Crew Resource Management

  • Uncategorized

CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 4

CrewResource Management

CrewResource Management

TheUS Airways Flight 1549 describes the journey taken by Airbus A320-214before it took an emergency landing at Hudson River. The aircraft wasflying from New York to Charlotte Douglas International Airport. Itexperienced mechanical challenges after a series of bird strikes thatmade it to lose power and altitude. The outcome made it impossiblefor the crew to land at a nearby airport. As a result, the crewdecided to glide over the Hudson River, minutes before it lost power.All the crew and passengers were evacuated successfully. Luckily, theplane landed on the river successfully.Some of the passengers onboard suffered severe injuries, but no deathwas reported. The crew was recognized as heroes by the regulatory andaviation bodies. Skills on crew resource management (CRM) areinstrumental towards enhancing decision-making when a squadencounters difficulties during a flight.

Importanceof CRM during the US Airways Flight 1549

Theincident is among many other eventualities that the aircraft crewsexperience during their daily engagements. As such, appropriatedecisions are required to eliminate incidences of accidents anddeaths of passengers. Some of the events take place fast, hence,necessitating prompt and well-thought decisions. At times, the staffhas to depend on its personal experiences to mitigate the effects ofthe likely accidents. The Crew resource management (CRM) is anefficient program that enhances decision-making mechanism (Ford,Henderson, &amp O`Hare, 2014).The US Airways Flight 1549 is a good example of the usage of CRM thatculminated to the safe landing of the aircraft. The captain, ChesleySullenberger, used his training and experience to make an appropriatedecision within minutes. Investigations reveal that the captainsought permission to return to LaGuardia before performing the enginerestart procedure. It is noteworthy, that the engine failed, thusforcing him to seek permission to land in an alternative airport. Hewanted to avoid the likelihood of a crash in a crowded area. Sincetime was short and the engine had malfunctioned, the captain made adecision to land in Hudson River (Becker&amp Merkle, 2016).The copilot worked closely with him by providing the altitude andairspeed readings to help glide the aircraft. The decision saved thelives of the occupants as well as resulted in minimal damages to theaircraft.

Beforesafe landing on the river, the captain encountered time constraints.As such, there was no time to discuss all parts of the decisionprocess. The CRM skills helped the crew in making appropriatedecision without consulting all the written guidance or checklist. Infact, after the first bird strike, the crew opened all the lines ofcommunication that enabled them to work together using theexperienced obtained during the CRM training. Theprogram, developed in 1976, has helped in improving in-flightdecisions that are sometimes disastrous. It is now common to thecivilian aviation and the military around the world (Ford,Henderson, &amp O`Hare, 2014).The CRM program trains aircraft crew on excellent communicationskills that aid in maximizing coordination as well as lessen theburden of errors. Further, it helps the staff members in implementingappropriate actions when a problem arises during a flight (Becker&amp Merkle, 2016).

Conclusion

CRMis a precious safety tool in the aviation industry. Aircraft crew cannow reduce chances of making poor decisions and errors in case ofdifficulties during flights. The incident reflects the importance ofobserving the CRM procedures when an aircraft crew encounterschallenges during a flight. The program has helped in the avoidanceof deadly crashes, destruction of properties, and loss of lives.

References

Becker,C., &amp Merkle, W. (2016). (CRM). In RiskManagement in Medicine(pp. 109-112). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Ford,J., Henderson, R., &amp O`Hare, D. (2014). The effects of CrewResource Management (CRM) training on flight attendants` safetyattitudes. Journalof safety research,48,49-56.

Close Menu