Does a pilot really need to be trained how to "monitor"?
Aviation Week & Space Technology /1-14 February 2016, published an article "Is the FAA too soft in combating the ill-effects of automation." Auditors found that the FAA did not have "effective processes" in place to assess monitoring skills both in the cockpit and in the simulator.
In addition the audit said that FAA inspectors say "they do not know how to assess a pilot's ability to monitor the state of the aircraft, beyond observing call-outs."
A recommendation the NTSB issued to the FAA in 2007 to train pilots in monitoring skills, remains "Open-Acceptable" in advance of the new training rules going live in three years.
Where does all this nonsense stop? No wonder flight operations inspectors admit to not knowing how to assess a pilot's ability to monitor the state of the aircraft beyond standard call-outs.
I hate to say this but it seems inevitable that some University bright spark(s) with multiple degrees in flight safety disciplines, will dream up costly courses on how to monitor (watch) a Magenta Line? Big money awaits authors if Regulators take up the idea.
How on earth does one assess "monitoring?" No wonder FAA inspectors themselves are unsure of how this is done. Maybe watching the PM's narrowed eyes darting up and down left right and centre and ears wiggling and hands at the ready to whip control from the captain if the autopilot strays one millimetre from an ILS glide path?
Isn't monitoring nothing more than sitting back and keeping a general eye on where the aircraft is going? Are we in danger of making a mountain out of a mole hill? I suspect the majority of professional pilots think so.
Comments welcomed before thousands of new pilots in the future are forced to pay out of their own pockets for yet another "Safety Related" qualification.