downloaded from “fits” oversight committee update 23 march, 2005 aero–tech, inc

Downloaded from www.avhf.com

“FITS”Oversight Committee Update

23 March, 2005

Aero–Tech, Inc.

Purpose:FAA Industry Training Standards (FITS)

FITS Mission Statement

Improve pilot learning to safely, competently, and efficiently

operate a technically advanced piston or light jet

aircraft in the modern National Airspace System (NAS).

FITS Imperatives:

Implement training that reduces the human error element and accelerates acquisition of higher-level

judgment and decision-making skills.

FITS is the application of proven aviation education concepts to General Aviation!!


FITS Basic Concepts

Technically Advanced Aircraft Scenario Based Training (SBT) Single Pilot Resource Management (SRM) Learner Centered Grading


FITS Progress 2003-2005


FITS Transition and Instructor Training Commenced June 2003

FITS Evaluation and Validation Conducted Concurrently with the training

FITS Site Visit, 11 March, 2005 Expansion and improvement of

the FITS Transition, Instructor, and recurrent syllabus is ongoing.


Cessna 182/T 1000

Cessna Cessna will debut a FITS

Transition Syllabus New Cessna 182 will be first

“Glass Cockpit” single Garmin G-1000

equipped Similar to avionics suite

that will debut in the Cessna Mustang Jet

Transition Syllabus accepted June 2004

Instructor Syllabus current under review.

FITS is being deployed to over 200 Cessna Pilot Centers (CPC)


Adam Aircraft Adam A-500

FITS Curriculum accepted April, 2004

Pending Acceptance Instructor Recurrent

Adam A-700 (Jet) FITS curriculum FAA

accepted October 2004.

First FAA accepted VLJ Syllabus


FITS (accepted)Transition Training Commenced Feb 2005

FITS Instructor submitted March 2005


FITS training currently conducted by Empire Aviation using the Garmin FITS syllabus

Dedicated Diamond/Empire FITS syllabus submitted for acceptance in March 2005

Excellent Diamond/Garmin Support for MTSU

Cirrus Owners and Pilots AssociationPilot Proficiency Program

FITS Recurrent Training Seminar

• 3 Hour Single Pilot resource Management (SRM) Seminar• Presented in a realistic scenario environment•Scenario presented chronologically and resolved through group discussion and interaction•No “right” answers!•Leverages the variety of experience in the seminar.

Participant Comments:• “As the last presentation at

CPPP it was very effective in placing the BIG picture into perspective”

• “New approach to flight safety”

• “Offers a plan to analyze the issues”

• “The portion in which the instructor ticked off altitude and airspeed was effective in showing the time frames involved in emergencies”

FITS Recurrent Training Seminar

Site Visit BPPP (Lakeland Florida), February 2005

Reviewed the current programProvided suggestions for FITS acceptance and improvement

Working Meeting 24 march at Daytona BeachFITS acceptance to follow


Site visit (December 2004) Transition Syllabus

submitted March 2005 Acceptance pending

review


MTSU/NASA /FITS Partnership

Partnering with MTSU/NASA SAFER Grant 800K Grant to study FITS Pvt/Instrument training FITS Team providing the syllabus MTSU providing the aircraft and subjects

Diamond DA-40 Garmin G-1000 Equipped

Win/Win situation Independent evaluation of the FITS Pvt/Inst Syllabus

Results early 2005


Site visit, February 2004 Site visit, March 22 March

2005


Avemco support! FITS Insurability

requirement for TAA’s


Aero Tech Inc. ASA Skyline Aeronautics Garmin HPTI Hudson CAP Electronic Flight

Solutions King Schools Magenta Line

FBO’s and Other Training Providers


“FITS” Future Plans

Applied Research Increase Customer Base Apply Lessons Learned to the Generic Documents Develop Guidance for Instructors, Inspectors, and FBOs Identify and track FITS graduates TAAP Lab Research and Development


FITS Updates

Revised (Simpler) Grading Scale Integration of the 5 P Concept for SRM Improved Guidance for Scenario developmentReview of the FITS Pvt/Instrument Syllabus based on the MTSU experience


Current Learner Centered Grading Scale The object of scenario-based training is a change in the thought processes, habits, and behaviors of the students during the planning and execution of the scenario. . Since the training is student centered the success of the training is measured in the following desired student outcomes:

Describe – at the completion of the scenario the PT will be able to describe the physical characteristics and cognitive elements of the scenario activities.

Explain – at the completion of the scenario the PT will be able to describe the scenario activity and understand the underlying concepts, principles, and procedures that comprise the activity.

Practice – at the completion of the scenario the student will be able to practice the scenario activity with little input from the CFI. The PT with coaching and/or assistance from the CFI will quickly correct minor deviations and errors identified by the CFI.

Perform - at the completion of the scenario, the PT will be able to perform the activity without assistance from the CFI. Errors and deviations will be identified and corrected by the PT in an expeditious manner. At no time will the successful completion of the activity be in doubt. (“Perform” will be used to signify that the PT is satisfactorily demonstrating proficiency in traditional piloting and systems operation skills)

Manage/Decide - at the completion of the scenario, the PT will be able to correctly gather the most important data available both within and outside the cockpit, identify possible courses of action, evaluate the risk inherent in each course of action, and make the appropriate decision. (“Manage/Decide” will be used to signify that the PT is satisfactorily demonstrating good SRM skills).


Draft Collaborative Learner Centered Grading Scale * The object of scenario-based training is a change in the thought processes, habits, and behaviors of the students during the planning and execution of the scenario. The student will participate in the grading process. Since the training is student centered, the success of the training is measured in the following desired student outcomes:

Maneuver Grades (Tasks)Understand – at the completion of the scenario the PT will be able to describe the scenario activity and understand the underlying concepts, principles, and procedures that comprise the activity.

Practice – at the completion of the scenario the student will be able to plan and execute the scenario. Coaching, instruction, and/or assistance from the CFI will correct deviations and errors identified by the CFI.

Perform - at the completion of the scenario, the PT will be able to perform the activity without assistance from the CFI. Errors and deviations will be identified and corrected by the PT in an expeditious manner. At no time will the successful completion of the activity be in doubt. (“Perform” will be used to signify that the PT is satisfactorily demonstrating proficiency in traditional piloting and systems operation skills)

Not Observed – Any event not accomplished or required.

* Note: Grading will be conducted independently by the student and instructor and compared during the flight critique.


Draft Collaborative Learner Centered Grading Scale* The object of scenario-based training is a change in the thought processes, habits, and behaviors of the students during the planning and execution of the scenario. . The student will participate in the grading process. Since the training is student centered the success of the training is measured in the following desired student outcomes:

Single Pilot Resource Management (SRM) GradesUnderstand – the student can verbally identify, describe, and understand the risks inherent in the flight scenario

Practice – the student is able to identify, understand, and apply SRM principles to the actual flight situation. Coaching, instruction, and/or assistance from the CFI will quickly correct minor deviations and errors identified by the CFI. The student will be an active decision maker.

Manage/Decide – the student can correctly gather the most important data available both within and outside the cockpit, identify possible courses of action, evaluate the risk inherent in each course of action, and make the appropriate decision. Instructor intervention is not required for the safe completion of the flight.

* Note: Grading will be conducted independently by the student and instructor and compared during the flight critique.


The SRM 5P Check: The “5P” Check

The Plan? The Plane? The Pilot? The Passengers? The Programming?

The “Decision Points” Pre-Flight Pre-Takeoff Mid-Point Pre-Descent Pre-IAF


The Plan? Weather? Route? Publications? ATC Reroutes

and Delays? Fuel Remaining?

The Plane? Mechanical Status? Automation Status? Database Currency? Circuit Breakers? Backup Systems?

The SRM 5P

Check:


The Pilot? “I”llness? “M”edication? “S”tress? “A”lcohol “F”atique “E”motions The Passengers?

Pilots or Non pilots? Nervous or Quiet? Experienced or New? Helpful or a Handful? Urgent or Optional? Business or Pleasure?

The SRM 5P

Check:


The Programming: Preprogram the:

Autopilot? GPS? MFD/PFD?

Anticipate: Likely Reroutes and

Clearances? “Crunch” Points? Manual Backup? High terrain Encounters?

Question: What’s it doing? Why is it doing that? Did I Do That?

The SRM 5P

Check:


SRM “5P”Decision ProcessAt several predetermined decision points consider the following!

What's the situation? The 5 P’s (Plan, Plane, Pilot, Passengers, and Programming) What's changed since your original Go/No Go decision. What negative outcomes are we more exposed to?

Engine failure, Avionics failure Missed approach Pilot overload Mistakes on approach / final CFIT, Fuel exhaustion Icing, loss of control.

What can we do to minimize the increased risk associated with those outcomes? Use automation to reduce workload / increase awareness. Use MFD to maintain terrain awareness, etc Use passengers to share workload / monitor environment Request

A simpler approach Single frequency approach Vectors to final Declare min fuel Ask for altitude / routing change Turn down "difficult" ATC requests

Prioritize tasks If we can't do everything well, at least get the important things right. What are they? What can we "shed“

Is the resulting risk acceptable? Would I have taken off knowing this was going to happen? If not, divert / terminate the flight early


Surveys are being collected at COPA, Cirrus and Cessna

This will expand to Diamond, Mooney, Lancair, BPPP, and others shortly.

Purposes Improvement of current

FITS concepts/documentsMeasurement of FITS

applicationForms basis for a

longitudinal study

FITS Survey Efforts

LimitationsManufacturers are uniformly protective of sensitive customer informationCustomer participation is voluntary.

Good response to dateInformation is dependant on customer setting and surrounding.

Requires an additional effort to track FITS vs. Non FITS data.Industry consent

Protection of proprietary informationDiscretion in how the data is used.

We need FOC suggestions and participation.


Two locations ERAU/UND Allows real time testing of FITS

educational principles Extensive data collection capability

Supports ongoing student research.

Technically Advanced Aircraft Performance (TAAP) Lab


FAA Industry Training Standards,

“FITS”

Aero–Tech, Inc.