Insights

One- And Two-Pilot Operations Are Not Equivalent

An experienced, well-respected flight instructor told me that he teaches instrument students to follow procedures used by two-pilot crews. His sincerity and dedication is unquestionable, but his methodology is unwise.

I can't quote safety statistics, but I can make some common-sense observations. Aviators have made safe, single-pilot instrument flights for years. Two-pilot crews evolved as airplane complexity increased, but this advancement did not eliminate aircraft accidents. Researchers recognized that human factors in the cockpit played a part in accidents. Although human factor research is far from complete, it has refined two-pilot responsibilities, coordination, and workload.

An old-timer I once worked for in general aviation told me, "Yep, I quit United right after World War II. I got $200 a month to raise and lower the landing gear on a DC-3, and believe me, that's all I did."

That situation no longer exists in the airline industry. In today's aircraft, two properly trained pilots work together and reinforce each other's thought processes and actions, and they use all available resources, including advanced automation and crew resource management (CRM) principles. The captain is still captain, but the pilots work as a team. This allows both pilots to process and back up a large amount of flight-related information.

Pilot workload is unacceptably high when a single pilot attempts to include all the backup information two-pilot crews use. I'm not saying that single-pilot flights are less safe than two-pilot flights. I'm saying that aviators who fly single-pilot IFR must use different procedures to achieve and maintain an acceptable level of flight safety.

In the past I've watched pilots get bogged down with minutia and then have big problems. They bust checkrides, and if they do slip through the cracks, they compromise flight safety. These pilots can't see the forest for the trees. They have not been molded by, nor do they realize the importance of, the KISS principle - Keep It Simple, Stupid.

Think about this example of two-pilot and single-pilot actions during an instrument approach. In a two-pilot crew the pilot not flying does the radio work, reads the checklists, and calls out - 1,000 feet AGL, 500 feet AGL, approaching minimums (when 100 feet above the approach minimums), approach lights in sight, runway in sight, minimums (time remaining, if on a non-precision approach), and, finally, the airplane's vertical speed approaching the flare point.

If the pilot flying makes a missed approach, the pilot not flying retracts one increment of flaps and the landing gear on the other pilot's command, calls out the missed approach steps, and sets the altitude alerter - an electronic device that chimes, whistles, or beeps if the pilot flying busts the altitude. The pilot flying concentrates on aircraft control, lateral course guidance, and vertical flight path.

In a single-pilot approach, the pilot must concentrate on airplane control; lateral course guidance; vertical flight path as well as the decision height if flying an ILS approach, or the MDA (minimum descent altitude) and the time remaining or the VDP (visual descent point) if flying a non-precision approach; ATC communications; and the missed-approach procedure. This pilot is busy with these tasks and, if well trained, is anticipating a missed approach. Landing is the easy part, if the runway comes into view at or before the missed approach point.

Instructors must address human capabilities when training instrument students, particularly those who will fly single-pilot IFR. You cannot forecast how much flying or what type of flying a student will do 12 months after training ends, yet the instructor must certify his (or her) student's competency.

To do this ethically, the instructor must be assured that the student's thought processes and skills are habitual. The student must have no less than full command of the essentials, and a student gains this command through sustained repetition of these elements. As practical experience increases after the student earns the rating, he'll gain other insights. But when trouble rears its ugly head, the pilot will automatically revert to the critical elements he learned (or didn't learn) in training. That's the bottom line.

The subject of single-pilot and two-pilot operations has other implications. Students and low-time pilots who talk with experienced pilots often hear information that makes them uncertain. An example would be a pilot talking about the challenge-and-response checklist litany and not making it clear that this procedure only works for a two-pilot crew.

To avoid confusion, student and new pilots must consider the experienced pilot's operating mode (single-pilot or two-pilot crew), their instructor's training philosophy, and whether they were truly proficient for their current certification level before they started advanced training. What's good for one pilot may not be good for another.