CRM Applications
Bob Upham (uppie_at_emirates.net.ae)
Mon, 28 Oct 1996 15:03:36 +-400
I have been reading the correspondence in this discussion group with =
great interest. Congratulations to those who started the process.
We have several areas of interest where we may be able to contribute a =
little and ask a lot.
Maintenance CRM
We have just had a visit by Prof Jim Reason that has stimulated =
significant interest in areas of the company that had not previously =
paid serious attention to Human Factors, especially Maintenance. Has =
anyone done, or have any information about, a needs analysis for =
maintenance CRM?=20
I can recommend a visit of this nature as a means of alerting management =
to their responsibilities, and increasing the interest level enormously.
LOFT
The process of instructor training is just beginning, and I imagine that =
we will make the same old mistakes, but in the unlikely event that we =
uncover any exciting new insights, we will pass them on. I note with =
extreme interest Vince Mancuso's reference to the training video based =
on Dr. Key Dismukes work, and would love to talk to you about it if you =
are still attending the FSF meeting here in November.
Applied CRM
Have recently read Vince Mancuso's paper presented at the ICAO =
conference in Auckland on "Moving from Theory to Practice". and note the =
comments in one of his earlier messages regarding practical applications =
of CRM. Whereas Vince's paper concentrates mainly on the macro =
environment, we recently were fortunate to have a demonstration of such =
a practical application of CRM to specific cockpit procedures, in our =
Boeing 777 Sim.=20
A fleet captain form an airline in this region of the world, who was not =
endorsed on the 777, and had flown only one previous circuit, was able =
to successfully handle two relatively serious emergencies to a =
satisfactory, and extremely professional, conclusion using the model =
they had developed for managing abnormal situations. The procedure =
resulted from a dissatisfaction with the results of their LOFT training =
- they felt that they could achieve more - and has been applied in =
serious situations on the line, with feedback from the Captains involved =
to the effect that "it took the stress out of it".
This airline had looked at the CRM principles and built a checklist for =
crews to follow in any abnormal situation. The essence of it is three =
phases, Assessment, Action and Management. In the various phases control =
is transferred so that in the assessment the Captain is usually the =
PNF, during the actioning of the checklist he is PF and in the =
management phase he is PNF again. It sounds clumsy, but in practice it =
worked very smoothly. What they also found was that the "good guys" were =
pretty much doing it this way, but that it provided a very useful =
structure for the weaker members of the airline.
The assessment phase is for the captain to identify the precise problem, =
and is sort of an enforced period of "sitting on hands". The Action =
phase is the execution of the appropriate checklists, and the Management =
phase is the ongoing ramifications, with guidance given as to the areas =
of Task, Group and Individual needs that should be considered before =
coming to a decision.
Some of the areas that the company looked at were as follows:
Authority Gradient
This airline uses the captain as PF during the action phase because they =
felt he was in a far better position to slow or stop the checklist if =
the loop was falling down, or if their was a higher priority task to =
complete. Tests in the this airline's simulator showed that when the FO =
carried out the abnormal check list, it was done a lot more slowly and =
methodically than when the captain did it. Also, items omitted for =
experimental purposes were not picked up when the FO was monitoring, but =
were in the reverse situation. This rather supports the hypothesis that =
the captain can maintain far better control when the FO is executing the =
checks, rather than the other way around.
Workload Management
This airline has attempted to define a desirable peak workload and =
examined the workload of both crew members at all stages of the =
operation, from pre start to shutdown, and then attempted to =
redistribute required tasks from areas of peak load to times when the =
load is below the desired maximum. Load distribution between crew =
members was also examined to identify areas of peak load for one crew =
member that coincided with low load for the other, and redistribute =
accordingly.
A great deal of the emphasis in the company's procedures, and in the =
abnormal situation in particular, is placed on unloading the Captain so =
that he is in a position to manage and monitor the situation.=20
Teamwork
The procedure allows the captain to stop the check at any time so that =
other tasks can be completed with both pilots in the loop. There is also =
the requirement to ensure that one pilot's actions are communicated to =
the other.
Stress Mitigation
There are, of course, rare situations where a rapid return to the ground =
is essential for the safety of the aircraft, but generally the crew that =
handles an abnormal situation systematically and methodically will =
generally do a better job. Any rush will be manifested in increased =
stress levels, which will possibly be beyond coping limits, resulting in =
poor decision making and increased risk to all on board. The effect of =
this procedure is to take out the rush, share the work and thus reduce =
the levels of acute stress.
Prioritisation
The model forces a systematic approach to any abnormal situation, and =
imposes a predetermined structure which is familiar to all crew members. =
The model forces an assessment prior to any decision making, which =
substantially reduces the chances of solving the wrong problem, or =
rushing to a decision in the absence of all the facts, and thus =
committing to a course of action that may be completely inappropriate.
Situational Awareness
There is a very clear requirement for each pilot to monitor the flight =
path and the other pilot, and also a responsibility for each to keep the =
other "in the loop" by appropriate communication. Awareness of the =
"Safety Window" is also important in this airline, and crews are =
encouraged to remain outside the window when carrying out abnormal or =
emergency procedures, and only re-enter when the aircraft is ready for =
approach.
Unfortunately I have been intentionally vague and discussed general =
principles only, as it is not my procedure and I am uncertain as to how =
far the guys who wrote it want it distributed. If there is sufficient =
interest expressed I will consult with the designers as to the best way =
of circulating it and giving credit where it is due.
Regards to all
Bob Upham
CRM Coordinator, Emirates.