Lushin Aviation Consulting · Nationwide Aviation Expert Witness & Litigation Support
Direct Case Intake & Conflict Checks: (812) 240-5483 · elliott@lushinaviation.com
CRM Series · Week 2 of 8

Crew Resource Management, Week 2 of 8: Decision Making

Decision Making is the first of the seven CRM critical skills listed in the Naval Aviation CRM instruction. This article sets out how official sources define the skill and what two closed NTSB investigations record about crew decisions.

How official sources define it

COMNAVAIRFORINST 1542.7E, Enclosure (2), defines Decision Making as “the ability to choose a course of action using logical and sound judgment based on available information.”

The FAA’s Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge (FAA-H-8083-25B) describes the DECIDE model: “Detect, Estimate, Choose a course of action, Identify solutions, Do the necessary actions, and Evaluate the effects of the actions,” which it calls a “continuous loop process.”

FAA Advisory Circular 120-51E, Appendix 1, lists as behavioral markers: “Operational decisions are clearly stated to other crewmembers” and “Crewmembers acknowledge their understanding of decisions.”

Air Florida Flight 90 (January 13, 1982)

Air Florida Boeing 737-222, registration N62AF, in flight on approach, side view, May 1981
Air Florida Boeing 737-222 N62AF, May 1981. Photographer unknown (scan via Aero Icarus). Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

A Boeing 737-222, N62AF, departed runway 36 at Washington National Airport in snow. According to NTSB report AAR-82-08, it struck the 14th Street Bridge at 1601 eastern standard time and came to rest in the Potomac River. Of the 79 people aboard, 70 passengers and 4 crewmembers were killed; 4 people in vehicles on the bridge were also killed.

The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) excerpts in the report (pp. 3-5) include the following during the takeoff roll:

  • 1559:58, first officer: “God, look at that thing, that don’t seem right, does it?”
  • First officer: “...that’s not right...”; captain: “Yes it is, there’s eighty”; first officer: “Naw, I don’t think that’s right.”
  • About 9 seconds later the first officer said “...maybe it is,” and, after the captain called “hundred and twenty,” “I don’t know.”

In its analysis, the NTSB wrote (p. 65): “An observation that something is not right is sufficient reason to reject a takeoff without further analysis,” and that “there are no comments on the CVR to indicate that the captain ever considered rejecting the takeoff.” On p. 67 the Board wrote that “the captain did not react to the first officer’s repeated comments that something was not right during the takeoff roll.”

The NTSB determined the probable cause to be “the flightcrew’s failure to use engine anti-ice during ground operation and takeoff, their decision to take off with snow/ice on the airfoil surfaces of the aircraft, and the captain’s failure to reject the takeoff during the early stage when his attention was called to anomalous engine instrument readings.” The Board also listed contributing factors, including the ground delay between deicing and takeoff clearance and the flightcrew’s limited experience in jet transport winter operations.

US Airways Flight 1549 (January 15, 2009)

US Airways Airbus A320-214, registration N106US, on approach at Las Vegas, side view, November 2008
Photo: Edmund Seeger, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0

An Airbus A320-214, N106US, struck a flock of birds at 2,818 feet above ground level after departing LaGuardia Airport and lost almost all thrust in both engines. According to NTSB report AAR-10/03, CVR times (eastern standard time) include:

  • 1527:10, captain: “birds.”
  • 1527:23, captain: “my aircraft.”
  • About 1528:05, captain to air traffic control: “we’re unable. we may end up in the Hudson.”

The airplane was ditched on the Hudson River about 8.5 miles from LaGuardia. The 150 passengers and 5 crewmembers evacuated; one flight attendant and four passengers were seriously injured.

The NTSB concluded (§ 2.3.2, pp. 88-89; Finding 15) that “the captain’s decision to ditch on the Hudson River rather than attempting to land at an airport provided the highest probability that the accident would be survivable.” The NTSB listed among factors contributing to survivability “the decision-making of the flight crewmembers and their crew resource management during the accident sequence.”

The NTSB determined the probable cause to be “the ingestion of large birds into each engine, which resulted in an almost total loss of thrust in both engines and the subsequent ditching on the Hudson River.” Among the factors the Board listed as contributing to fuselage damage was “the captain’s resulting difficulty maintaining his intended airspeed on final approach due to the task saturation resulting from the emergency situation.”

CVR times in both investigations

Timeline of cockpit voice recorder times for Air Florida Flight 90 (January 13, 1982, from NTSB-AAR-82-08) and US Airways Flight 1549 (January 15, 2009, from NTSB/AAR-10/03)
Original graphic, Lushin Aviation Consulting. Sources: NTSB-AAR-82-08, pp. 3-5; NTSB/AAR-10/03.

Next week: Assertiveness.

View the Week 2 carousel on LinkedIn →

About the author. Elliott B. Lushin is an aviation expert witness. He is a current Part 121 A-350 First Officer, a former USMC F/A-18 pilot and Aircraft Maintenance Officer, a retired Indiana Air National Guard A-10C pilot, and a former T-6 primary flight instructor (VT-2, NAS Whiting Field). Attorneys with aviation matters can reach him through Case Intake.

This article summarizes public records. Probable cause statements, findings, and conclusions quoted here are those of the NTSB, attributed as such.

Sources

  1. COMNAVAIRFORINST 1542.7E (December 23, 2024), Enclosure (2), para. 4.a. Naval Safety Command (PDF)
  2. FAA, Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, FAA-H-8083-25B, Chapter 2. FAA
  3. FAA, Advisory Circular 120-51E, Appendix 1. FAA (PDF)
  4. NTSB, Aircraft Accident Report NTSB-AAR-82-08, Air Florida, Inc., Boeing 737-222, N62AF, Collision with 14th Street Bridge, Near Washington National Airport, January 13, 1982. NTSB (PDF)
  5. NTSB, Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-10/03, Loss of Thrust in Both Engines After Encountering a Flock of Birds and Subsequent Ditching on the Hudson River, US Airways Flight 1549, Airbus A320-214, N106US, January 15, 2009. NTSB (PDF)
Direct Attorney & Brokerage Contact

Case Intake & Conflict Checks

Available to plaintiff and defense counsel nationwide for initial conflict checks, case evaluations, Rule 26 expert reports, depositions, and trial testimony. Please include the jurisdiction, parties involved (for conflict screening), and key case deadlines in your initial inquiry. The current Fee Schedule, Retention Agreement, and Form W-9 are provided immediately upon conflict clearance.

Principal Consultant Elliott B. Lushin
Firm Entity Lushin Aviation Consulting LLC
Direct Phone (812) 240-5483
Location Columbus, Indiana · Available Nationwide