>> We feel that our operating environment is changing significantly and
>> what worked for us in the past may not be the best in the future.
>>
>> We are becoming aware that some operators specifically divide FMS
>> programming duties between "flying" and "non-flying" pilot. For
>> example, the flying pilot requests a specific FMS configuration and
>> the non-flying pilot does the programming. We understand that some
>> operators allow flexibility above 10,000 AGL, but are strict in the
>> division of duties below this altitude.
>>
>> We are looking for information on what practices operators are using,
>> the data driving these practices, and how they are working on the
>> line. An underling concern is if behavior changes are necessary that
>> the effort will be successful. Not the best SOPs except that many
>> can't change that dramatically or quickly. I know that many on the
>> list are not directly connected with specific operators. So the
>> questions are: What do you promote? What drives your thinking?, and,
>> When you take the horses to the water do they drink?
>>
>> For the record, we will be operating:
>>
>> Canadair Challengers - Collins FMS
>> Gulfstream I-IV - Sperry FMS
>> Boeing 737 Business Jet( 737NG) - Smith Industries FMS
>>
>>
>>
>> I have not seen this topic come up so maybe this will turn into a
good
>> thread.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Larry Steele
>