{"id":16334,"date":"2022-01-17T08:54:49","date_gmt":"2022-01-17T13:54:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ops.group\/blog\/?p=16334"},"modified":"2022-01-18T07:12:43","modified_gmt":"2022-01-18T12:12:43","slug":"getting-your-head-back-in-the-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ops.group\/blog\/getting-your-head-back-in-the-game\/","title":{"rendered":"Getting Your Head Back in the Game"},"content":{"rendered":"

In 2017, an Airbus 380 routing to UUDD\/Moscow Domodedovo had a serious incident attributed to \u201cDescent below Cleared Altitude during Approach and FS not reconfigured following a reset doing the Second Approach.<\/i>\u201d<\/p>\n

What happened, in plain English (and minus 166 pages of report), was an aircraft carrying 422 passengers descended to 395 feet AGL<\/strong>, had an EGPWS warning<\/strong>, and then attempted a second approach<\/strong> which they went around from before finally landing without incident from the third approach<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Now, it might come as a surprise, but\u00a0 if we are going to talk about either of those approaches, then we actually should talk about the second one. Here’s why…<\/p>\n

(But before that) The Report<\/h4>\n

A large number of the aforementioned 160 plus pages of this report<\/a> discusses and analyses Airbus specific (and at times quite technical) factors involved in the second approach. Things to do with FMS sequencing, oscillations from mismatching position signals, FMC resets, multiple waypoints\u2026<\/p>\n

But if we sift through this technical stuff and really ask what led an experienced crew, with a full functioning modern aircraft, into this situation<\/strong> then the real root cause is simple.<\/p>\n

Stress.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Stress caused by what had happened earlier clouding their ability to do what needed to be done next.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Showing the first approach to go-around path<\/p><\/div>\n

We’ve all been there.<\/h4>\n

We have all experienced a time where something has gone wrong and our brain has refused to drop it.<\/strong> Instead of getting to work, it’s sat there reminding us what we just did, how silly it was, even when we’ve tried to move on and get our focus back on the current situation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

You no doubt have your own examples – the first manoeuvre in a sim assessment that is so messy you spend the rest of the session dwelling on it, wondering if it was too messy to pass. The time you did something silly on the line and sat there stewing away with the \u201cwhy did I do that?!\u201d<\/em>\u00a0and the \u201cWhat an idiot I am!” <\/em>thoughts.<\/p>\n

And out on the line, this dwelling on what happened just now, instead of what is happening now<\/span> now<\/strong>\u00a0is particularly critical because, as we know, a flight is a pretty dynamic beast, and it doesn\u2019t stop at the mistake – it keeps moving on. If we don’t get with the program, then where it is going to move us to might very well be another equally or even tighter spot than the one we are still stewing over.<\/p>\n

Now, us pilots are tough on ourselves, often our own worst critic. We are also quite detail-oriented which means if we allow our brain the freedom to, it tends to start throwing a few additional ingredients into that stew pot, until there is a nice bubbling\u00a0<\/span>hot soup of worry filled with self blame, bruised ego, concerns about repercussions and just a little fixation on hindsight.<\/p>\n

But if we let this soup spill into the remainder of the flight, we can get burned very quickly. So, how can we get our head back into the game?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"

Brain overload.<\/p><\/div>\n

Time<\/h4>\n

Yep, time is a wonderful thing. They say it heals all.<\/p>\n

Alas, we don’t always have it, and if you don\u2019t, then you\u2019re going to need to do two things.<\/p>\n

One:<\/strong> Take just a few moments to throw everything into the stew pot.<\/p>\n

Two:\u00a0<\/strong>Stop stirring it and put it aside until you do have the time to really sit and look at your reflection in the probably quite thick, dark gloop (ok, enough with the stew analogies, I promise).<\/p>\n

You are going to have to wait until you can sit and reflect, dissect, digest. This\u00a0does not mean disregarding it immediately though.<\/p>\n

After a stressful or surprising event, it can take between 20-30 minutes for adrenalin levels to really drop<\/strong> down to normal again. In the flight deck SOPs, memory items, all our years of practice are there to help bring those levels back to normal quickly.\u00a0But you still need time to acknowledge something happened, and to regroup. While you may not have time for the full self-trial, you do need to\u00a0make time\u00a0for your brain to get it together again.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"

If your brain is not in the flight deck, it’s as good as empty.<\/p><\/div>\n

But how long do you need?<\/h4>\n

That is very dependant on you and on the situation. A group of pilots were asked to give an estimate of how long they thought they\u2019d need to reset and re-brief for a second approach following a \u201cnot their fault\u201d event leading to a go-around.\u00a0<\/span>It wasn\u2019t particularly scientific, there was a hypothetical pig involved, but for the most part the group seemed to feel 5-10 minutes was adequate.<\/strong><\/p>\n

This was a situation where they were not to blame though.<\/strong> Throw in the embarrassment and concern about repercussions and the time to put all that aside may be much more.<\/p>\n

Admit it, Move on.<\/h4>\n

A key step in this seems to be simply admitting something went wrong<\/strong>. Acknowledging a mistake, out loud. Saying \u201cThat happened, but now we need to do this\u2026\u201d<\/em> can be trigger to your brain to focus on that \u201cnow we need to\u201d element which is so important to safety. It can also be the trigger to bring the other person back into the now<\/strong> as well.<\/p>\n

Without this, it is often hard to stop your brain from running through the events again and again, self-preservation kicking in as your brain so thoughtfully <\/i>tries to find reasons, evidence, excuses as to why it wasn\u2019t really your fault.<\/p>\n

We need to Rebuild<\/h4>\n

In the A380 incident, this seems to have been what happened. Added to that was a likely loss of trust – in themselves or potentially in the aircraft – because there was not time to review and work out what had really happened. And this is the next thing you need to give yourself time to do – rebuild.<\/p>\n

Just as we rebuild our automation after a wind shear event, or a TCAS RA, we need to rebuild our own mental model of the situation<\/strong> as well, and using a structured method – sticking to SOPs, ANC, what we know – will help reset your brain back into the \u2018now\u2019 far more quickly, and with far more useful context to keep you safe. By going back to basics, starting simple with a good bit of ANC<\/strong> and working up again, you can determine where to place your trust and then go from there.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Getting your brain up to speed is key.<\/p><\/div>\n

The Process<\/h4>\n

The process look simple:<\/p>\n