C-2 CASE STUDY
TITLE:
FOCUS SKILL:Leadership
SOURCE: HAZREP REPORT
TERMINAL OBJECTIVE:At the completion of this case study, the audience will better understand how sound leadership contributes to mission effectiveness and the safety of the aircraft and crew.
ENABLING OBJECTIVES: 1. Cite examples of how the leader tried to control the situation and where he may have failed to control the situation.
2. Identify how leadership’s decisions may affect the decisions and responses of crewmembers.
DESCRIPTION:
INTRODUCTORY TEACHING POINTS:
What is Leadership?
Leadership is the ability to direct and coordinate the activities of other crew members, and to encourage them to work together as a team.
Being a good leader involves inspiring your crew to work up to their potential; a good leader can bring out the best in the crew.
Responsibilities of Leaders:
The leader is in control of the situation and has certain responsibilities. Aircrew leaders must be able to:
•Direct and coordinate the crew's activities
•Delegate tasks
•Make sure that the crew understands what is expected of them
•Focus attention on the crucial aspects of the situation
•Keep crew members informed of mission information
•Ask crew members for mission relevant information
•Provide feedback to the crew on their performance
•Create and maintain a professional atmosphere
Types of Leadership:
Designated Leadership: Leadership by authority, crew position, rank, or title.
Functional Leadership: Leadership by knowledge or expertise.
Designated leadership is the normal mode of leadership. Functional leadership is temporary and allows the most qualified individual to take charge of the situation.
Feedback to the Crew:
The crew needs to know:
•What behaviors are being evaluated
•What their performance is being evaluated against
•How their performance compares to these standards
Effective Leadership:
It is more effective to try to influence individuals than to dictate to them. This can be accomplished by:
•Making suggestions
•Making the crew want to perform activities
•Leading by inspiration
Remember:
•Leadership is not solely the responsibility of the pilot - each crew member has specialized duties and qualifications.
•It is the leader's responsibility to make sure that the crew works together as a team.
•Feedback should be given to the crew on both good and bad performance.
INSTRUCTOR DIRECTIONS: Divide the participants into case study discussion groups. If the class is small, each member can work on their own. Present the case study using the following steps:
1. Describe the goal of the case study exercise and present the focus questions. Ask if any one has questions about the objective or the focus questions.
2. Allow time to read and discuss the synopsis in relation to the focus questions.
3. Lead a discussion or have groups present their findings in relationship to the focus questions. Highlight the key points on board or other medium as the discussion develop.
DESCRIPTIVE SYNOPSIS:
1. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY This report is for official use only (FOUO), may contain privacy and/or privileged information and is not to be released to any other activity or organization, or used for any purpose other than safety, without the written permission of Commander, Naval Safety Center. Ref: SECNAVINST 5720.42, OPNAVINST 3750.6 Series and OPNAVINST 5102.1 Series.
Rawhide 01 was returning from the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) on a routine logistics mission. Naval Station Norfolk was landing runway 10 with winds from 010 at 14 knots. Upon approaching the initial for the break at 1500 feet and 250 knots, tower directed the crew to execute a straight-in approach due to quiet hours (AF). Working from a high-fast position, the pilot brought the power levers to flight idle and climbed to bleed off airspeed prior to dropping the landing gear and flaps. Once configured with full flaps and landing gear down, the pilot executed S-turns to descend the aircraft onto straight-in approach parameters. The aircraft commander, sitting in the co-pilot seat, then took the controls to demonstrate proper S-turn technique (LD,DM). During this compressed final, the crew also received a Terrain Awareness Warning System "glideslope" alert due to the high approach, and a Traffic Collision Avoidance System "traffic" warning from a pier side ship (SA). On short final, the co-pilot reconfigured the aircraft to two-thirds flaps, put in a wing-down/top-rudder crosswind correction to compensate for the left to right crosswind, and passed the controls back to the left seat pilot (AS, LD). Upon touchdown, the pilot brought the power levers back to the top of the flight idle gate and received BETA lights. With pilot and co-pilot concurrence on the BETA lights, the pilot brought the power levers into ground idle and the top of the reverse region. The co-pilot neglected to raise the flaps from two- thirds, and, shortly thereafter, the BETA lights extinguished as both pilots noticed the aircraft accelerate (DM, SA, LD). During this short time the co-pilot brought the power levers into max reverse, the BETA lights re-illuminated, and the propellers went to max reverse (DM, CM)). Attempting to maintain directional control of the aircraft, the pilot inadvertently blew the port tire. Shortly thereafter, the starboard tire blew and the aircraft proceeded towards the left side of the runway, spun 360 degrees and stopped just passed the three board with the nose of the aircraft sitting off the runway on a paved surface. The co-pilot pulled the T-handles and the crew safely exited the aircraft.
- Possible Synopsis Additions
a. The correct procedure for NO-BETA is to execute a go-around.
b. The Co-Pilot was the CO of the squadron and the pilot was the most junior Pilot in the squadron.
c. There had been a previous MISHAP from a sister squadron due to a NO-BETA indications on landing with of high crosswinds.
d. Eight Bladed prop is a relatively new system for the C-2 community and has been under a lot of scrutiny from all command levels.
- List of focus and support CRM skills.
a. Decision Making: The ability to choose a course of action using logical and sound judgment based on the available information.
b.Assertiveness: The willingness to actively participate, state, and maintain a position until convinced by the facts that other options are better.
c.Mission Analysis: The ability to develop short-term, long-term, and contingency plans and to coordinate, allocate, and monitor crew and aircraft resources.
d.Communication: The ability to clearly and accurately send and receive information, instructions, or commands; and provide useful feedback.
e.Leadership: The ability to direct and coordinate the activities of crew members and to encourage the crew to work together as a team.
f.Adaptability/Flexibility: The ability to alter a course of action based on new information, maintain constructive behavior under pressure, and adapt to internal and external environmental changes.
g.Situational Awareness: The degree of accuracy by which one’s perception of the current environment mirrors reality.
FOCUS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:
1. How did a breakdown of Leadership help contribute to this incident?
Instead of trying to make the landing they could have requested a circle to give more time to set up the landing. As the senior pilot and with knowledge that a previous MISHAP occurred in high crosswinds he could have elected to take an arrested landing. Condensing the landing time and then quickly handing the controls back to the pilot may have also caused her to be a little behind the aircraft.
2. Do you think the CO flying with the most junior pilot was a factor in how the flight was conducted and the decisions were made?
He was demonstrating flying skills on final to help get down. The pilot was most likely less likely to question his judgment about making the landing, or suggesting an arrested landing.
3. What other CRM skills and behaviors may have contributed to or helped with this incident?
Decision Making: pilots ignored NATOPS procedures by failing to raise the flaps on touchdown, and then failing to execute a go around with the NO-BETA indications. Deciding to try to make the landing.
Situation Awareness: Constant TCAS and TAWS calls distract the pilots from the landing. Failure to notice how difficult the crosswinds would make the landing.
Assertiveness: Co-pilot was assertive in taking the controls to help, but was not assertive in directing the pilot on standard procedures during the landing. Pilot did not direct the Co-Pilot to raise the flaps.
Adaptability/Flexible: Setting up for the Break and then having to slow for the Straight In. Tried to execute procedures to make the straight in, but failed to recognize the experience of the pilot.
- How could the crew have handled this situation differently?
Had the crew been more familiar with NATOPS they would have know they were at the crosswind envelope. Also know the previous problems with crosswinds and the weight on wheels switch for the BETA lights they should have made sure proper inputs were used to counteract the crosswind forces. The Aircraft Commander’s decision to take controls until short final and the condensed final may have caused the crew to forget their roles in the full stop landing. Usually the co-pilot raises the flaps, but with multiple configurations changes and the reduced time on final the task loading was higher. The other solution would have been to follow proper NATOPS procedures and executing the go-around would have prevented the directional control problems.
SUMMARY TEACHING POINTS:
- Leadership
- Needs to direct and coordinate the crew’s activities and delegate tasks.
- Need to understand the experience of all crew members
- Responsible for the performance of his crew.
- All 7 critical skills are interrelated, and must be used effectively to ensure mission success.
C-2 CASE STUDY
TITLE: C-2A Aircraft blows both tires and departs runway on full stop
SOURCE: HAZREP REPORT
SYNOPSIS:FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY This report is for official use only (FOUO), may contain privacy and/or privileged information and is not to be released to any other activity or organization, or used for any purpose other than safety, without the written permission of Commander, Naval Safety Center. Ref: SECNAVINST 5720.42, OPNAVINST 3750.6 Series and OPNAVINST 5102.1 Series.
Rawhide 01 was returning from the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) on a routine logistics mission. Naval Station Norfolk was landing runway 10 with winds from 010 at 14 knots. Upon approaching the initial for the break at 1500 feet and 250 knots, tower directed the crew to execute a straight-in approach due to quiet hours. Working from a high-fast position, the pilot brought the power levers to flight idle and climbed to bleed off airspeed prior to dropping the landing gear and flaps. Once configured with full flaps and landing gear down, the pilot executed S-turns to descend the aircraft onto straight-in approach parameters. The aircraft commander, sitting in the co-pilot seat, then took the controls to demonstrate proper S-turn technique. During this compressed final, the crew also received a Terrain Awareness Warning System "glideslope" alert due to the high approach, and a Traffic Collision Avoidance System "traffic" warning from a pier side ship. On short final, the co-pilot reconfigured the aircraft to two-thirds flaps, put in a wing-down/top-rudder crosswind correction to compensate for the left to right crosswind, and passed the controls back to the left seat pilot. Upon touchdown, the pilot brought the power levers back to the top of the flight idle gate and received BETA lights. With pilot and co-pilot concurrence on the BETA lights, the pilot brought the power levers into ground idle and the top of the reverse region. The co-pilot neglected to raise the flaps from two- thirds, and, shortly thereafter, the BETA lights extinguished as both pilots noticed the aircraft accelerate. During this short time the co-pilot brought the power levers into max reverse, the BETA lights re-illuminated, and the propellers went to max reverse. Attempting to maintain directional control of the aircraft, the pilot inadvertently blew the port tire. Shortly thereafter, the starboard tire blew and the aircraft proceeded towards the left side of the runway, spun 360 degrees and stopped just passed the three board with the nose of the aircraft sitting off the runway on a paved surface. The co-pilot pulled the T-handles and the crew safely exited the aircraft.
FOCUS QUESTIONS:
1.How did a breakdown of Leadership help contribute to this incident?
2. Do you think the CO flying with the most junior pilot was a factor in how the flight was conducted and the decisions were made?
3. What other CRM skills and behaviors may have contributed to or helped with this incident?
4. How could the crew have handled this situation differently?