Jet upset training
 

Is jet upset training a mandatory requirement from ICAO/Airbus? Which law requires airlines to train the pilots for jet upset recovery?

FAA is introducing UPRT, some other nations are following suit. I haven't got my notes for the ICAO ref.

The Europeans are dragging their heels a bit.

The law will affect you when your Indian DGCA mandates it.

The important thing to remember is that you need the right simulator for it. you can't just take any old 320 sim and do a 120 degree AoB recovery, or stalls. There are not many sims in the world that have been modified yet.

Not only is there to be the flight characteristics (except G obviously) but the iOS panel has to support instructor visibility of the trainees' control inputs (eg warnings on rudder use, and the g load graph).

My company does it every 6 months as part of the ATQP .

Whilst I agree re the IOS requirements, I will disagree with the FFS requirements. Any level D device can support UPRT training. Updates are only required for Advanced Stall Training capabilities.

Not sure where you get that from; EASA introduced mandatory UPRT two years ago and the FAA are still thinking about it.

ZFT
I agree with you. We already do it for some airlines. Unusual attitudes and recovery training has no problems in any SIM. Advance stall cannot be done in every sim because they are not programmed with realistic data.

OK - let's be clear we are talking the same thing here.

Basic Upset recovery training has been in place for some years now in many jurisdictions, generally post AF447, in some cases earlier. This can be done in most sims. It does not cover the full stall.

New changes being implemented include an extended envelope training course in full stall /stick pusher recovery, full upset (eg 120 deg+ Aob recovery) and a couple of days classroom theory. It's not a check per se, it's training and will be mandatory for all existing pilots and a refresher involving this each year. And the UPRT/EET will become part of the type rating. SFIs will need specific training to conduct the course and can only be done in the upgraded sim. There is a massive emphasis on the dangers of existing negative training with existing simulator training.

I had a short session a little while ago in the sim with the FAA guys going over this.

(Within Europe) EET is neither a requirement for recurrent nor TR training (and the latest CS FSTD A issued quite recently even allows for Level D FFSs to be qualified D without advance stall attributes). I concur will your other points, especially the need for correctly trained UPRT instructors.

Hence the "dragging their heels" quip .... actually the FAA's words not mine!

Everything you write except the full stall is exactly what is mandated under EASA regs in ORO.FC.220/230 and has been for two years; full upsets, classroom stuff and mandatory instructor training. It is an operator requirement primarily because for licencing there is no mandatory recurrent training, so to get it in the recurrent they have put it under the operator responsibilities. It comes into the initial TR course this August - again, sometime before I believe the FAA are mandating it.
The reason for not including the full stall training was the lack of suitably qualified sims. It is proposed to be included as soon as they are real. Boeing and Airbus tell us that will be some time, although apparently Gulfstream have already produced a data package. So I think the FAA person you quote was talking BS

Indian DGCA has no rule/circular regarding training the pilots on jet upset recovery. But it is a mandatory check for IR/PPC/SKILL TEST

They are real - the modified sims are out there for many aircraft types for B and A with the data packages for full stalls and the modified iOS station interface. The percentage modified is low but will increase over the next few years.

A couple of days?? Surely you jest.. Jet upset theory should easily be done in less than one hour. Reminds me of a company in Auckland New Zealand, who offer a three month MCC course for $15,000 upwards and suckers pay it.

ICAO has published 'Upset prevention and recovery training provisions'. On their website you can view Annex 1 UP&RT excerpts (Amendment 172) which outlines the minimum upset prevention and recovery training standards and recommended practices to meet aeroplane flight crew licensing requirements.

It is rapidly developing into yet another cottage industry like CRM, TEM and their ilk. Two days in the classroom is an overkill; unless of course you are trying to make a buck out of it. You can easily cover the subject in two hours. You also only need an hour in the simulator with a competent instructor who knows what he is talking about. There are only so many UA's you can get into and the basic theory of recovery applies to most.. After all it is only flight instrument interpretation.

From my experience teaching acro and upset training in the actual airplane, I think the right answer for classroom work is somewhere in the middle of the 2 hour and 2 day figures. But for the amount of training time in the sim or airplane, I vehemently disagree with this. What's necessary to inculcate into the student is far, far more than "only flight instrument interpretation" (other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?") And a mere hour is worth next to nothing. There's only hope in sustained and repeated practice.

Orienting one's mind is much harder than it sounds, and what one is taught as the right course of action in an upset situation is easily overwhelmed by incorrect instinct (usually to pull back on the yoke and Split-S out.)

You can teach an average pilot to safely barrel roll the simulator on instruments after 3-4 attempts. That is an unusual attitude. Freeze the simulator when inverted to discuss the use of the sky pointer for recovery. Pitch to 50 degrees or more nose up then teach the student how to unload and roll to the nearest horizon for recovery. On instruments. it is all clearly described in the FCTM. It is nothing new. 2-4 attempts at very nose high attitude recovery should have the student recovering consistently well. All on instruments.
Put simulator is steep spiral descent. Demo the correct recovery (unload and pull when wings level). Teach the correct method of correcting GPWS Pull Up warning. 3-4 attempts for a competent pilot on instruments.
There must be a sensible limit to repeated practice. Like riding a bicycle you will never forget. In almost every case of airliners crashing due loss of control in cloud or at night, the blunt fact is the pilot concerned simply could not fly on instruments. The key to a successful recovery from an unusual attitude is good instrument flying ability in the first place.

If your whole career from cadet to captain (common nowadays) has been monitoring an automatic pilot, leaving only five minutes of (if the airline permits) manual flight with autothrottle engaged and concentrating on the flight director, then no wonder self confidence fades and you need the crutch of the automatics from take off to touch down.

Note the title is 'prevention & recovery' techniques. I have the opinion that many airline SOP's are so rigid and inhibiting that they consider the energy should be put into prevention; therefore they can spend less time & education on the recovery because they believe it will not be necessary if their trained monkeys do not stray from their tiny enclosure. Full use of automatics will save the day. Much UPT training is done by SFI's of 2 years experience. Hm? I wonder just how much they can instil in realism and how much of that RST is just tick the box.

You can get live Jet upset training in an L29 or T38...here in the states