It’s not the skill in recovering from a post stall upset, it’s the skill of avoiding a stall or the post stall consequences which is important
Prevention is obviously of prime importance.
However, by disregarding the "cure" side, one let the last hole open (in the chain of failures).
When and how are line pilots taught to think?
That is a good question. Some answers :
- Pilot selection : select people with good education, check theyr "thinking" ability. This is not in phase with the current philosophy of selecting "standard" (average) personnalities. One of my best student was rejected for being "too good" at thinking. He was also very, very good at "handling" the controls ... (Got a job in a less pretentious company without problem.)
- Continuous education : lectures, reading accident reports and analysing failures, recurrent training with the appropriate briefings and debriefings ... From first copilot job to captaincy, many many opportunities arise to learn facts and to learn thinking, decision making etc; still a few years and many more opportunities before becoming an TRI. At the TRI level, scenario based training make it mandatory to think and to teach thinking ...
That is theory ...
I'am a strong supporter of the thinking pilots, and of all the means to improve thinking ability. It is a long quest, and if you care about it for your children or grand-children it is a long term investment ...
In the real world of the airline Industry?
I'm not sure that the management does care. Including at the flying department managment level.
Finally :
Maybe the captain was a good TRI/TRE with great thinking ability. And he was just "not in the mood" that day. Brain performance reduced for any reason. Human "thinking" failure ... That is. Brain power more often than not is a weak link in the chain ...
I keep thinking that in a stressfull context, basic piloting skills - skills that do not require thinking - can save the day.