Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Are GA flights with multiple pilots more dangerous than single-pilot flights?

I’ve become PIc on a few flights when the low-hours syndicate member handed me control. I have said “I have control” as the aircraft developed an increasing PIO, or, on two occasions, left the runway.
Our Jodel syndicate includes an instructor at present, previously had an examiner, and earlier an instructor.
I always have my biennial “flight with an instructor” in a school plane. It avoids problems.
My last “one- hour- with-instructor” was in a Pa38 with the instructor who shares the Jodel. I’ve far more Jodel hours than him.
Flying with fellow part-owners, if they’re unhappy with the weather, I’d usually divert/turn back.

Maoraigh
EGPE, United Kingdom

Doesn’t the captain “own” the whole decision, in the legal sense, always? Even if PNF (pilot not flying). In GA you don’t have the PF and PNF concept so you have the PIC and he should “own” the whole decision.

It seems to me that the common issue is that the PIC (and I am sure that the PIC virtually always knows perfectly well who is the PIC) derogates his responsibility to a passenger (a non-PIC PPL) who seems (or is) much more experienced. Or is just more assertive; a lot of syndicates suffer from assertive individuals on the ground and one would expect this to carry through into the cockpit.

This would also be more likely to happen to fresh PPL holders because they have just spent some 50-60 hours sitting next to a “passenger” who was the PIC. Accordingly, many pilots start to screw up badly when they have an instructor as a passenger. Happens to me, too, at 2400+hrs, and I have to consciously force myself to disregard who the passenger is.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

There is something in CRM training called “ risky shift “ and it refers to the likelihood of a committee to make a more risky decision than an individual, presumably because no one individual owns the whole decision.

As a captain of a jet airliner I don’t ignore anyone on the crew, even the most junior cabin crew members input is welcome as it all helps with keeping the big picture.

Last Edited by A_and_C at 02 Jun 17:07

At a bit of a tangent, this interesting BBC radio 4 programme from a couple of years ago shows how a lot of hierarchy problems in commercial aviation (captain ignores 1st officer, who ignores cabin crew, who ignore passengers: wrong engine shut down) have been addressed, but are also present in medicine (surgeon ignores doctor, who ignores nurse, who ignores patient: wrong hand operated on); and how the medical profession are introducing checklists and set phraseology.

I know of one crash that essentially had two passengers on board, i.e. both pilots thought the other was in command. Communication is the answer. Easier to say than to do though. Agreeing roles before the flight (“I’ll navigate, you fly”), following standard procedure (I tend to rush the checklist when there’s another pilot on board), not being afraid to speak up (I don’t think this is a good idea…“), posing questions and suggestions in a positive non-confrontational manner (”James, I think we should…").

EGHO-LFQF-KCLW, United Kingdom

I think the problem can be that together, each one feel they can handle more than they can alone. This may or may not be true depending on the situation. I think the end result is more risky choices are made. More risky than any of the individuals would make when flying alone. This includes fuel and weather also.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Multicrew is a complex affair.
People delegate responsibility and thus rely on others. Group of 5 looking at a derelict bridge: „I’m sure one of the others would say if it is unsafe to cross“. If all 5 think like that it’s a problem. If one of the 5 is in command of and responsible for the group the risk is less prone to be shared.

Two pilots are an advantage (two sets of eyes, traffic lookout, point out any deviations), but only one can be PIC. He should take the other Pilot‘s opinion into consideration but always remember that he is ultimately responsible.

always learning
LO__, Austria

We tend to defer to people with more experience / qualifications / training – for a reason – they are usually better. However, as with any rule, this is not always the case. With maturity, we also learn to speak up and are prepared to express our own view. Working together is complex, and there can be occasions where the “junior” pilot defers to the more “experienced” pilot with disasterous consequences, and there are lots of occasions the more experiened pilot literally saves the day. Of course we love to talk about the first scenario, but the second hardly gets a mention.

Some instructors may indeed not go very far, but many fly almost every day, they can and do have a breadth of experience that is exceptional, combined with well honed fly skills. I think the average pilot should be cautious about underestimating the skills of many instructors, and I think the combination of two pilots working through a challenging situation, can often result in a better result than not. I also think that on occasions a much more experienced pilot / instructor will effectively mentor a less experienced pilot taking on a flight they would not otherwise do. It is very easy to critcize the mentor, but we all learn by taking on new challenges.

Whether in this case the flight was unreasonable and whether weather was a factor I have no idea. All the speculation is most interesting (as always), but it is just that, at the moment, speculation.

Good point. I only fly with pilots I have known a while unless receiving instruction or test

It depends on the pilots. In an emergency two may be safer. Also a pilot-rated passenger can warn if you are going beyond his personal risk limit. And an extra pair of eyes to draw your attention to relevant things, such as other aircraft, or fluctuations in oil pressure.

Maoraigh
EGPE, United Kingdom

Properly briefed, a second pilot is a very valuable asset even in a small GA plane without formal CRM-procedures. The second set of eyes, the ability to assign tasks without having to explain them and also the chance to discuss decisions before and during the flight can make a difference in many situations.

However I fully agree that decisionmaking can degrade quickly to a mutual, unspoken assumption “well, he doesn’t object, so it must be OK”. The cockpit gradient is not so much the issue, because most inexperienced pilots will openly defer to the more experienced ones, and most of the latter will also assume responsibility if needed.
I think the critical cases are asymmetric backgrounds, like a pilot with many hours TT and little experience on the type of airplane or in the specific operation flying with e.g. an inexperieced airplane owner of a capable airplane tackling some weather.

Remedies:
- Nothing will be assumed, concerns and suggestions are encouraged to be voiced openly
- Critical decisions are made together
- If opinions differ, the more conservative approach will be used (no matter who is PIC)

Would be interesting to see if accident statistics support my assumption that a second pilot really reduces risk.

Friedrichshafen EDNY
12 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top