some of the worst Bizjet skippers I have flown with have been those with thousands of hours of single pilot time and an attitude to match.
Are you RHS in a 737/Airbus, Josh?
Since nobody is going to knowingly employ a pilot who has problems dealing with other people, what you say you found could be simply due to “occupational self-selection”, which is a problem in most jobs… If somebody is doing dodgy AOC work then most applicants will be dodgy pilots. And we could all make a huge long list of unpleasant examples of occupational character profile self-selection… and not just in paid jobs; some of the worst are in volunteer organisations.
Peter wrote:
some of the worst are in volunteer organisations
like French aeroclubs and homeowner’s associations… Pfeeew!
JasonC wrote:
Of course. My point is that it is not intuitive for someone used to single pilot ops
Actually it is, in my experience (it may have to do with being rather low hours).
PPL school isn’t that long ago and back then, in the beginning my FI used to do radio. So I actually LEARNED it this way and only later transitioned to doing all alone. So I feel I can do both easily. In the three years since then, I’ve occasionally given the communication task to other pilot passengers, or to instructors for example when training on a new type. It made sense, e.g. in the C182, to focus on flying a good circuit rather than communicating.
The disclaimer is that this only applies to the rather clear-cut “you take care of communication” split. While I would also value input from others (pilot or non-pilot passengers), I agree with others here that it should be made very clear during pre-flight who will be the decision-making instance on this flight…
I find interpreting “sterile cockpit” as “all shut up under any circumstances” a rather dangerous practice, as has been shown by several examples here.
In a commerical environment, task sharing can be complicated by the fact that you are likely to be flying with a different crew member each day.
One advantage for PPLs is that they probably don’t fly with more than 2 other PPLs. So they have plenty of time to get used to one another and understand each others skills and weaknesses, and get used to clearly dividing up the tasks.
But as has been mentioned already, I think it’s really about clearly defining the roles and who is PIC, before the engine is even started.
Since nobody is going to knowingly employ a pilot who has problems dealing with other people
You would be surprised. One of my very close friends is a senior training captian with one of the largest global airlines.
His stories are fascinating, and you would be surprised how often there are what might best be described as quite lively debates on the flight deck when there are questions over a particular process. I suspect part of the problem is their is a huge experience gap these days between the 50+ year old pilot that has grown up the “old” way and the new fledgling not long out of Oxford training full of theory, but little real world experience.
Another friend in a similiar role recently retired can recount numerous occasions which usually started with an “unusual” instruction, when the well rehearsed plan has gone totally pear shaped and the day is saved by the captain salvaging a very dangerous situation. The ability to think outside the box I suspect can only be honed by experience.
I think that is the real danger of two pilots of similiar experience level attempting to work together in the cockpit and why that isnt even a good idea in GA. The trouble is there isnt the experience in either, for either to say, stop, think, lets have a look at that again, its either I am the PIC, I know what I am doing, or a certain about of democratic fumbling around with neither doing anything helpful.
Patrick wrote:
I find interpreting “sterile cockpit” as “all shut up under any circumstances” a rather dangerous practice, as has been shown by several examples here.
That is not what the sterile cockpit concept is about.
It’s about concentrating professionally on the job and not having distracting and irrelevant conversations at critical periods. There is lots of communication between pilots at all stages of flight, just not “what did you do at the weekend?” as you taxy out.
In the days when this was still possible, I’ve spent a lot of time in different flight decks of lagre airliners. The range of CRM on those was quite wide.
I’ve seen small airlines where everyone knew everyone, we were a close knit community and atmosphere in the cockpit was very open and easy going. Everyone knew what everyone else was like, how they were doing their things and what to expect. We had procedures and they were followed by 2nd nature, nobody really had to think about them. Very relaxed, genuine and good feeling. I was there for two irregularities (1 IFSD after bird strike, 1 battery overheat) which were dealt with swiftly and safely.
I’ve seen major carriers with several thousand crew members where people knew each other at best from afar. There, procedure, wording, e.t.c. was the key to the possibility of everyone working together seamlessly, everyone was in the same movie. Yet atmosphere was still very relaxed, very second nature.
I’ve seen commuters where adherence to EXAKT wording, EXACT doctrine and EXACT procedure was paramount, where people were reprimanded for a wrong word, for a ever so slight deviation in everything. Procedures were not second nature, but drilled in even during everyday ops. This had to do with a lot of change in the crew composition, people came, stayed a year or two and went on for bigger and better stuff.
The guys I trained with recently come from a realtively small but well established airline, which I would classify between the first and second sample. Very nice to fly with, very good folks and people who bring CRM into a training flight again by 2nd nature. After flying with these, flying with similarily trained SEP’s was 2nd nature again.
For the usual PPL’s who are trained by folks who have no idea of MCC and CRM, whose FI’s are club FI’s and “drillmasters” and where every flight is an “examination”, I can well imagine that CRM does not come easy. It is a matter of mutual trust. A very good idea if you plan to fly with someone regularly and want to implement some sort of CRM is to sit together with someone who does this for a living and work out the way you work together. If you want, treat yourself to fly in an A320 sim or something similar, get the idea how working together in a flight deck works and then implement the same strategies in your SEP cockpit. It can be a lot of fun and make up for very relaxed flying.
For spouses without licenses, suggest a Pinch Hitter with someone they know, respect and like, preferrably also someone with MCC experience. Once they get the hang of the basic stuff, the airplane becomes more than just a collection of scary instruments and shaky engines, they can become much more comfortable and at ease and can actually contribute to your flight by taking over certain tasks as well on the ground as well as in the air. I find that this helps a lot of getting such people on board and helps them enjoy the flight.
chrisparker wrote:
Patrick wrote: I find interpreting “sterile cockpit” as “all shut up under any circumstances” a rather dangerous practice, as has been shown by several examples here.That is not what the sterile cockpit concept is about.
Chris, I understand that and I agree. But after this has been explained on this thread for the first time, the original poster who brought it up insisted that he teach his passengers the concept of a “sterile cockpit” as “when I raise my hands, you folks zip it”. I was pointing up that I find that “simplification” dangerous and even passengers should not be told to keep it to themselves if they see something (like an airplane you’re about to collide with) that they find important for the safety of the flight. Of course it’s harder to judge for them what is important and they might tell you irrelevant stuff, but it’s easy to discard that in a friendly manner. Even on approach.
Odd this thread has wandered into mutli-crew cockpit management from the original – single-pilot cockpit management. The presumption that somehow a single-pilot cockpit needs to be managed in the same way as multi-crew is absurd. Or that the skills and training for multi-crew are less likely to be achieved by a pilot who has single-pilot experience.
The whole point being the PIC in single-pilot mode is the sole and only responsible person for the flight. Sharing PIC responsibiloity in a single-pilot situation is not appropriate.
Currency in VFR for example is required to make sure the PIC can fly safely when others are on board. You go up ALONE and you manage the entire plane ALONE. And for IFR currency the ‘safety pilot’ is not there to share the load but to observe only. For those who seem ready to relingquish control and/or are not able to ensure that the cockpit is manageable by a single person when flying GA aircraft are missing this critical point, IMHO.
There was a major disaster at SFO a couple of years ago when a Korean crew got into an argument on approach and no one took responsiblity for flying the plane to touchdown. The plane hit a seawall and disintegrated on the runway. The NTSB found that the “Mismanagement of Approach and Inadequate Monitoring of Airspeed Led to Crash of Asiana flight 214” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214
USFlyer wrote:
For those who seem ready to relingquish control and/or are not able to ensure that the cockpit is manageable by a single person when flying GA aircraft are missing this critical point, IMHO.
I can only speak for myself, but from what I’ve read, nobody is suggesting to relinquish control in a single-pilot operation.
However, the notion is that as PIC (regardless how many crew there may be), you should be in a confident position to take in all available information that is relevant to the save conduct of the flight. If that information so happens to come from an attentive passenger (with a pilot license or not), that should be no reason to disregard that information.
Asking people to categorically shut-up could lead them to hold back information which might proof helpful to you. Even single pilots may from time to time make mistakes.
