>>When I originally posed my question about ACT /CRM in flight manuals, I
didn't realize that I had stopped short of the question that really needed to
be asked. There is definitely a place in flight manuals for CRM, and as
Greg Deen said in part on 9/12 ".... There is a lot of CRM in flight
manuals, it's just not labeled that way...". Because the Navy is just now
starting to develop a "formal" ACT (CRM) program, I do think we have a long
way to go before we have optimized our NATOPS to the concepts of CRM. But
the real question should have been: How do you make CRM as much of a living
entity in day to day operations as Flight manuals have become for the vast
majority of pilots?
Greg goes on to say, in part, ".. it turns my stomach to have people
think CRM is a separate and bounded entity which we turn off and on when the
training department thinks it's time...", And Tony Kern makes the point
that "...Military CRM is on the cusp of success or failure... "
Both of these comments drive right to the heart of effective CRM in the
military. How do you make it a living breathing way of life rather that
trying to implement another "program"? I suspect (for a number of reasons
not the least of which is the greater length of time that civil carriers have
been working on formalized CRM) that this problem is probably more endemic to
the military, and I agree with you Tony that we need an "out of the box"
focused effort to take us (the military) to the next step. Thanks for
helping me focus on what I should really be questioning.
Regards,
Mark Lagier
LCDR USN>>
Mark,
This comment may be a little off point, but at least I see a connection.
I recently had an interesting experience working on a new concept for
military CRM. A team of researchers measured the impact of certain CRM
behaviors on combat mission performance in the MC-130P aircraft. Our team
included the reaseachers, re ISD personnel, CRM developers, and highly
experienced aircrew instructor/evaluators. Our objective was to develop an
outline to lead in the creation of a new type of CRM capitalizing on the
reasearch data. Such a course would be one that is mission and weapon system e
mployment specific and integrated into the combat training for the weapon
system. Besides coming up with a new way of training CRM, we could also see
the eventual incorporation of CRM tools in the tactical manuals and technical
orders that are so much a part of an aviators library.
Greg Deen was right, CRM is not something that is apart from combat or combat
training, it is an essential ingredient of both. I recently heard one of the
most ridiculous comments about CRM that I have ever heard. It was made by a
senior program manager who should know better. He said, "We have moved our
CRM training out of the WSTs (weapon system trainers) to make room for more
combat training." I can only hope that his opinion is in the minority.
Dave Wilson
HTI