Actually, I think PEI 3712 has it just about right. Of course, there is almost nothing very complex in life that can be summed into a few cogent sentences. But, he is correct that without an adequate cognitive basis, the psychomotor application is going to suffer. Factually, the first part of it to suffer is almost always the fact that we forget just how hard it is to do the job – by that I mean, for example, in flying a simple ILS approach – by hand (w/o FD) the following areas are critically important—
The 1st Level: recognize the amount of correction required – in what direction the correction is needed – what controls are used – and in what order – including the amount of control deflection – the associated control required (i.e., rudder application with aileron use; thrust application with nose up elevator displacement, etc. and what input leads or lags) – recognize the change in the aircraft flight path (a very subtle recognition) – recognizing when and how to remove the correction – how much of the correction to remove – is trim going to be required before, during, and/or after the control adjustments.
But this becomes very highly dependent on the “preparation” or foundation knowledge:
The 2nd Level: the myriad of “pieces” you need to remember, consider, apply correctly, and in the correct order in order to know what needs to take place in the 1st level. For example, how heavy is the airplane, what headwind, tailwind, or crosswind exists that will affect the adjustments to localizer, glide path, and airspeed adjustments; maintenance of situational awareness (i.e., is the aircraft ahead still on the runway; what is the communication from ATC and does it affect you; does your aircraft “feel” like you thought it was going to “feel;” what is the position of your hands, feet, arms – are they where you expected them to be; does it “sound” correct; and if any of the above causes a question, what is it and should you continue the approach.
Of course, both of the above lists are pathetically limited, but this should provide an idea of the kinds of things that can get lumped into the cognitive sense area and provide some understanding as to how the cognitive and psychomotor areas are inexorably linked. The cognitive area generally consists of knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation – in that order. And this is what I was attempting to point out in the “2nd Level” as a basis for being able to perform at the “1st Level,” even though the 1st Level has included what many believe are “cognitive” pieces … and they’re NOT altogether wrong. It’s a very close differentiation between knowing (cognitive) and doing (motor)– that’s why it’s called “psycho” and “motor” (which means “motor action directly proceeding from mental activity”).
When someone gets to be routinely used to using automation, almost any automation, the basis for understanding may still be present – but dragging it back to the surface for immediate application varies from individual to individual.
Also, I whole-heartedly agree with those here who make it a point to jump on those who want to “play” or “have fun” experimenting with the airplane with passengers on board. That is a supreme NO NO. While simulators are not airplanes … we have to admit that they are a very good approximation of airplanes – and they’re getting better at doing so, every day. My position is to use the training equipment to practice, play, and learn. Yes, it can be fun – and it should be. But because all of us are capable of making mistakes – let’s make sure that we use every opportunity to minimize the mistakes we make with passengers on board. Let’s make sure that we practice and experiment in the simulated environment. Once we have developed the skills to operate the airplane using the systems available – then we can operate the airplane using what we've learned and practiced.