Air Line Pilots Association’s Post

In complex socio-technical systems, human operators are the primary security providers. 

“The Dangers of Single-Pilot Operations” Advocates of single-pilot operations highlight potential cost savings and increased efficiency. However, extensive research and practical experience underscore the significant safety risks and operational challenges associated with reducing crew size in the cockpit. Studies by reputable organizations like NASA and the FAA over the past decade reveal that these risks far outweigh any financial or logistical benefits. Safety Risks 1. Pilot Fatigue: Single-pilot operations increase the risk of fatigue, as one pilot is solely responsible for all tasks, including communication, navigation, and monitoring the aircraft. Fatigue impairs decision-making and reaction times, crucial in high-stress situations. 2. Emergency Situations: In the event of an emergency, having a second pilot can be critical. Dual-pilot operations ensure that there is always a backup to assist with troubleshooting, managing the aircraft, and communicating with air traffic control. 3. Increased Workload: The workload for a single pilot is significantly higher, which can lead to cognitive overload. This increases the chances of errors, especially in complex or high-pressure scenarios. Operational Challenges 1. Technical Failures: A second pilot provides a layer of redundancy in handling technical failures. Without this, the risk of catastrophic outcomes in the event of system malfunctions is higher. 2. Training and Skill Maintenance: Single-pilot operations require a higher level of training and skill maintenance to ensure that the pilot can manage all tasks alone. This can be challenging and costly to maintain at the necessary standards. 3. Human Factors: The interplay between two pilots helps mitigate human error through cross-checking and collaboration. Single-pilot operations eliminate this safeguard, increasing the potential for mistakes. Conclusion While single-pilot operations promise cost reductions, the comprehensive studies and historical data suggest that the safety and operational risks are significant. The evidence indicates that maintaining two pilots in the cockpit is essential for ensuring aviation safety and managing the complex demands of modern air travel.

What makes air travel so safe is the number of redundancies in place. Multi-person flight crews are an essential redundancy that keeps the world safely in motion.

Pilots oppose the idea of single pilot operations. Why? It may sound enticing to a historically “type A” group of people - not having to worry about someone else’s opinion. But the reality is… We are all humble enough to know better. Because every last one of us has made a mistake at some point, no matter how big or small, that never developed into something bigger because we had another pilot next to us that caught it. There are two of us for a shared work load. There are two of us for redundancy. There are two of us to utilize diverse opinions and approach tasks from different ways of thinking. Single pilot operations are a risk to this industry. Dual pilot operations keep everyone safe. Air Line Pilots Association #aviation #airlines

One pilot is not enough.

At the airline level, there are two pilots in the flight deck at any given moment due to the stress and many decisions that must be made on a day-to-day basis. Advocating for less pilots in the flight deck compromises advancements made in safety at an industry level. Two pilots are absolutely necessary in such large operations for the safety of everyone involved, especially for passengers. #SafetyStartsWith2 #TwoIsBetterThan1

Powerful image to illustrate an extremely important point. With the complexity of today’s aviation environment, TWO highly trained and capable pilots are the most important safety feature of any large transport category aircraft.

It is of the utmost importance that professionals in the business and commercial aviation industry stand with ALPA in the fight against airlines and governing bodies to irradicate 50% of the flight deck. We have already seen positions like a flight navigator/radio operator cut (in some aircraft), followed by the flight engineer, all to keep profits high. Now, they are not only attempting to cut down on jobs to increase margins but doing so at a direct cost to the safety of the passengers and crew aboard, putting all at a far more substantial risk than prior. We can see, just as recently as 2015, the tragic Germanwings 9525 incident, which was caused by the F/O deliberately crashing the aircraft into terrain after the Captain was locked out of the flight deck, and this is not an isolated incident; we just saw the Horizon jump-seater, and what he tried to do. If enacted, this change would not only prove a disaster for Crew Resource Management (CRM) but also a risk to safety in general from more than one angle. As we all know, the FARs and other aviation regulations are written in BLOOD, but it shouldn't take blood to see that this proposition may, God forbid, directly lead to one or more tragic occurrences.

This image summarizes the argument extremely well. Sometimes, one just isn’t enough. An airliner always has two or three of everything for redundancy - two engines, two FMCs, two Autopilots, etc. Why would you insist on just one pilot? No redundancy there. So knock it off, all you engineers and airline bean counters. Your arguments are invalid.

Aviation transport operates in a complex environment with high altitude, lower oxygen levels, and significant pressure. Therefore, each aircraft system needs at least one backup, just like pilots. For this reason, having more backup systems enhances safety, but due to economic reasons, a balanced approach is better.