曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

air traffic control contributed to the accident occurrence.
Zone Sud – Bâtiment 153
200 rue de Paris
Aéroport du Bourget
93352 Le Bourget Cedex
France
Tél. : +33 1 49 92 72 00
Fax : +33 1 49 92 72 03
www.bea.aero
APPENDIX
Study of CRM performance during Flight RNV967
Technical Operations within Armavia
• Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)
The Captain practically never made any callouts on the mode changes
or inputs that he made, which prevented the Co-pilot from
accomplishing his role of checking the information displayed on the
FMA. Further, this even surprised him on two occasions - vertical mode
V/S having been engaged for two minutes when the Co-pilot noticed it
and selection, for no apparent reason, of an altitude of 3,200 feet on the
FCU for no particular reason. It is notable that, during the A320 training
that was undertaken at SAS Training, several remarks had already
been made to the Captain concerning the absence or the poor quality of
his callouts.
For his part, the Co-pilot, though he was Pilot Not Flying (PNF), did not
press the takeover button and did not make the callout when he started
using his sidestick, which is in contradiction with the SOP. This may
have led the Captain, who was unaware of his Co-pilot’s inputs (both in
pitch and roll), to believe that the airplane was behaving abnormally,
and thus increase his difficulties in recovering control of the trajectory.
Note: fatigue resulting from the very late hour of the flight likely contributed to
a reduction in the crew’s attention to the conduct of the flight and respect for
the SOP‘s.
• Pilots’ Objectives
The meteorological information available at departure made it possible
to plan the flight. Around thirty minutes after takeoff, the forecast
provided by the Sochi controller led the Captain to turn back towards
Yerevan. Fifteen minutes later, after having stated that they had some
Deputies on board, the crew received meteorological information that
allowed them to return towards Sochi. Exchanges between the pilots
and the chief flight attendant show that the Captain seemed satisfied at
having achieved his objective of landing at Sochi. The Co-pilot seemed
less focused on the destination airport and on several occasions
considered a diversion (to Rostov).
It was only in the last few minutes that the situation was reversed, with
the Captain scrupulously following the controller’s instructions, despite
his increasing anger, and the Co-pilot who was ready to “go and see”.
In fact, this switch in the two pilots’ objectives was only superficial,
resulting as it did from the marginal meteorological situation and from
their obviously divergent concept of the crew’s responsibilities with
- 2 -
regard to the decision to land (see following). In this context, the
Captain accepted the authority of the controller while the Co-pilot
seemed to refer to international procedures.
• Relations between crew members
Note: No available documents made it possible to determine that the crew
followed any Crew Resource Management training (CRM). Furthermore, the
Captain seems never to have followed an adaptation course relating to the
change in environment from three- or four-man crew operations to two mancrew
operations.
The Captain and the Co-pilot carried out the arrival briefing together.
Subsequently, however, due to divergences in strategy (focus on the
landing against acceptance of a possible diversion) the two pilots were
more or less no longer working in phase.
Several comments by the Co-pilot remained unanswered despite their
significance for the flight. For example, the Co-pilot proposed erasing
the LAMET point, inserted by the Captain in the flight plan. In fact the
published approach, which passes through BANUT, is then followed by
flying towards GUKIN, located on the runway extended centreline, and
not towards LAMET, located beyond, which corresponds to another
arrival. The Captain stated that the controller might possibly send them
through that point1. The conversation was then interrupted and was not
continued subsequently. Later, the Co-pilot prepared the arrival by
presenting the structure of the exit taxiways while the Captain was
concentrating on getting back on to the descent path.
From the time they were established on the centreline and the descent
path, when they were cleared to land, the pilots shared a plan (they
were then sure that they were going to land). The configuration of the
airplane and pre-landing actions were coordinated. The controller’s
　
中國航空網 m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：航空資料30(103)