YYZSaabGuy wrote:Interesting comment and not what I expected to read. Is there actually incremental effort involved in working with another pilot on a flight deck? My guess would've been that the extra effort involved to communicate and coordinate effectively would be more than offset by reduced tasking/workload (quite apart from all of the safety benefits of proper CRM). Isn't CRM training part of CPL training? Or is it more complicated/involved to actually implement it once you're actually in a line position? Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand the issues involved.
I have heard of schools doing CRM training during the CPL and it sounds like they are doing an honest job of trying to tackle the issue. I'm haven't seen enough to comment on how successful their efforts are.
The thing about small turboprops is they are all designed to be operated by one pilot flying in the left seat. While the ergonomics of some 30 year old turboprops left enough to be desired, new King Air 200s like Lifeguard operates have excellent autopilots, FMS, and flight instruments that result in a workload that is easy for 1 pilot to manage under all normal circumstances. Even in busy airspace a properly prepared and proficient pilot simply doesn't have to work that hard to get from A to B.
When you add a second pilot, a few things get much easier. Taxiing around on the ground is where I find the greatest benefit to 2 crew operations. You can taxi sooner, rarely have to stop the airplane for cockpit tasks, and the benefit of having a second person checking what you are doing is immediate and obvious. I can get off the ground in 3 to 5 minutes faster with 2 pilots, even with the time it takes for a good takeoff briefing. Working 2 radio frequencies is another good example of things becoming easier. Circling in mountainous terrain is something I simply will not do single pilot.
Other tasks get far more complicated. The simple act of putting the flaps down becomes far more complicated with little benefit. With 1 pilot, you want the flaps down, you put the flaps down. In some cases you may have to make a point of checking the speed but in most cases you know what the speed is already and just reach over and put the flaps down. With 2 pilots, it seems silly for the PM to sit on their hands and do nothing so you write an SOP to have the PM manipulate the switch. It usually looks something like this:
PF: Flap down.
PM: Speed checked, selected.
PM: Flap set down.
A whole lot of talking with, I would argue, zero benefit. While it's possible that the PF has called for the flaps at too high a speed, in 1500 hours of single pilot operation I've never made this mistake. It just doesn't take 2 pilots to move a flap lever on a King Air. But when you have 2 pilots it becomes a 10 second process. Add in some radio work at the wrong time and you end up in a situation where you can't put the flaps down because you can't get the required talking done.
I could list many, many more situations where a simple task for 1 pilot becomes an involved process of communicating, cross checking, and co-ordinating for 2 pilots. Go arounds; approach briefings; engine failures, all require well thought out and practiced SOPs just to ensure we don't get a decrease in safety, let alone an increase.
2 crew can increase safety, no doubt about it. The difficulty in actually getting that increase in safety is considerable though. Good SOPs are rare. When was the last time you listened to an entire approach briefing without tuning out for a while or being distracted by something else to the point where you weren't listening any more? In my career I've only met 2 pilots who had an actual talent for keeping both pilots on the same page. I'm definitely not one of them. The workload added by having to continuously ensure that the other pilot has the same mental picture as you, including SOP calls; effective briefings; and discussions is far greater than the reduction in workload of having someone to talk on the radio and move some switches for you. Senior management needs to do an excellent job of selling the benefits while reducing the negatives as much as possible. Otherwise you don't get any buy-in from the line pilots and you're spending a whole bunch more money without getting a systematic increase in safety for it.
