Emir wrote:
I just say if it’s not defined, known and aligned
…and trained…
it doesn’t have any place in cockpit.
Maybe it works for the leisurely VFR flight, but IFR during phases with high workload, or when things go south, things can start breaking down.
Could a currently working airline (or other multi pilot cockpit) pilot post details of how it is done in that case?
it is a fun way of flying, much more relaxed then doing everything alone, but the clear pre-condition is that both of you know what they are doing and the tasks are clearly set.
Some of the things mentioned here are clear indications that some here do not do that or know how. Anyone who has worked in an airline environment or had the chance to regularly observe a crew at work will easily adapt to this relaxed but clear cut standard of work. Otherwise, work in a multi crew flight sim can help.
I found it came very easy to me to fly multi crew from the start as I had plenty of observer flights before going into my own multi crew experience. First MCC airplane I flew in command was the AN2, then I got plenty of introduction to MCC in different simulation projects plus some real life stuff too. Today I enjoy it tremendously and it is very natural both as PF and PNF and both as PIC or SIC.
It is one of those things that can work fine flying along in cruise chatting and sharing jobs. But in a high intensity situation, it can lead to important things being missed. Of course it is not rocket science (nothing in flying is -except I guess actual rocket science!) but to do it properly under pressure requires training.
I still think the replies leave this wide of the mark.
An experienced P1 in a light aircraft may say to his mate – would you like to look after the radio. I did just this with a mate of mine who is a training captain with BA, but hasnt flown light aircraft for years. It worked fine, he handled the radios and transponder for me and inevitably I monitored most of what he did – because well if you are accustom to doing everything yourself you just do. We both enjoyed ourselves, and he was less bored than he might otherwise have been. With his experience almost no brief was required, although we did cover a few things given that he hadnt flown VFR outside CAS in years for one of the legs.
Another person I fly with sometimes isnt a pilot, but likes dealing with frequency changes and the transponder. They take care of those functions brilliantly – never been an issue.
Of course there maybe high intensity situations where you prefer taking over all the functions – so do just that. It is a little like letting someone else fly the aircraft, if you dont like what is happening or there is a need – I have control.
I just find it very hard to imagine where the problems manifest themselves as I have never had any – maybe just lucky.
When I had an engine failure my mate was handling the radio and left him to continue doing so. We had a quick conversation, agreed what it was we were going to do, and got on with it. I guess if I felt the need to intevene with any of the radio calls I would have done so.
CRM in a commercial op is very different and I dont think we are comparing the same thing. Pilots have for ever as far as I am aware shared some aspects of flights together and I am simply not aware of all these potential pitfalls that some contributors seem to think arise. By its nature it is not a formal trained arrangement in the same way, its an allocation of often a simple or simple tasks which you continue to supervise, its not designed around the same challenge and response, or decision sharing, even if I am accustom when flying with another pilot to brief that if there is anything I do with which they are uncomfortable then please do let me know at the first convenient moment.
With apologies, but unless someone would like to convince me with specifics, I think we are trying to make something complicated which isnt, a trend that seems to be all to common these days.
loco wrote:
I share my plane with another guy and when we flew together we used to do radio for each other. That worked nicely until the day we got near a TS during descent for approach. Since I was doing the radio, I immediately asked for a heading change, but without confirming with PIC. PIC wanted a different heading, so I had to ask again. Then we were asked where we want to hold and again we had different ideas. Discussion ensued. It all lead to more confusion and further complications. From that time, I just sit quiet and speak only if asked when in RHS. As private pilots we’re not trained for that kind of cooperation.
.. .. .. btw I have just followed this example.
With respect, it seems to me its simple, the APIC (assistant PIC 
) requested a heading change and was working the radio, assuming it was a reasonable request go ahead and fly the new heading. I havent listened to the audio, but presumably it was something like 10 degree left to avoid weather – quite reasonable go ahead and fly it. If you dont like it tell the APIC straight away its your radio. I accept in the very few instances maybe rapid thinking is required and events are getting close to overtaking you, it may well be a good idea to take over the radio, but that would take place even in a commercial enviroment.
I also accept if there is one rule, it is to take over if the need arises, much as I said above “I have control” BEFORE this type of confusion becomes a more serious problem.
As to the discussion I dont think this really has anything to do with the topic. If you are flying with another pilot and there is a “problem” there may well be a discussion or not. Whether you have been sharing tasks in some way, doesnt change that. There will always be some pilots who want to express their view. How we handle that is a different topic and I would suggest doesnt arise from sharing tasks.I am not even sure it becomes more likely because of sharing tasks, in fact I think the reverse is true, another pilot sitting bored is far more likely to chip in with some bright idea about how things should be done 
Fuji_Abound wrote:
CRM in a commercial op is very different and I dont think we are comparing the same thing.I agree with you here. Task division is not the same thing as CRM. Two-pilot ops have always had task division, while CRM became widespread in the 80s.
JasonC wrote:
But in a high intensity situation, it can lead to important things being missed. Of course it is not rocket science (nothing in flying is -except I guess actual rocket science!) but to do it properly under pressure requires training.
That is true for single pilot as well and even more so.
In emergencies or unusual situations, the PIC has to define clearly what he is doing and what he wants his PNF to be doing, if they go away from the standard distribution of work. E.g.. :"I fly the airplane and handle the radio, you grab the emergency checklist and perform “xxx” " Clearly this requires getting used to and is better with training.
Also checklist work always has to be done in a closed loop fashion, particularly emergency checklists.
Multi Crew Training can be quite useful for that, also in an SEP but is often more than what is required. So far with all the pilots I’ve flown with, it came natural to us.
Wow.
A lot of people getting worked up over this! I wonder if those who claim tasks should not be share, might usually fly with non-pilot passengers? It might account for their different experiences. Or perhaps they usually fly on the autopilot, meaning that they have little to do themselves if they offload some task?
To explain my own position a bit more, I regularly fly with two different pilots at my club. We share many trips together. Our modus operandi is that the PIC handles the aircraft, and the other pilot operates the radio. At no time whatsoever is the pilot operating he radio authorised to make any decisions. Rather they act to get the PICs desired clearances etc. If some example ATC offer a choice or ask if we can accept something, then the PIC lets the second pilot know the answer before they reply to ATC. So the pilot operating the radio does not make any such decision.
What the PIC wants, is covered in a route briefing before departure, and updated along the way. At all times the PIC monitors what the other pilots is saying and doing. And there are occasions unusual but not rare, where it’s simply easier for the PIC to take over and negotiate directly with ATC rather than having to replay stuff between the pilot in the middle. If that’s the case, then we just do that. This can happen when ATC refuse a clearance but offer a different one, but that’s not acceptable for some other reason (perhaps weather) and some negotiation is required.
We also have a brief at the start about what the second pilot is to do in an emergency situation. For example, when I’m PIC, I’m always happy to offload the Mayday call to the second pilot in the event of an engine failure. That leaves me more time to concentrating on choosing a landing site, setting up the glide and attempting to restart the engine. The other pilot has more time to give a more accurate position report so that if I mess up, it’s likely we’ll be found sooner.
There really is nothing to go wrong with this. Sure the other pilot might mess up some radio call or they might get a clearance for something other than what you wanted and then have to go back and fix the misunderstanding. But so long as the PIC does their job and monitors everything, nothing bad can happen.
Maybe it works for the leisurely VFR flight, but IFR during phases with high workload, or when things go south, things can start breaking down.
That’s certainly not my experience. I don’t fly IFR, but VFR can get quite intense too. Especially so when the weather starts to close in and you need to do an unplanned diversion. In these situations having a second pilot who knows what they are doing and who you’re used to working with and whose judgement you trust can help immensely. Being able to fly in deteriorating weather, while asking the other pilot to get weather updates from ATC, or check which airfields around are suitable for a diversion if necessary, is incredibly useful and liberating. Especially so in an aircraft with no autopilot.
Certainly I will and do fly in more challenging conditions if flying with one of these pilots than I will if I’m on my own. I do this because I know I’ve move capability available….capability that I know and trust through experience. But at no time do I ever relinquish command or stop monitoring what the other pilot is doing.
As for Loco’s example
loco wrote:
That worked nicely until the day we got near a TS during descent for approach. Since I was doing the radio, I immediately asked for a heading change, but without confirming with PIC. PIC wanted a different heading, so I had to ask again. Then we were asked where we want to hold and again we had different ideas. Discussion ensued.
For those who aren’t used to flying with other pilots, it might not seem a normal way of flying. For many of us, it’s a very natural thing to do. So long as the PIC does their job and stays in command and monitors everything, there is little to go wrong. It’s really akin to turning on the autopilot and monitoring it. As Fuji says, the task of flying a light aircraft isn’t really complex.
For me it’s certainly being a positive experience and extremely useful when things start to go wrong. Of course I wouldn’t rely on having such help unless I knew the pilot well and have shared tasks with them previously in the past, so knew their attitude and how we worked together. But in conditions that I’m happy to fly without any help, I can’t see how any harm can come about. Worse case scenario I don’t like something they are saying/doing, so I just tell them “Things are getting a bit more difficult, so I’ll do that from now on.” and I’m back to doing it myself anyway.
Emir wrote:
Somebody will dial in the frequency instead of PF? Or pefrorm all communication, readbacks etc. and execute related actions? So if the other person does e.g. taxi readback where will I as PF find the instructions – at his notes or mine? If he reads back headings who sets heading bug and who confirms it’s set?
I can only speak for how I do this. All is agreed before and. In my case, the second pilot is in full control of the radio. They set the frequencies, do that radio calls and read backs. But I’m listening in the whole time, and I’m taking my own notes. So why do I find my notes? On my own kneeboard. If there is a difference between his notes and mine (rare but occasionally happens) then we check with ATC. I can and do sometimes make mistakes so this can be a ‘save’ that otherwise might have been lost. In my case they don’t set any headings or bugs. They have three instruments that they can touch. Radio, transponder and the second altimeter on their side of the aircraft. Anything else requires asking me first before touching it.
They often like to use the VOR and NDB for practice, which I don’t mind, as I navigate by GPS, but they always have to ask before touching those items.
It works quite well in my experience so long as it’s discussed beforehand and the PIC remains in command and monitors everything.
