UPRT part three
These are just several examples to make the point that industry, and instructor pilots, need to clearly understand the training objectives, and in how to accurately and effectively utilize simulators and ALL training infrastructure to ensure accurate transfer of training.
Other gains can be made in simply HOW we train in the simulator. Many have expressed here how most simulator training is just rote unusual attitude training. First, we cannot assume that when an airline hires a new pilot that they have the requisite knowledge of aerodynamics in all flight regimes (high and low) or the handling characteristics of their aircraft (ICATEE recommendations are to enhance the academic requirements at both the licensing level and the airline/operator level, which should produce more knowledgeable pilots in the future). There is still a need for what we call "maneuvers-based training (MOFT), but it should be broken down to basic levels on the initial type specific training in the FFS. The pilots should be introduced to the basic manual handling characteristics of their aircraft, with an emphasis on the information available on their flight displays, and how it relates to energy management and trends. Handling should be related to a practical demonstration of aircraft performance, and how it is related to the basic aerodynamic principals involved. And then this demonstration should be repeated to show the tremendous difference related to high altitude flight. For the AF 447 pilots, they likely never hand flew at high altitude, nor in the simulator environment, let alone in degraded flight protection modes.
As an aside, you may have noticed that the industry verbiage is changing from Upset Recovery Training (URT) to Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT). This is based on our analysis that the best gain in risk reduction in LOC-I is to deploy a dual strategy of emphasizing both Prevention and Recovery. Prevention is leveraged by enhanced aerodynamic academics and appropriate use of simulators. The goal is that through improved pilot knowledge and awareness of their specific threat environments, pilots will undertake risk avoidance strategies, or at the least recognize increasing risk threats and take early action before an actual "recovery" is required.
I will address the benefits of "on-aircraft" training later, but our research has indicated that pilots need the exposure to "real aircraft" g-maneuvering to acquire the actual recovery skills required to recover from Upsets. However, those pilots who do complete some form of "on-aircraft" UPRT not only benefit from greatly enhanced recovery skills, but also show tremendous gains in appreciating and utilizing the benefits of using prevention strategies in their line flying activities for avoiding and preventing upsets.
Going back to MOFT or maneuvers-based training, the FFS are excellent for baseline training of this sort. And as "recovery skills" can at times be counter intuitive (" I need to "push" to recovery when my nose is low or I am inverted?"), they will need to be re-visited in recurrent training at appropriate intervals. But industry will need to evolve from better and more thorough MOFT, to more realistic scenario based training, or LOFT if you will. MOFT can be rote, and is usually delivered to one pilot at a time to build up essential pilot competencies. But it needs to evolve to a context in replicating how upsets will be experienced on the line; as a surprise, and in the shared crew responsibility requiring effective CRM, hence LOFT style UPRT training.
LOFT should be used by an airline or training provider to evaluate how effective their flight crews are in upset prevention, by tasking flight crews on their effectiveness in employing avoidance strategies, and then in monitoring aircraft performance and taking effective action before an aircraft departs the normal flight envelope (any upset by definition starts within the normal envelope. Most but not all upset/stall scenarios can be prevented by flight crews employing early monitoring or prevention strategies).
MOFT will continue to be required however, as these skills are perishable and do need re-visiting at appropriate intervals. So the near future will likely see a combination of on-going MOFT and LOFT.
End Part three