Unusual Attitudes..
I can't help but think we're departing from the essentials here...
Focusing on one pilot's failure during a check-ride is not advancing the subject.
However...
***Was the simulator placed in the unusual attitude using the automated instructor station selections which then freeze the simulator for discussion only? The recovery exercise then being carried out when freeze was released with no pass/fail criteria attached. Pilot collective bargaining organizations have been known to favor this to protect their members from a potentially strictly subjective assessment.
No... this was a check-ride.. not a training event... the candidate had undergone training over the previous few days which had included this very event.. and had performaed satisfactorily during training.
***Did the instructor/evaluator 'fly' the simulator into the UA and at some point say, "Recover"? As if the checkee were PNF but for some indeterminate reason not able to respond sooner?
The NFP 'flew' the a/c into the UA and the instruction to recover was given at the appropriate moment by the check-airman.
***Did the 'checkee' fly the simulator into the UA himself? (Intentionally or inadvertantly?) Was he in the dynamic loop continuously so as to experience the handling cues leading to the upset & UA?
No.. see above.. And the capt of aforementioned 737 was also not 'in the loop having mistakenly thought that the A/P was flying the a/c. So this is not an unrealistic scenario. With the emphasis on encouraging people to 'fly' aircraft through the systems this will not be the last event of a similar nature.
Was the simulator recovered without exceeding the 'CRASH' threshold? Do most other pilots NOT exceed VNE from those conditions?
Please give us credit for knowing how to train/test our crews. 150+ a/c and been around for 50+yrs. The candidate exceeded VNE to the point where even if he had finally retarded the thrust levers (and there was no indication that he was about to) any attempt at pulling up would have pulled the wings off. The a/c was effectively lost.
Did the upset correspond to an event which could actually occur in the real world? Should every pilot be evaluated in exactly the same manner using the same events? Or is there latitude to use any of these type setups and achieve the same transfer of learning goals trainingwise?
Yes it was potentially a real world event. No two events are likely to be exactly the same.. what does that matter ? The pilot has to deal with the situation as it happens... in real life especially.
None of the above is especially important... the focus needs to remain on training.. which even if given does not guarantee that someone will react correctly in the real world event but does go a long way to helping.
I've spent enough years both in a/c and simulators to know that a pilots actions can never be 100% forecast... even the best have surprised me on occasion. This pilot screwed up on the day in a way that would have been impossible to predict. Next time I'm sure he'll perform well. He elected not to continue with the C/Ride...
Last edited by MungoP; 30th January 2012 at 20:24.
Reason: sp