FLIGHT TRAINING DOCTRINE:
THE FOUNDATION OF PILOT
TRAINING REFORM
Elements of the
Pilot Training System
The Framework of
Pilot Training Reform
2
The Issues Requiring
Pilot Training Reform
• Safety
– Stagnant fatal accident rate for last decade
– Risk management impact on fatal accident rate
– Public image/latent training market
3
Issues Requiring Reform
(continued)
• Growing the community
– Creating a more welcoming training environment
– Providing more support for those learning to fly
– Creating easier stepping stones
– Using modern teaching tools and methods
4
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
•
•
•
•
Doctrine
Standards
Curricula
Instructors and Schools
5
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Doctrine
– The “what” and the “why” of the training system
– Official training doctrine contained in FAA
Handbooks and other documents
– Supported and supplemented by industry doctrine
• Manufacturers
• Courseware providers
• Training providers
6
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Standards
– Knowledge tests and practical test standards (PTS)
– Under current training philosophy, defines what is
taught for pilot certificates and ratings
– Issued by FAA, with some industry input
7
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Curricula
– The “when”, “where”, and “how” of pilot training
– Physical infrastructure and components
– Syllabus
– Training methods
– Training tools
8
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Curricula (continued)
– Defines the training environment
• Classroom vs. distance learning (web, etc.)
• Simulators and training devices vs. aircraft
– Defines the training method
• scenario-based vs. maneuver-based
• student-centered vs. instructor-centered
– Developed by industry, rather than FAA
9
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Instructors and schools
– The “who” of pilot training and the face of the
training system to the customer
– The integrators of the pilot training process
– Critical to safety, student pilot starts and retention
10
The Components of the Pilot Training
Delivery System
• Instructors and schools (continued)
– Instructors certified by FAA
– School oversight by FAA varies
• Training centers (Part 142) and Pilot Schools (Part 141)
subject to FAA oversight on curricula but entities
operating under Part 61 are not
– Professional accreditation not widespread
– Example: 90,000+ flight instructors, only 600 Master
Instructors
11
FAA Regulations
• The FAA pilot training regulations set the
boundaries of the pilot training system but do
not define its content or application
• Regulations and rule-making process lengthy
and uncertain
- Process can take ten years, end to end
- Final rule requires implementing action
12
FAA Doctrine and Standards
• Doctrine and standards are issued by FAA
administratively, rather than through the
rulemaking process
– Standards are enforceable, and can be revised
fairly easily
– Rulemaking is complex and takes years, or even
decades
– FAA’s recent emphasis on general aviation safety
focuses on non-rulemaking initiatives
13
This Symposium’s Challenge
• Determine needed changes in training
doctrine, standards, curricula, and instruction
– Reduce fatal accident rate
– Make training system more appealing and
accessible
• Craft recommendations for FAA and industry
• Engage FAA and industry decision makers to
improve the training system
14
Flight Training Doctrine –
The Foundation of
Pilot Training Reform
16
What is flight training doctrine?
• “The formal description of knowledge, skills,
and abilities that pilots must apply in order to
safely and efficiently operate aircraft,
including the rationale for prescribing these
requirements”
• The “what” and the “why” of pilot training
requirements
17
Doctrine Purposes
• Defining the minimum, desired, and/or
optimum requirements to perform the aircraft
mission specified
• Standardizing performance expectations, both
for the individual and the community
• Providing a body of knowledge, skills, abilities,
and procedures upon which to base
knowledge and practical test requirements
18
Origins of Pilot Training Doctrine
• Before 1939: Formalized mostly for airlines and
military only
– General aviation not well defined before then
• AOPA formed 1939
• J-3 Cub introduced 1938
– Formal doctrine did not exist
• Informal non-public training material
• “Tribal” knowledge passed down
19
Origins of Pilot Training Doctrine
• 1939-1941: Civilian Pilot Training Program
– First formal training doctrine for general aviation
– Codified by CAA (ex. - Civil Pilot Training Manual)
– Driven by looming military requirements
• CPTP created doctrine
– Example: Civil Pilot Training Manual
(CAA Bulletin 23, 1940-41)
20
Origins of Pilot Training Doctrine
• 1939-1941: Civilian Pilot Training Program
– Structure for training process defined
• Maneuver-based (rather than scenario or mission)
• Driven by test (knowledge and practical tests)
• Top down (rote, “spoon fed” by instructor)
– Despite some improvements, still largely the
model today
21
Who creates pilot training doctrine?
• Original doctrine development (1939-1941)
– Largely influenced by looming military needs
– Some input from CAA and training community
• Today’s doctrine developers
– FAA is custodian for documents, but
– Industry playing increasing role
• Ex. – FAA/industry General Aviation Joint Steering
Committee (GAJSC)
22
Pilot Training Doctrine ExamplesFAA Issued
• FAA issued legacy handbooks
– Airplane Flying Handbook
– Aviation Instructor’s Handbook
• New training topics
– Risk Management Handbook
– Advanced Avionics Handbook
23
Pilot Training Doctrine ExamplesIndustry Developed
• Industry developed training doctrine
– Manufacturers
– Courseware developers
– Training providers
24
How training doctrine is created
• Doctrine is created by FAA with increasing
industry input
• Doctrine can be issued administratively
– Usually with public notice
– Time frame: Months to one or two years
• Regulatory change requires elaborate
procedures
– Time frame: Years to decades
25
Doctrine vs. Regulatory Change
• Regulations are basis for doctrine but do not
determine actual content
• Example:
– 61.107 Flight proficiency (private pilot)
• 61.107(b)(1)(v) “Performance maneuvers”
– Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3A)
• Chapter 9 Performance Maneuvers
– Steep turns
– Chandelles
26
Key Players in Doctrine Development
• FAA Headquarters (AFS-800 and AFS-600)
• FAA/Industry Safety Groups (GAJSC)
• Research community (Center for General
Aviation Research – CGAR)
• Industry
– Manufacturers
– Courseware providers
– Others
27
Recent Progress in Doctrine
Development and Revision
• Many FAA handbooks have been reissued
– Example: Instrument Flying Handbook
• New FAA handbooks have been created
– Example: Risk Management Handbook
28
Recent Progress in Doctrine
Development and Revision
• Despite recent progress, key questions
remain:
– Has new doctrine been effectively integrated into
curricula and testing standards?
– Are pilots using the new doctrine in flight
operations?
29
Some other questions to ask
• Is there any research to support the need for,
and effectiveness of, revised training doctrine?
– Previous research available?
– Research currently underway?
– Additional research needed?
– Who will sponsor?
30
Some other questions to ask
• How can FAA and industry move forward from
here to ensure that doctrine is up to date and
is effectively applied in training and in pilot
flight operations?
– How can industry and FAA collaborate?
– Is there a current process we can use?
31
Some other questions to ask
• Can manufacturers, and courseware and
training providers, develop and implement
effective training doctrine?
– Which industry elements are best equipped to
develop doctrine?
– Are there alliances of manufacturers and training
providers that are already doing this?
32
Research Supporting Modernized
Training Doctrine
Michele Summers Halleran
Center of Excellence for General Aviation
Research – CGAR
CGAR was established in 2001.
CGAR’s mission is to utilize the world-class talents of our General
Aviation Consortium members to make significant
contributions toward improvements in safety and efficiency
for General Aviation air transportation.
CGAR accomplishes its goals with multidisciplinary teams to
enhance aviation related research, education, technology
transfer, and the utilization of research in mission critical
areas.
Center of Excellence for General Aviation
Research – CGAR
The Center of Excellence for General Aviation Research is a research organization
in a consortium of academia, industry, and government that addresses the needs
of General Aviation through its synergistic relationships.
•
•
•
•
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
University of Alaska
University of North Dakota
Wichita State University
– Affiliate Members
• Florida A&M University
• Middle Tennessee State University
Sponsored by the Office of Airport and Aircraft Safety R&D Division
FAA Industry Training Standards – FITS
Develop a Methodology to Justify the Inclusion or Removal of
Maneuvers from the Practical Test Standards
Summary of Findings and Recommendations to the FAA
Methodology for Validation of Tasks and Completion Standards
Results of Initial Validation of Tasks and Completion Standards
Effectiveness of FITS Training
Embry Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) Study
University of North Dakota (UND) Study
Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU) Research
MTSU Initial FITS Results
Implementation of the FITS Program in TAAs: Lessons Learned
Best Evidence for the FITS Program in TAAs
FITS Enhances GPS Proficiency
FITS Commercial Pilot Training Course – A Student’s Perspective
Guide for Instructors and Examiners-Evaluating Pilots Using a Scenario-Based
Methodology
FAA Industry Training Standards – FITS
General Aviation Technically Advance Aircraft Safety Study
Scenario Based training to teach Single Pilot Resource Management
Examining Learner Centered Grading
Scenario Based Training in TAA to Improve Risk Management
Student Pilot Situational Awareness: The Effects of Trust in Technology
Evaluating the Satisfaction and Quality of FITS Flight Training
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Scenario Based Training in the Collegiate Flight
Training Environment
Validity and Reliability of Learner Centered and Collaborative Grading
Determining Appropriate Levels of Automation
Runway Incursion and Wrong Runway Threat and Error Management Syllabus
Current CGAR Research Projects
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
•
Remote Airfield Lighting Systems
•
A Database Management System for General Aviation Safety
•
Pilot Awareness of Current and LED Elevated Runway Guard Lighting
•
Flight Data Monitoring: General Aviation Safety Information Analysis & Sharing
•
Weather in the Cockpit: Pilot Training Requirements
•
Synthetic Speech and Visual Data Communications for Flight Deck Use (Contract)
•
Pilot Source Study, Phase III
University of Alaska - Anchorage
•
Remote Airport Lighting Systems III
•
Weather Technology in the Cockpit: CONOPS
University of North Dakota
•
Weather in the Cockpit: User Needs Statement
•
Business Jet Loads Data Acquisition
•
Development of UAS Operational Data Collection Concept
•
Subject Matter Expert Support for FAA UAS Simulator Workstation
•
Helicopter Lighting System
•
FDM – GASIA & Sharing Phase I
•
Weather in the Cockpit: User Needs Statement
2010 CGAR Research Projects
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
• FITS Runway Incursion and Wrong Runway Threat and Error Management Syllabus
• Data Communications Human Factor Air Traffic Control Implications on Preferential
Treatment Service-for-Equipage
University of Alaska – Anchorage
•
Visual Guidance - Remote Airfield Lighting
University of North Dakota
•
Operational Loads Monitoring of Agricultural Aircraft
•
Analysis of 14 CFR Part 61 for Pilot, Flight Instructor and Ground Instructor
Certification for Unmanned Aerial Systems
•
Analysis of 14 CFR Parts 91 & 43 for UAS Applications
Wichita State University
• Load Spectrum Development for Unmanned Aerial Systems Airworthiness
For More Information
• http://www.cgar.org
• http://faasafety.gov/
• http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/training/
fits/
QUESTIONS ?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Michele Summers Halleran
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Aeronautical Science Department
Daytona Beach, FL
(386) 226-7020
Michele.Halleran@erau.edu
Jens Hennig
Vice-President Operations General Aviation Manufacturers Association
Creating Industry Training
Doctrine to Improve Flight Safety
Travis Klumb
Cirrus Aircraft
Cirrus Aircraft Flight Standards Office
• SMEs and Flight Instructors
–
–
–
–
–
–
Transition training
Corporate flight operations
Aircraft delivery
Training network oversight
Flying club
Courseware and document
creation
• Close interaction with entire
company
–
–
–
–
Engineers
Flight Test Pilots
Technical Publications
Vendors
Cirrus aircraft are built on a foundation of safety
features, but there is a common weak link
WHY DO WE EXIST?
Always Trust Your Instruments, Son
Cirrus Flight Training
• The pilot is still by far the weakest link
– Stick and rudder skills
– Avionics/automation proficiency
– Behavioral issues
• Hazardous attitudes / risk management
• Standardization is our philosophy
– Same procedures taught by all Cirrus instructors
• Factory Instructors, CSIPs, CTCs
– Same procedures flown by all Cirrus pilots
Standardization Emphasis Areas
Standardized
Instructors
• Factory
Instructors
Standardized
Procedures
• Flight
Operations
Manuals
• CSIPs / CTCs
• Instructor
Edition FOMs
Standardized
Training
• Initial Training
• Transition &
Differences
Training
• Recurrent
Training
STANDARDIZED INSTRUCTION
Cirrus Standardized Instructor Pilot
• Foundation of standardized flight training in Cirrus aircraft
• Provide experienced CFII’s in-depth knowledge of aircraft
systems, flying qualities, and teaching techniques
• Promote standardized flying among as many Cirrus pilots as
possible
• Recognized by most insurance underwriters
– Program has helped reduce premiums & increase insurability
CSIP Program
• Each instructor personally
trained by Cirrus Aircraft
Instructors
– We think of the training as a
mini type-rating
– 450 current and active CSIPs
– 1500 instructors have gone
through the training
• CSIP must renew
certification annually
– Online quizzing, flight with
Cirrus instructor or very
experienced CSIP
STANDARDIZED PROCEDURES
Flight Operations Manuals
• Primary standardization
document
– Pilot and Instructor
Editions
– Normal, abnormal,
emergency procedures
– Flow patterns, profiles,
expanded checklists
– Desired outcomes,
common errors, teaching
techniques
Flight Operations Manuals
• Guide for all Cirrus pilots on how to fly Cirrus aircraft
• Available for free to anyone at CirrusAircraft.com
• Standardization concepts will be key to operating more
complex aircraft such as the SF50
• Used as common “Bible” for Cirrus flying and training
– Cirrus Instructors, CSIPs, CTCs, CPPP Instructors
– Very useful to avoid channel conflict and to quickly resolve
technique disputes among pilots
STANDARDIZED TRAINING
Cirrus Transition Training
• Complimentary with aircraft purchase
– Evolved through the years with the airplane
– Various training providers
– 1→2→3 days of training
• Extensive pre-training, ground, and flight training
• Performance-based
– Not everyone passes or progresses at same rate
• Flexible and customizable, yet highly standardized
Transition Syllabus Suite
• Training plan for Cirrus
pilots
• Transition and differences
training
• Recurrent training plan
• Maximum flexibility while
maintaining standardization
– Weather delays, en-route
training, advanced training
Access to Flight
• Combined Private Pilot
Certificate and Instrument
Rating
• Dr. Paul Craig of MTSU, ASA,
Cirrus Flight Standards
• Heavily based in FITS concepts
• Scenario-based training from
the beginning
• Awaiting rulemaking change to
allow simultaneous check ride
Additional Ways Cirrus Influences
Training Doctrine
• Cirrus Partner Symposium
• Training Webinars
• COPA (Cirrus type group) programs
– Cirrus Pilot Proficiency Program (CPPP)
– Critical Decision Making Courses (CDM)
LUNCH