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

Training for LOSA, including the behavioural markers as well as classification of threats and errors, takes two full days and is similar to that recommended for using the markers alone.
The markers listed below in Table 2 are used in Line Operations Safety Audits, non-jeopardy observations of crews conducting normal line flights. Each of these markers has been validated as relating to either threat and error avoidance or management. With the exception of two global ratings, specific markers are rated (if observed) during particular phases of flight. Following is a list of currently used markers showing phase where rated, followed by the ratings for each phase of flight:
Table 2 University of Texas (UT) Behavioural markers Rating Scale
SOP BRIEFING  The required briefing was interactive and operation-ally thorough  Concise, not rushed, and met SOP requirements Bottom lines were established  P-D 
PLANS STATED  Operational plans and decisions were communi-cated and acknowledged  Shared understanding about plans —Everybody on the same page“  P-D 
WORKLOAD ASSIGNMENT  Roles and responsibilities were defined for normal and non-normal situations  Workload assignments were communicated and acknowl-edged  P-D 
CONTINGENCY MANAGEMENT  Crew members developed effective strategies to manage threats to safety  Threats and their consequences were anticipated Used all available resources to manage threats  P-D 
MONITOR / CROSSCHECK  Crew members actively monitored and crosschecked systems and other crew members  Aircraft position, settings, and crew actions were verified  P-T-D 
WORKLOAD MANAGEMENT  Operational tasks were prioritised and properly managed to handle primary flight duties  Avoided task fixation Did not allow work overload  P-T-D 
VIGILANCE  Crew members remained alert of the environment and position of the aircraft  Crew members maintained situational awareness  P-T-D 
AUTOMATION MANAGEMENT  Automation was properly managed to balance situational and/or workload requirements  Automation setup was briefed to other members Effective recovery techniques from automation anomalies  P-T-D 
EVALUATION OF PLANS  Existing plans were reviewed and modified when necessary  Crew decisions and actions were openly analyzed to make sure the existing plan was the best plan  P-T 
INQUIRY  Crew members asked questions to investigate and/or clarify current plans of action  Crew members not afraid to express a lack of knowledge “Nothing taken for granted” attitude  P-T 
Key to Phase: P =Pre-departure/Taxi; T =Takeoff /Climb; D =Descent/Approach/Land; G =Global 

Table 2 University of Texas (UT) Behavioural markers Rating Scale

ASSERTIVENESS  Crew members stated critical information and/or solutions with appropriate persistence  Crew members spoke up without hesitation  P-T 
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：CAP 737 Crew Resource Management (CRM) Training 機組資源管理培訓(103)