Demonstrating CRM Significance in Aviation - Essay Example

Emergence of Crew Resource Management (CRM) and Its Contribution to Safe Flight Name: University: Date: Emergence of Crew Resource Management (CRM) and Its Contribution to Safe Flight Abstract Aviation is a multifaceted environment that is critical to safety wherein an inappropriate action may result in major consequences. Without a doubt, nearly 80 per cent of aviation accidents are caused by human errors; therefore, Crew Resource Management (CRM) is a crucial measure that is used to reduce the likelihood of errors and in so doing, improving flight safety. The purpose of this paper is generally analyzing Crew Resource Management and using examples of good and bad CRM to exhibit its importance. For instance, U.S. Airways flight 1549 crash landing exhibited how CRM can significantly contribute toward preventing accidents attributed to pilot errors; whereby lives were saved. On the contrary, Air France Flight 447 tragedy exhibited hot failure to adhere to Crew Resource Management can lead to a fatal crash. Therefore, such accidents have been analyzed in this paper with the intention of demonstrating CRM significance in aviation. Introduction Basically, the aviation industry is a global undertaking wherein partakers from different backgrounds have to successfully interact so as to reduce the existing risks. In aviation industry, there is a mixture of nationalities, ethnicities as well as cultures, which normally result in circumstances wherein miscommunication and misunderstanding can occur easily (Flight Safety Foundation, 2010). Even though miscommunications are normally harmless, Helmreich (2000) posits that failure to work as a team poses an enormous threat to safety in the aviation, especially if the task at hand needs a coordinated response. For this reason, CRM was developed with the purpose of promoting coordination in the aviation team as well as overcoming inconsistencies in expectations and background that can create barriers to effective teamwork. The essay seeks to demonstrate the importance of CRM by focusing on good (U.S. Airways flight 1549) and bad CRM (Air France Flight 447). Body of essay Emergence of CRM Three decades ago, Hagen (2013) posits that the aviation industry came to realize that the majority of airline disasters and errors were not caused by technical problems, but mainly by poor communication as evidenced by the US Air Force Inspector General’s 1951 report. Teamwork training programs as suggested by the report was the only way of solving this problem. In spite of the evidence provided by the report, it took almost three decades for the proposal to be revisited; eventually leading to a set of air safety training procedures referred as the first Crew Resource Management. Before the introduction of CRM, the captain had all authority in the cockpit and his decisions and questions could not be questioned by the cabin crew (Baron, 1997). In view of this, Crew Resource Management can be defined as a tactical and flexible method for generally optimizing human performance as well as improving safety by identifying the main human factors that result in errors (Wagener & Ison, 2014). At first, CRM focused mainly on the flight crew, but contemporary CRM training courses are normally carried out collectively amongst cabin crew and pilots and at times the ground staff such as maintenance technicians and dispatchers are included. This was after realizing that safety relied not only on the pilots’ actions, but also through coordination of all people involved in the system. Furthermore, it was established that a joint CRM training for the crews (cabin and flight) improved the cooperation and understanding level for the whole team. Bearing in mind that there are some situations whereby the cabin crew help to flight crew can help avert a looming accident. Currently, commercial air transport is considered as the safest means of transporting people and goods from one place to another. This is so because fatal accidents in aviation industry per mile are very low. In spite of this, the aviation industry is suffering from a high potential of losing many lives when an accident occurs. A number of scholars such as Gaur (2005) hold the view that nearly 80 per cent of commercial air transport accidents are caused by human error; however, they have failed to recognize that humans are just part of the broader environment since they have to interact with a number of components such as social systems, technology, and so forth. Still, humans are the main cause of almost all accidents since they eventually design and interact with every component of the broader environment. Air carriers were introduced with the purpose of transporting people as well as goods safely from one point to another. According to Helmreich (2000), managing threat and risk is crucial for safety management; for this reason, a number of aviation systems exist with the purpose of managing risk. Contemporary CRM concentrates on managing every available resource with the goal of reducing error by involving all specialists in the aviation such as pilots, cabin crewmembers, air traffic controllers, dispatchers and maintenance technicians. All this is achieved through awareness, teamwork, goal setting, and reactive feedback. These days, aviation regulatory institutions such as Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and others have made CRM training a mandatory practice; thus, CRM is nowadays an essential part of aviation operations, especially for commercial airlines. For this reason, CRM successful application in aviation industry has is widely acknowledged and related training techniques are currently applied widely different high risk industries such as maritime, fire department and medicine. Example of an Accident Where Good CRM Has Been Demonstrated On 15th January, 2009, shortly after taking off from the LaGuardia Airport, the US Airways flight 1549 passed through a flock of birds.  As a result, the engines were struck by the birds resulting in a total loss of the thrust. For this reason, the air crew were forced to land in the Hudson River 13.6 kilometres from LaGuardia Airport (Eisen & Savel, 2009).  Luckily, no fatalities were recorded and only four people were injured (a flight attendant and three passengers). With a flight time of 19,000 hours, Captain Chesley Sullenberger used his experience and training to make wise decisions that saved lives. Captain Sullenberger in less than three minutes asked for permission to go back to LaGuardia, which is a normal procedure; carried out the engine restart procedure, but the engines failed to restart (a number of attempts could have led to the similar result and there was no adequate time); since he wanted to avoid LaGuardia because it is densely populated, he inquired for alternative airport and the closest was in New Jersey; finally, he decided to ditch the aircraft in the Hudson River. The decision to land in the Hudson River is considered heroic successful and one that saved all lives on-board. All this was achieved through teamwork since Captain Sullenberger’s co-pilot offered altitude and airspeed readings for Sullenberger to successfully move the aircraft smoothly into the river. The Captain mentioned that CRM training had mentally prepared him for such situation. CRM is currently used widely in civilian and military aviation across the globe with the key purpose of training the aircrews in communication skills so as to facilitate coordination and reduce the likelihood of errors. In view of US Airways flight 1549 crash landing, it is without a doubt that good communication is very important in creating an environment that is safe. Therefore, a succinct and clear closed-loop communication is a must, and communication must take place in every direction within the hierarchy.  Captain Sullenberger exhibit good leadership since he was able to control the situation as well as listen carefully to his co-pilot and the air traffic controllers. Being a good leader, Captain Sullenberger had a reliable follower, his co-pilot who apart from being ready to follow his master’s instruction was not afraid to speak his mind when the leader decision seemed astray. The co-pilot followed Captain Sullenberger decision because he believed they were correct, and was ready to ask for clarification or provide alternatives when the decisions made by the captain appeared incorrect. In the CRM training, cognitive unloading and preparation with checklists is always emphasized.  The checklist helped the crew in the US Airways flight 1549 to face the problem in way that is a structurally proven.  Even though the checklists cannot solve all problems because they are not sufficiently dynamic to solve new problems, it places the crew in the path towards addressing the problem. An aspect of CRM that materializes in this case is leadership, since the captain shared the information to the crew team before making the decision. By sharing the information, the team individuals offered the best by performing with their strengths. As a leader, Captain Sullenberger assumed the total responsibility for the inaction's or actions of the crew members; for instance, he hastily took control of the radios and aircraft after the aircraft’s engines failed; thus, making it easy for the first officer to focus only on the checklist for the engine restart. Captain Sullenberger decision allowed him to land aircraft precisely where he deemed safe, and on the other hand, first officer was able to focus on the checklist devoid of interruption. After realising that the first officer understood the checklists location faster than him, the captain delegated the responsibility to the first officers who had recently undergone CRM training. Therefore, the importance of CRM can be evidenced by the US Airways flight 1549 crash landing, where leadership, communication, and collaboration lead to the saving of many lives. Example of an Accident Where Bad CRM Has Been Demonstrated A case of bad CRM can be evidenced by the tragic crash of Air France flight 447 that was flying passengers from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Paris, France in 1st June, 2009 (Wise, 2011). In the history of aviation, the flight 447 accident is considered as the most mysterious accidents. Following months of investigation, it was established that failure to adhere to CRM practices led to the tragic accident; thus, proving that the safety problem in aviation industry is still prevalent. The incident took place following an ice build-up that resulted in the complete disengagement of the autopilot.  For this reason, two first officers who were equally-ranked decided to control the plane manually and made efforts to increase the altitude.  In the process, the plane started signaling an audible stall alarm for 75-times, but the two first officers apparently ignored the signals.  Upon gaining the speed as well as altitude, one co-pilot tried to climb once more; thus, the stall alarm started signaling or this reason, the co-pilots made efforts to solve the problem by increasing the speed; however, due to lack of communication, the pilots took the opposite actions on their own control yoke. The first co-pilot took the correct action by pulling down while the other co-pilot pulled up his control yoke; therefore, both yoke controls were not synchronous resulting in competing actions.   When the captain returned from his rest break, there was no time to take corrective action since one of yoke was still being pulled back by one of the co-pilot. Failure to adhere to the Crew Resource Management practices was the main factor that led to Air France Flight 447 fatal crash into the Atlantic. After an earlier incident involving the damaged Pitot tube had been solved, the captain of left the cockpit to take a break; this, leaving the copilots to control the plane. The captain did not select the co-pilot that was to be in charge of the plane, and poor communication between the co-pilots resulted in mire challenges. Both co-pilots failed to adhere to CRM practices, and there was no cooperation between the two. Both did not understand their responsibilities in terms of what they were expected to do. Besides that, the side stick feedback mechanism on Air France Flight 447 did not show right-hand side pilot what the left-hand side pilot was doing, and vice versa. Therefore, when one co-pilot was erroneously pulling back, the other copilot was not able to see so as to take the right action. Because of lack of communication and cooperation the plane crashed into the Atlantic Ocean leading to the deaths of 228 people (all passengers and crew members). In view of Air France tragic crash, there are numerous human factors issues are discernible, the majority of which may be grouped as non-technical skills: firstly, there was no communication between the first officers, leading to actions that were deemed counterproductive. Secondly, the captain did not exhibit leadership since he was not at the cockpit during much of the incident, and since the first officers were ranked equally, it is hard to comprehend who was in charge. Thirdly, the decisions made were poor, and being a situation that was exceedingly stressful, the ‘rule-based’ thinking was reverted by the co-pilots; thus, making it hard for them to comprehend why the aircraft was not responding. Lastly, there is lack of situation awareness considering that the captain was informed about the situation late when there was no enough time to make a timely decision.  Still, in comparison to US Airways flight 1549 crash landing it is without a doubt that leadership is always imperative in such situations. Failure to inform Air France Flight 447 captain about the situation contributed a lot to the accident. Conclusion/Discussion Basically, CRM training intends to improve performance, and includes team and interpersonal skills as well as technical proficiency. It emphasizes on team coordination, the behaviour and the attitudes of members of the entire team. Besides that, CRM training is crucial for addressing human behaviour, but not to change a person’s personality. In spite of the significant amount of devoted effort to CRM practices, commercial aviation accidents caused by human factors are still occurring. It can be recommended that to maximize CRM effectiveness in the aviation industry; the crew members must technical skills and knowledge that can help them fulfill their specific role in the within the plane. Besides that, the crew members should comprehend and develop the interpersonal and cognitive skills crucial for good CRM. In conclusion, the essay has demonstrated the importance of CRM by focusing on good (U.S. Airways flight 1549) and bad CRM (Air France Flight 447). Experience and Knowledge concerning CRM developed recently by utilization of facilitative training methods has resulted in efforts to define performance that is deemed optimum by utilizing behavioural indicators. Even though such efforts are still in the early stages, a fruitful result would assist in clearly defining interpersonal and cognitive skills needed for good CRM. As evidenced in the essay, adhering to CRM practices as the case of U.S. Airways flight 1549 can help save lives, but disregard to such practices as evidenced in Air France Flight 447 may result in a fatal accident. A good CRM has effective leadership, clear communication and cooperation, and situational awareness. References Baron, R. (1997). The Cockpit, the Cabin, and Social Psychology. Retrieved from AirlineSafety.com: http://airlinesafety.com/editorials/CockpitCabinPsychology.htm Eisen, L. A., & Savel, R. H. (2009). What Went Right: Lessons for the Intensivist From the Crew of US Airways Flight 1549. Chest, 136(3), 910-917. Flight Safety Foundation. (2010, October 26). Crew Resource Management (OGHFA BN). Retrieved from SKYbrary Aviation Safety: http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Crew_Resource_Management_%28OGHFA_BN%29 Gaur, D. (2005). Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Applied to Civil Aircraft Accidents in India. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 76(5), 501-505. Hagen, J. (2013). Confronting Mistakes: Lessons from the Aviation Industry when Dealing with Error. ‎New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Helmreich, R. L. (2000). On error management: lessons from aviation. BMJ, 320(7237), 781–785. Wagener, F., & Ison, D. C. (2014). Crew Resource Management Application in Commercial Aviation. Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering, 3(2), 2–13. Wise, J. (2011). What Really Happened Aboard Air France. Popular Mechanics, 1-10. Read More