Jul 17, 2011 - It probably began with the military, and then most likely as the result of an accident more than a half-century ago, the procedure for changing control of an aircraft has made a significant contribution to safety. The steps in the procedure generally include something like this: 1) the current pilot in command (PIC) states, “You’ve got it;” 2) the pilot taking control states, “I‘ve got it;” 3) followed by the former PIC stating, “Roger, you have it.” Or the more contemporary civilian expression: 1) “You have the airplane;” 2) the pilot taking control states: “I have the airplane;” 3) followed by the former PIC stating, “Roger, you have the aircraft.” The control transfer is also often accompanied with a brief shaking of the control stick (a la USAF), then the new aircraft PIC is in charge and is immediately responsible for control of the aircraft, regardless of its attitude or position.

Positive Aircraft Control

Sounds simple. However, there have been accidents in aircraft with two control sticks where it appeared that there was some uncertainty as to who was flying the aircraft, including recently. Obviously, it would only take a few seconds for the aircraft to be slicing through the air with neither pilot in control—each thinking the other pilot has control of the aircraft—when, in fact, it is not being guided by either pilot. As you can imagine, this situation is especially dangerous close to the ground or in formation.

Transfer of control issues arise during all phases of instruction—basic checkouts, skill upgrades like aerobatics, formation and instrument training—as well as on flights where pilots share the duties of PIC or swap control for a demonstration of a maneuver, and during a host of other flight conditions.

Since we typically fly aircraft that have two cockpits and were primarily designed for training, the “who’s got it?” issue can surface on every flight. As fundamental as the process sounds, incidents, accidents and destroyed airplanes and lives have resulted from breaches of this simple facet of flying aircraft with two controls. Even if it sounds redundant or too formal, it is a good idea to follow it. Briefing the process for change of aircraft control before the flight only takes a minute; one more aspect of safe flight will be in place.

Briefings

Briefing the process of changing aircraft control is not the only topic to cover before flight. Training and formation flights, naturally, dictate thorough briefings for all pilots. Formation briefings are required by FAA reg’s (FAR 91.111). But briefings are a good idea for every flight. For example, regardless who the second pilot or passenger is, he/she should be informed by the PIC which flight maneuvers will be performed, if any, and an overview of the conduct of the flight—the term mission comes to mind—even if it is to look at the scenery. I maintain there is no such thing as a random flight (“let’s take off and see what happens”). Safety demands some plan so the crewmembers are familiar with and agree on the purpose of the flight. Whether for fun, proficiency or training, the flight merits a briefing.

Briefing Topics

A good place to begin briefing is to address fundamental items such as ingress and egress, operation of the canopy, pressurization procedures and what not to touch. Even if the other pilot/passenger has flown before, reviewing the basic safety procedures is a good idea. For all aircraft certified with an Experimental airworthiness certificates pilots are required to inform any passenger of the “experimental nature of the aircraft” (FAA reg’s 91.319 (d) 1).

That regulation requires, at least, telling the person flying—passenger or other pilot—that the aircraft is not certified according to the standard FAA process but issued an airworthiness certificate similar to a homebuilt aircraft. Plus, a placard stating “Experimental” in two-inch high letters must be placed where easily visible to passengers. In addition, the placard shown below plainly must be displayed in full view for passengers to read or you may be in violation of FARs:

THIS AIRCRAFT IS AMATEUR-BUILT AND DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR STANDARD AIRCRAFT.

Complementing the minimum regulations for disclosure to passengers or other pilots are some common sense, but sometimes forgotten, items. They are shown below in a form that I recommend pilots of Experimental-certified aircraft use to both remember the safety issues that are required to be briefed and to document those briefings by keeping a written form, to be read to the passenger/pilot flying in the aircraft. I keep a laminated copy of the briefing guide with my flight gear so it is always readily available.

Experimental Aircraft Passenger Briefing

1. Canopy operation
2. Radio procedures
3. Safety procedures
4. Experimental jet
5. Pressurization procedures
6. Emergency procedures
7. Flight operations
8. Flight profile

This list of briefing items in the above list is not comprehensive. I suggest you make your own and carry a printed copy with you to brief passengers/pilots. Update it as you see the need for more information for the passenger. It will improve safety and assist in showing regulatory compliance from any ramp checks by authorities.

Not a believer yet? A perfectly airworthy L-39 crashed and killed both occupants when a back seater assumed a steep climb was an emergency. Unfortunately, the only briefing this non-pilot, white-knuckle flyer received was how to jettison the canopy and bailout of the aircraft with a parachute “. . .  in case of an emergency.” The passenger interpreted the climb, much more aggressive than his level of familiarity with jet aircraft—moderate climbs on airline flights—as an emergency. So he blew off the canopy and, unable to complete the bailout procedure, froze on the controls. A fatal accident ensued.

When flying single–engine aircraft many procedures are more relevant than in multi-engine aircraft. For example, engine failure soon after takeoff requires immediate attention. If two pilots are on board defining the course of action in the event of that immediate emergency is valuable: one pilot can assist the other by making the necessary radio calls while the other flies. If a passenger is on board in the other seat briefing the appropriate actions for them is essential. For instance, the instruction to lock the shoulder harness in the event of an impending landing, would prove valuable. A much more comprehensive briefing than the bailout instruction given in the accident described above is needed. What is an emergency? What action will we take? What if the radio or intercom fails; what then?

Brief and brief some more. And, of course, plan.

Defining the Mission

In this country (not true everywhere) we are free to fly, mostly, given the limits of airspace restrictions, where we want to and when we want to. However, given that freedom does not mean that even joy rides should not be briefed, for several reasons. First, briefed flights, where the conduct of the flight is planned in advance, are statistically, safer. I recall flights that resulted in accidents after the planned mission was completed and the pilots were horsing around; others where the briefing was not followed producing, almost predictably, serious accidents.

Beyond the concern for safety, which should be sufficient, planning for optimizing fuel consumption, accomplishment of training or other flight objectives, makes economic sense.

Of course, there is no requirement to accomplish any specific proficiency or related goal on a flight. It’s perfectly permissible to fly along and see the snow on the mountains, the desert flowers in bloom or experience the sound of the plane flying through the air. Briefing is still a good idea on those flights.

CRM

The airlines and military, long recognized as setting safety standards, and successful at doing so, have identified some key concepts that improved safety. One of those concepts is the practice of Crew Resource Management (CRM), where crews work together to safely complete the flight. No more “Don’t say anything unless you are asked” policy for co-pilots or crewmembers. The new CRM programs have been successful at applying the synergy of multi-pilot crews. We can learn from those practices by: carefully defining missions, briefing flights and describing positive transfer of aircraft control.

The more aspects of a flight are planned and briefed the safer the flight. I should add too: fly the planned briefing, and no more. Landing when the mission is accomplished preserves the safety of flying.

Douglas Gilliss, CFII, ATP