The two pilots vs one debate....

Baronpilot244

Baronpilot244

Killick Stoker
....just became a no brainer for me. Allow me to elaborate.

A good friend of mine, who I did a lot of flying with, mentored and taught me a great deal, sent me a text yesterday that had me breaking out in cold sweats.
Basically there he was at FL250 in a large-ish turboprop, which is single pilot certified, when he had a cardiac episode and lost consciousness. The owner was in back with his family and really the story should have ended with the aircraft and occupants ending up as a hole in the ground.

Luckily there was a second pilot aboard in the right seat who was typed and current in the airplane. He thought my friend had died when he slumped over the yoke. When he pulled him back his eyes rolled back in his head and he was unresponsive.

The copilot put the airplane into a steep descent and headed for the nearest airport while coordinating medical help which was waiting for them as they touched down.

My friend was found to be alive but unconscious and the medics got him figured out fairly swiftly. Turns out he has AFIB and never even knew about it. He told me he began to feel a bit unwell and nauseous so he asked the copilot to hand him the ice bucket and close the cockpit doors because he didn't want the pax to see him throw up. That was the last thing he remembers. The next thing he knew he was in an ambulance.

My takeaway from this event is how the copilot became the cheapest insurance that owner ever bought in his life. I'm also extremely glad that wasn't my friend's final flight, even though he is going to be grounded for quite some to until he can get a special issuance.

I had never really thought too much about this happening, but I guess this has really been an eye opener for me.

Just wanted to pass this along.

Bp244
 
Ugh...harrowing. I am glad that your friend was treated quickly and hope that he will be back to the skies soon.
 
And as far as going to one-pilot flight decks is concerned...I will say it for the record. It will not happen until artificial intelligence has been developed to the point whereby it can assess situations and make decision just as well as a human being or even better. It must be able to converse and communicate with a human captain/pilot as well as a human copilot can. Think C-3PO from Star Wars or Data from Star Trek. Until that day comes, fear not losing your job.
 
Wow. Glad your friend is OK! Can bet that owner will forever employ two pilots from here on out.
 
I wrote up a big post on real safety statistics of a single pilot operations vs crewed pilots, how data that shows many operators use low time pilots (if even qualified) when they use two pilots vs an experienced pilot, and the number of times that CRM broke down between two pilots vs the number of single pilot operations losing their only pilot.



But I deleted it all. Opening a can of worms on an airline site.
 
Fly_Unity said:
I wrote up a big post on real safety statistics of a single pilot operations vs crewed pilots, how data that shows many operators use low time pilots (if even qualified) when they use two pilots vs an experienced pilot, and the number of times that CRM broke down between two pilots vs the number of single pilot operations losing their only pilot.



But I deleted it all. Opening a can of worms on an airline site.
Click to expand...
Eh, what? An airline site?? Jeez, no wonder! I wish someone would of told me!
I'd be interested in reading that data, but in the end, I'm selfish. I want to live, and if I have a survivable event that renders me incapacitated, I'd like a fella next to me to get my ass on the ground. That being said, meatbag shopping at the FBO is not the way to go, for above mentioned reasons and then some. Not very difficult to put someone thru, or even develop your own familiarization course for what ever you're flying. Write up some sop's and do some good briefing, you're half way to having a safe operation. ;)
 
Fly_Unity said:
I wrote up a big post on real safety statistics of a single pilot operations vs crewed pilots, how data that shows many operators use low time pilots (if even qualified) when they use two pilots vs an experienced pilot, and the number of times that CRM broke down between two pilots vs the number of single pilot operations losing their only pilot.



But I deleted it all. Opening a can of worms on an airline site.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry if I’m reading this wrong. Your data shows that using two low time pilots is a bigger risk than using a single experienced pilot? I don’t think that’s a big surprise. I’d like to see what the data says about using two experienced pilots vs one experienced pilot. I’d like to see your data anyway. It’s always interesting to see that stuff.
 
AAPalmTree said:
I’m sorry if I’m reading this wrong. Your data shows that using two low time pilots is a bigger risk than using a single experienced pilot? I don’t think that’s a big surprise. I’d like to see what the data says about using two experienced pilots vs one experienced pilot. I’d like to see your data anyway. It’s always interesting to see that stuff.
Click to expand...
And, there is no data to show the number of times CRM worked. The few recorded instances (Haynes and crew into Soiux City, Sullenberger and crew into the Hudson, etc.) point to an overwhelming unwritten record of CRM working. I'd say it's at least once a month that my fellow crewmember catches something I've missed. Usually it's nothing big, but having that back up there is crucial. I think that's the biggest reason to keep two up there. Yeah, a box can remind me when I've forgotten a checklist, or to put the gear down, but when the poo hits the fan, can a computer help me troubleshoot, think creatively, and outside the box if necessary to get the aircraft on the ground successfully?
 
So, if there's an inexperienced pilot sitting in the right seat and the captain slumps over unconscious the odds of surviving haven't increased?

To the OP, I'm glad your friend is doing well now.
 
Hammertime said:
And, there is no data to show the number of times CRM worked. The few recorded instances (Haynes and crew into Soiux City, Sullenberger and crew into the Hudson, etc.) point to an overwhelming unwritten record of CRM working. I'd say it's at least once a month that my fellow crewmember catches something I've missed. Usually it's nothing big, but having that back up there is crucial. I think that's the biggest reason to keep two up there. Yeah, a box can remind me when I've forgotten a checklist, or to put the gear down, but when the poo hits the fan, can a computer help me troubleshoot, think creatively, and outside the box if necessary to get the aircraft on the ground successfully?
Click to expand...
Have you ever worked 135, and maybe a few companies?
The bare minimum is usually the gold standard, or whatever is cheapest. And CRM is usually a punchline to a joke. Something glossed over at recurrent.
There are obviously exceptions, but to equate 121 CRM and safety to charter/private isn't valid.
 
Also, the tracks would be littered with broken freight trains while their Enginductors waited for the car service to bring someone out to do a crewmember swap.
" sorry, I don't have time to secure the head end, go find the problem, go back and get parts and tools, carry all of it 100 cars back, fix it, go back to head end and re couple cars, walk back and re-connect brake lines, etc... "
that just wouldn't work, not just from a time perspective, but safety and logistics as well. I know I wouldn't want to carry an 80LB knuckle a mile in crappy WX, stumbling along the slag, tripping over ties and slipping on snow, ice, etc...
:)
 
z987k said:
Have you ever worked 135, and maybe a few companies?
The bare minimum is usually the gold standard, or whatever is cheapest. And CRM is usually a punchline to a joke. Something glossed over at recurrent.
There are obviously exceptions, but to equate 121 CRM and safety to charter/private isn't valid.
Click to expand...
Apologies. I guessed I missed something. I thought we were having a general discussion on single pilot vs. a crew environment. In my mind, I made the connection that a large majority of crew operations occur in the 121 environment... However to counterpoint: Just because 135 operators apparently don't implement CRM training well doesn't invalidate the success that it has had. I think if you do look at 121 operations, CRM is, and can be, very successful.
 
Hammertime said:
Apologies. I guessed I missed something. I thought we were having a general discussion on single pilot vs. a crew environment. In my mind, I made the connection that a large majority of crew operations occur in the 121 environment... However to counterpoint: Just because 135 operators apparently don't implement CRM training well doesn't invalidate the success that it has had. I think if you do look at 121 operations, CRM is, and can be, very successful.
Click to expand...
Yes, I very much agree. But there's also a point where the other person makes the flight more difficult. I've never seen that in 121. It wasn't too uncommon in 135. It's not the pilot's fault, usually - 135 does attract people that don't work well with others, it's usually the operators fault by either have poor training, a complete lack of standards or hiring a person that has no business being in that seat. Possibly all three.
 
z987k said:
Yes, I very much agree. But there's also a point where the other person makes the flight more difficult. I've never seen that in 121. It wasn't too uncommon in 135. It's not the pilot's fault, usually - 135 does attract people that don't work well with others, it's usually the operators fault by either have poor training, a complete lack of standards or hiring a person that has no business being in that seat. Possibly all three.
Click to expand...

Also in a Caravan or a King Air it's really hard to make "good" procedures when the cockpit is set up for single pilot ops
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top