I wonder if much of the argument over the applicability of 163 is really
rooted in the differences in the target audiences.
I have found that the real key to using 163 is, like media selection for
any training program, the target audience and target environment. Like
several others in this forum, I too have seen the Mystery of Flight 163
turn to the Misery of Flight 163 with flight crews. The urge to dismiss it
is too great for many crew members, for the very real and valid reasons
already noted. HOWEVER, I do use the tape with NON-FLYING crews, and it
works excellent. I attribute this difference to environmental familiarity
(or lack of it). Just as in the Star Trek clips, the audience only knows
what the sequence has told them - non-flying audiences cannot evaluate the
technical aspects or plausibility of the 163 sequence very easily. This
environmental separation makes it easier in some cases to focus only on the
human elements of the sequence - which is the desired focus in our case.
163 does not require prior piloting knowledge to understand what is
happening, or for the audience to maintain its "situation awareness".
Conversely, programs like Tiger 66 - with only approach plates and CVR -
can be totally lost on non-flying audiences.
The separation factor is apparent when the tape is running: both groups
start off with laughter at Larry, Curly, and Moe, but as the situation gets
worst the flying crews can emotionally reject the sequence and start to
separate themselves from it, where as the non-flying crews usually hang in
until the end. The non-flying crews react with shock and disbelief at the
end, but it is a "wonderment" disbelief, not a dismissive disbelief. Once
the environmental factors are mitigated, the tape is rich with material for
discussion.
If there is eventually a "criteria for evaluating training resources for
specific CRM applications" as Rick Heybroek thoughtfully suggests, it would
need to include these types of target environmental factors, or make the
assumption that the criteria is only for flying applications of CRM.
Best Regards,
Lark
-----Original Message-----
From: CRMDEEN_at_aol.com [SMTP:CRMDEEN_at_aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 1997 5:43 PM
To: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
Subject: Touche'
I thank Julian Hipwell of Cathay Pacific for reminding me of what I
said; videos should be used to illustrate a point, and there is danger in
hoping a video will stand on it's own merit. Saudia 163 should not be
shown
for "entertainment", but it does depict a captain who becomes incapacitated
due to task saturation (and confusion).
This introduces a question I've started asking some students--what is
the job of the copilot? Our crews have several people who are not pilot
skilled, and it's interesting that the copilots aren't sure what is
expected
of them, but the non-pilots do have a very clear answer to what the purpose
of the copilot is.
As anyone in the group, particularly those dealing with other than
two-pilot crews, asked this?
What is the duty, and task, of the copilot?
The next question will be, are we training and evaluating that task?
Thanks Julian, point taken.
Greg Deen
HTI