The human element in airline training - Royal Aeronautical Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

22 THE FAILED STUDENT course analysis of poor results will often identify probable reasons. It could be that need-to-know information is buried in a mass of generally irrelevant detail or that not enough information has been programmed for inclusion in the lectures. An honest review of the curriculum and available teaching facilities may lead to one or more changes in the lesson material, as part of the continuing search for the perfect conversion course. It may be apposite to remark at this point, that observations made at the time of the Regulator’s initial course approval and any subsequent audit comments should never be ignored. Points raised by Regulatory Authority auditors must always be addressed and should only be turned down for good reason, but only after careful constructive consideration and due discussion with the inspector(s) concerned. 96. Changes could range from the contents of some (or all) parts of the syllabus and the methods used in teaching, to the time allocated for completing the course. The manner used by persons involved to deal with each other may also need looking into. Are the instructors themselves free from stresses, even those possibly generated by their head of section? How well do instructors as a whole communicate with their students and among themselves? These typical questions may need to be asked and require satisfactory answers. Regular audits of training activities would give an insight into on-going individual teaching methods and of the way students react to the teaching process, by evaluating their level of learning through regular progress tests and final results. 97. During an audit, the ‘open-minded’ auditor should be immersed in the teaching process so that it can be evaluated thoroughly. Sitting with students during lessons and attending briefings and de-briefings for simulator or aircraft training and skill-test flights (observed from a jump seat), would continue the filtering process and add to the overall picture gained during the audit of most, if not all, instructors and examiners during any one audit. Analysis of comments and suggestions made by the auditor to the hierarchy would then establish any necessary action for improved teaching techniques and/or needed changes to lesson modules. 98. Teachers and examiners could then be brought up-to-date accordingly, by way of ‘Notes to training staff’ and at standardisation meetings. Regularly arranged seminars would also allow amenable training managers and staff to get to know one another better, while exchanging thoughts aimed at improving the overall quality of the product and also allowing views and new proposals to be freely and helpfully discussed by all. 99. It is essential that inquisitive thinking and equably disposed training managers who know how to delegate and supervise in an efficient non-confrontational manner, adopt an approach that shows a high level of empathy towards those who have new thoughts to communicate. An open-door policy and a receptive attitude to new ideas offered for consideration are essential, if the best is to be obtained from the hands-on experience acquired by staff in their day-to-day work. 100. What’s more, it is essential that instructors and examiners communicate effectively with each other in their every day encounters so that a high level of understanding between them develops and is also conveyed to their students. 7.2.2 Instruction standards 101. Different instructors may offer contradictory and therefore confusing information because of poor standardisation. Although individuals cannot be programmed to speak the same words all The human element in airline training the time and should not be turned into automatons of action and word, the same broad party line is an essential prerequisite for all instructors to follow. Even if they only differed on minor matters, confusion could easily be fostered in students’ minds however inadvertently and unintentionally. 102. It has been known for instructors to say: “Although the manual sets out this procedure in the way it does ... what I normally do is ...”. This puts the trainee in a quandary. He wishes to please, so he flies the procedure exactly as he believes his teacher prefers it to be flown ... TO PLEASE that instructor. Then comes the next day. What should that student do when the next ‘teacher’ asks him for a demonstration of what he believes was taught and expects it flown according to the training manual? Would the student not feel aggrieved if he were to be failed for doing exactly as he had been told to do the day before? 103. Use of prepared instructional audio-visual packages helps to ensure the overall standardisation of content for students, with the instructor as supervisor, ‘clarifier’ or demonstrator to help trainees who are not clear about what it is that they have seen or heard. Standardisation is encouraged and pre-prepared lesson material is complemented by a regular ‘continuation’ training programme for instructors, when maybe an instructor is recorded on video tape as he lectures a class of fellow instructors on a particular subject. Replay of the video tape and self-critique, together with general group discussion led by the session leader, then goes a long way towards instructor awareness of points to watch out for and improved teaching cum lecturing standards. A strong sense of team spirit and the sure knowledge that the team is at work to improve the product, are essential ingredients of such a programme. There must never be any feeling that a witchhunt is in progress. 104. As a corollary, it is clear that ‘Examiners’ also need a standard approach to their discipline, exactly like instructors, if fair evenhandedness is to prevail when they test for proficiency. Standardisation programmes similar to those for instructors therefore need to address the manner of achieving such impartiality. 7.2.3 The despondent student 105. Total failure for whatever the reason is difficult to justify. It may be hard to explain, particularly when dealing with an otherwise experienced pilot who will have demonstrated his ability in the past. In such a case, one is not dealing with an ab initio pilot who has yet to satisfy all his masters with his ability to fly, let alone operate the aircraft and manage its flight deck. It may be necessary to look searchingly for a reason when faced with such a situation. 7.3 The deteriorating performance 106. Poor or deteriorating performances from the part of a pilot may become particularly evident when he is on a new aircraft type conversion course, or they may occur over a longish period during periodic recurrent checks. This negative trend should be questioned. It may be that lack of handling practice on modern automated flight decks is the root cause of such deterioration in manual dexterity. Attention must therefore be given to ‘positive value training’ before and during the mandatory semi annual handling proficiency test sessions, to halt and reverse such negative trends in a pilot's ability to handle the aircraft accurately when flying manually. On the other hand, a sudden failure may bring to light an ongoing situation that should not have been allowed but which could have developed because of many reasons. Two in particular, need to be explored in the quest for a possible explanation.
7.3.1 Training department responsibility 107. Insufficient positive action on the part of the instructor(s) at some time, may have permitted continued operation while the subject was below known acceptable standards. In this context, a few possibilities come to mind. a. Little or no criticism of the correct nature and at the right time may have lulled the trainee into believing that he could continue to let his operation slip, without fear of being brought to task by the training team. b. Outside influences might have been brought to bear on the instructor and the pilot then cleared to continue on operations when he was not up to the mark. c. Misguided loyalty, or the call of friendship, allowing an otherwise totally unacceptable performance to count as a pass. 108. In all cases the integrity of the training machine and its staff would be open to question. 7.3.2 Special situations 109. The choice of candidate for training could be at fault. A number of possible reasons come to mind. a. The young pilot: Assigning a person who has insufficient experience or with a low number of flying hours straight from flying school, might be a reason why he cannot cope at first with the handling of a large airliner. b. The older man: A possible scenario is that of an older pilot moved from, say, a three crew turbo-prop environment to a two crew state-of-the-art jet operation. The move from an aircraft he is very familiar with and operates quite acceptably in the three-crew role on a route network he knows well, could be just that little bit too much. Though a safe and competent operator on the aircraft that he knows well, his ‘capacity bucket’, that is his ability to assimilate information, might be such that converting to the new environment might prove difficult. A jet aircraft may be too much to handle if never flown before and adaptation to a ‘glass cockpit’ two-crew operation not easy because of more demanding standard operating procedures and fewer hands to share the required duties. Such a situation might force discontinuation of training and mean the return to a previous fleet, if possible. In such circumstances, it might have been better to avoid fleet transfer from the start, particularly with a mature pilot of limited ability. 110. The alternative to an aircraft type conversion course in such a case, would be to find good reason for continued operation on the pilot’s current aircraft fleet, to avoid wasting time and money spent on training and, most importantly, preventing hurt feelings should the older candidate fail to make the grade. 111. An individual approaching retirement, or indeed (at any other time), might be considered by training staff as being at the edge of his comfort envelope and a marginal learner, though a competent pilot in his present operational circle. If necessary, to make the offer more palatable and with the pilot’s agreement, special arrangements may be proposed, possibly including an additional pay factor for not going on the new aircraft type conversion course. Some form of added responsibility within his/her present fleet might also be suggested as a reason for not offering a move. For a variety of personal reasons, such an option could be particularly attractive to a pilot who is looking for an acceptable alternative to a move away from his/her present level of operational zone comfort, with dignity and without humiliation. 112. If a personal family situation is not a reason to stay put, it is always possible that however desirable the move to a new aircraft type is, be it in monetary and/or personal ego terms, the pilot concerned could be secretly feeling (indeed admitting, but not to others) that the possibility of such a change was a bridge too far THOUGHT TO PONDER that it would be best not to cross. Such (but tacit) acceptance of doubt about his ability to make the grade on a new aircraft might make him a grateful (though not openly) non-candidate for transfer. Provided that the reason for not moving carried no loss of self-esteem or status in the eye of others, a deliberate side-step could well be the best ‘way ahead’. 113. In such cases, suitable arrangements for leapfrogging otherwise assignable pilots may need to be made, with no visible loss of self-respect for the individuals concerned who would simply carry on quite safely and efficiently in their now continued environmental situation. Only the biblical wisdom of a King Solomon can resolve certain human factors situations. Let honest good judgment and fair play prevail when arriving at the best solution in such emotionally difficult cases. To thine own self be true ... always ... and stay guided to do unto others as you would have others do unto you. c. The difficult to teach pilot: As instructors, we must adapt, compromise and be flexible, for we too must possess the desire to broaden our sphere of professional knowledge and improve our teaching skills. One becomes better at getting to understand others in time, but for many imponderable reasons that are not yet understood, some people just cannot relate to one another. Not everybody necessarily gets on with everybody else. Instructors must remember that on occasions a change of tutor works wonders, if they themselves cannot achieve the desired result with a certain person. This could be vital for the success of a student and would be ESSENTIAL for the peace of mind of his instructor. A change of scene (instructor?) may sometimes become necessary for the good of all concerned. 114. That being said, one must however accept that, on occasion, a pilot may need to be withdrawn from flying duties whether on personal grounds, because of illness or due to professional reasons, until the matter of his suspension has been resolved in a satisfactory manner for all concerned. 8.0 THOUGHT TO PONDER 8.1 Nobody is perfect 115. Each one of us is a mixture of good and some perhaps notso-good qualities. When considering our fellow man we should remember his good qualities and realise that his faults only prove that he is, after all, a human being. We should refrain from harsh judgement just because he happens to be a dirty ... low-down ... rotten ... no-good ... two-faced son of a bitch … To conclude, this could be said to be part of what ‘human factors’ are all about. 9.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 116. Those who offered constructive criticism and comments when the first draft of the original article was circulated in 1984 before publication in Aerospace, the Royal Aeronautical Society’s monthly magazine, are thanked. They are too many to mention by name but the author must thank in particular, Monsieur Pierre Mantel then of “Aeroformation” at Airbus Industrie in Toulouse, for an idea that developed into the original paper. Captain P.A.F. Hogge who was the Flight Training Manager of the British Airways B747 fleet at that time, must also be mentioned for his invaluable assistance in refining the identification of student types. Credits for other constructive comments received during the production of this updated Guidance Document will be found in the last Appendix. April 2003 23
Page 1 and 2: The human element in airline traini
Page 3 and 4: The human element in airline traini
Page 5 and 6: GLOSSARY Term Definition A Aeroplan
Page 7 and 8: Boeing 767-400. generally unstated
Page 9 and 10: A student and his instructor. candi
Page 11 and 12: Pre-flight checks. be used, company
Page 13 and 14: 4.3.3 How to handle errors 57. One
Page 15 and 16: A340-600. c. Mental saturation, tha
Page 17 and 18: 13. He who answers all the question
Page 19 and 20: 86. If more than the minimum number
Page 21: Schweitzer C/CB training helicopter
Page 25 and 26: Personnel Licensing Department staf
Page 27 and 28: 9. The focus when instructing is of
Page 29 and 30: a. A separate Airworthiness type ce
Page 31 and 32: The FE (PPL): Conducts the first ty
Page 33 and 34: If the rating has lapsed, the appli
Page 35 and 36: 4.4 Class Rating Examiner — Aerop
Page 37 and 38: a. Briefing b. Recording c. Assessi
Page 39 and 40: JAR OPS 1 Details requirements that
Page 41 and 42: Transport Canada. Crew Resource Man
Page 43 and 44: APPENDIX G RATIONALE AND ACKNOWLEDG

The human element in airline training - Royal Aeronautical Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?