Training Flight Safety
advertisement
1 Training Flight Safety Integrating Simulation and Operational Evidence to deliver Aviation Safety For personal use only 2 Cpt. Christof‐J. Kemény z Dipl.‐Ing. Aeronautical Engineering z Training Captain CRJ / EMJ z Certification for CRJ HGS z Simulator Evaluation Pilot z Project Pilot E190 z Head of Flight Crew Training / TRTO 3 Cpt. Willi‐Carlos André z Training Captain ARJ / EMJ z Courseware Development z Human Factors Specialist (EAAP) z Flight Instructor z Training Manager Embraer 4 Does a Full Flight Simulator contribute to flight safety with new aeroplane technology? 5 6 Secondary Definition ? Courtesy of Dr. Sunjoo K. Advani, Chairman of ICATEE 7 8 9 10 Requirement of enhanced training (Historic) Skill training Checks Procedures MCC 11 low level of automation sophisticated level of automation reduced reliability of automation high reliability tactile feedback no direct tactile feedback profound aircraft system knowledge hidden software algorithm pilot as active controller pilot as system operator manual flying skills required degrading manual flying skills 12 13 High Level of Pilot Assessing Monitoring Deciding Back‐up for Automation Machine Precise Thrust Control Data Computations Warnings and Alerts Man – Machine Integration Requirements Skill related training Task related training Scenario based training Deep system knowledge Extensive simulator training 14 Success Failure 15 Aeroplane Aeroplane Controls Aeroplane Controls Autopilot Controls Autopilot Computer Pilot Pilot Pilot Increasing peripheralization of the pilot 16 Aeroplane Controls Autopilot failure „old“ skills required Computer failure Pilot 17 Loss-of-Control fatalities have risen despite improvements in aircraft design, and existing training 18 General Assumption: Increase of automation increases safety Less training required Less complexity perceived Focus on Automation alone does it all 19 Analysis for Holistic Approach Simulator Skills Operating Standards •Technical Philosophy •Procedural •Interpersonal ? 20 The human operateurs role 21 Mindell´s Law*) : The system is: human(s) + machine Optimize the system, not the machine 22 Human Performance – what we are made for ~ 20 km/h 23 Measurement of Mind‐Time by Benjamin Libet concious experience 500 – 600 msec 24 (Human) failure rate increases in unknown, stressfull situations 25 Mean Time between Failure MTBF simple by Prof. Bubb, Munich 33 min complex frequently rare low stress high stress known no time press. unknown Time pressure 26 Mean Time between Failure MTBF simple by Prof. Bubb, Munich 5 min complex frequently rare low stress high stress known no time press. unknown Time pressure 27 Mean Time between Failure MTBF simple by Prof. Bubb, Munich 30 sec complex frequently rare low stress high stress known no time press. unknown Time pressure 28 Mean Time between Failure MTBF simple by Prof. Bubb, Munich 10 sec complex frequently rare low stress high stress known no time press. unknown Time pressure 29 Mean Time between Failure MTBF simple by Prof. Bubb, Munich 3 sec complex frequently rare low stress high stress known no time press. unknown Time pressure 30 Risk Analysis Conclusions of Report November 2009 z HGS would have likely or highly likely prevented the following percentage of all accidents – 38% of all the accidents/incidents • 69% of Takeoff and Landing Accidents (341 of 983) • 57% of Loss-of-Control Accidents (123 of 983) 31 Risk Analysis E‐Jets Originally Specified with Autoland How does Autoland contribute to Flight Safety ? 32 Risk Analysis How does Autoland contribute to Flight Safety ? • Only 2% of all landings are with Autoland • HGS provides safety benefits during all phases of flight 33 34 Analysis for Holistic Approach 9 Tools / Philosophy ? 35 Procedures are Airplane centred Integrating system logic and automation Pilot is regarded the active controler Use of appropriate level of automation Manual flying skills Manual flying is encouraged during normal line operation ad o kl r o W al rm o N Airplane Limit Limiter (Automation) Pilot Monitoring Pilot Flying Workload 36 Dealing with Limitations Ov erl oad Activation 37 Dealing with Limitations Increasing crew awareness Distinguishing between Pilot Operating (PO) and Pilot Flying (PF) Re‐defining Pilot Monitoring (PM)duties / tasks / skills PNF becomes PM New tasks / call outs for PM Defining monitoring as a skill not a task Active monitoring vs passive monitoring Re‐design of Indications / Annunciations to augment pilot monitoring (active monitoring) 38 Analysis for Holistic Approach 9 Tools / Philosophy ? Manual flying skills Crew Awareness 39 Flight Crew Licensing and Instructor Standardization Licensing – Training – Checking Criteria based approach does not provide appropriate skills Inadequately supports highly complex automated airplanes Aircraft manufacturer strive to reduce training Instructor Qualification and Standardization esp. for UPRT cannot be accomplished for most training departments. Increasing Training costs are a factor. Training regarded as another source of revenue 40 Analysis for Holistic Approach 9 Tools / Philosophy ? Manual flying skills Crew Awareness Licensing 41 Flight Simulation Training Device Qualification FFS – Data Package / Instructor Operating Station (IOS) Increasing Costs by Manufacturer – 2nd means of increasing revenue Inadequately supports Stall & Upset Recovery Training by design IOS inadequately delivers data to feedback the trainees´ performance Missing immediate feedback to trainees Limitations of Debriefing tools after simulator session 42 Analysis 9 Tools / Philosophy FSTD ? Manual flying skills Crew Awareness Licensing 43 Does Flight Simulation by itself contribute to aviation safety ? 44 50 40 Angle of Attack (deg) 30 20 10 ‐50 ‐40 ‐30 ‐20 ‐10 0 0 10 ‐10 Angle of Sideslip (deg) 20 30 40 50 45 Wording ‐ Nomenclature Stall recovery No valid stall data available „Approach to stall“ Recovery Training Upset recovery Missing Body sensations No sructural loads available „Basic“ Upset Recovery Training 46 Flight Ops Integrated Training Advanced Flying Skills (Basic) Manual Flying Skills 47 Flight Ops Integrated Training Simulator: • Train manoeuvers/ skills that cannot be trained during line ops • Abnormal A/C handling (Single Engine, TCAS, EGPWS ..) • System Abnormals • TEM Daily Line Ops: • Proficiency Training for basic skills • Manual Flying • Situation Awareness • Stabilized Approach Criterias 48 Flight Ops Integrated Training Simulator Training contribute to aviation safety Flight Ops is augmented by Simulator Training 49 50 Instructor Standardization Airline Instructor qualification and standardization is key • Aerobatic Experience is desireable but unrealistic • Majority of Airline Instructors without real Stall/Upset experience • Need of new approaches for Airline Instructor training • • • • Training Material Interactive Training via internet New Media ( „ipad‐generation based“) Team Teaching 51 Instructor Standardization Need / Proposal International Working Group to define Instructor Standards and Training 52 Take Away • Holistic or integral approach is required • Simulator Usage to augment Flight Ops • Pilot as active controller • Isolated training or simulator programs may fail • Reduced automation or re‐design may be required (system design) • Authorities & Manufactures` committment for additional training • Simulator Specifications to be updated • Airline Instructor Standardization is an industry task • Regard Piloting as a profession not as a job (with fair pay) 53 Thank You ! also for your questiones Christof.kemeny@dlh.de
