Back to School

“Put him in his environment, give him the aircraft and let him experience what it means to fly. An Airbus A320 and a 737 operate the same, stick and rudder. All pilots on this very new aircraft, whether they are newcomers from a Piper Cherokee or coming from the Boeing world, are taught what is going on. You fly it with the same abilities as you fly any other aircraft.

Once they realise it’s the same as any other aircraft, we go to the next stage.

In the next stage they get all the nice (computer) stuff that we have. ” Airbus began making limited adjustments to its training philosophy in the wake of the 2009 crash of an Air France A330 in the Atlantic when the crew failed to recognise the aircraft was in a stall and was confused by cockpit instruments. Initially, it introduced some changes after that crash and started training pilots on how to avoid and recover from high-altitude stalls, but the training program developed for theA350 goes substantially further and explicitly emphasises hand flying at various altitudes and across a wide range of manoeuvres. It also turns some traditional pilot training practices on their head.

The issue was thrown into the spotlight again in late June when the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released its report on the crash of an Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 as it landed at San Francisco in July last year, resulting in the death of three passengers. It concluded the Asiana pilots had several chances to avert disaster but they “over-relied on systems they did not understand and flew the aircraft too low and slow, colliding with a sea wall at the end of the runway”. The Korean carrier acknowledged the finding that the pilot’s lack of understanding of the 777’s complicated control systems played a role in the accident. The NTSB cited Boeing’s autothrottle, which automatically controls the speed of the aircraft, and overly complicated auto-flight system as contributing factors. Boeing has disputed that statement, adding the auto-flight system of the aircraft was functioning normally at the time of the accident but it occurred “due to the flightcrew’s failure to monitor and control airspeed, thrust level and glidepath”.

The crew’s shortcomings were far from unique. A comprehensive study prepared for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and released last November found some pilots “lack sufficient or in-depth knowledge and skills” to properly control their aircraft’s trajectory. It said this is because “current training methods, training devices and the time allotted for training” may be inadequate to fully master advanced automated systems. Among the accidents and certain categories of incidents examined in that report, roughly two-thirds of the pilotsOnce they realise it’s the same as any other aircraft, we go to the next stage. either had difficulty manually flying planes or made mistakes using flight computers. This report and the continuing incidents have heightened industry-wide concern about the hazards of excessive reliance on automated cockpits, and worries about pilots who may be reluctant to take over manual control when necessary.

However, the new A350 training program goes far beyond ensuring commercial pilots’ manual flying skills are revived and strengthened. Norden said the development of the A350, Airbus’s “brand new baby”, was an opportunity to review training practices. “

With a new bird we asked ourselves: Shouldn’t we review our training practices?

Why did we have to make a training difference, what new training tools did we need? Is it an idea to develop a new training style and eventually come to a new training program?”The answer was yes and to illustrate his point he shows photographs of three aircraft from different eras, a Douglas DC-3, a McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and an Airbus A380. “What do these three aircraft have in common? They all fly. They are two engine, three engine, four engines, two pilots or three pilots. They are all passenger aircraft, but what they have in common is training.

If you look to the regulations as to what is required there is flight preparation, before takeoff checklist, engine failure between V1 and V2, rejected takeoff before reaching V1, instrument departure and arrival procedure, engine-out, localised approach to minima and go-around with one engine out. This is the training program that is required for an AOC (air operators certificate) and has been for years. The question arises: does one size fit all? “Not being able to manage anWith a new bird we asked ourselves: Shouldn’t we review our training practices?engine failure on a DC-3 was a matter of succeed or perish. Either you manage to fly a DC-3 in an engine-out case or you are killed. It was as simple as that. Not being able to manage an engine failure on an A380 is not the same. If you don’t you will certainly have trouble to proceed with your pilot’s career but the aircraft will fly. ” In essence the reliability of today’s jet engines means training for an engine-out does not need to be as critical as it was years ago. “For many, many years the training focus has been on these things. I wouldn’t say that engine failures don’t happen and I don’t say you don’t have to train for it, but the main exercise is if you complete this list you get a stamp on your licence and you are off to fly an aircraft. Nothing less and nothing more,” says Norden. Thus the new training program takes in many elements of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regulations brought in last year covering competency-based training for cockpit crew. While not yet compulsory it advises different training regimes for different generation aircraft. For the latest generation aircraft, such as the 777, 787 and A380, it says some training should be addressed more frequently, some less frequently, and some even less frequently but at least once every three years.

“You see for instance that regularly-to-be-trained issues include unstable approaches. What is interesting on the other hand is to see engine failure is still a training topic but it is not to be trained as today every six months but can be trained every two to two-and-a-half years to stay current. It was the second input into our A350 training,” explained Norden.

These ICAO regulations encompass a range of competencies developed over several years by experts from around the world andcover such areas as knowledge, situational awareness, workload management, communication, manual flight, auto flight, problem solving, decision making, leadership, teamwork and application of procedures. All are included in the Airbus training program. “The main emphasis of pilot competencies is that for training needs we don’t want to train any more the skills themselves but we want to train the reason for the outcome, the reason linked to the different competencies that pilots have. ” One of the significant developments is the way in which pilots undergoing A350 training are actually taught. Gone are the days of trainees – or experienced pilots undergoing conversion courses – being lectured at by instructors. The Airbus program is based on a “learning by discovery” approach.

“The retention rate of the pilots, they keep more information if they are able to see something in audio-visual learning. The poorest performances is if I give you a course on the A350 in the classroom your retention rate will be very low, just 10 per cent. Much better in regards to learning is showing and demonstrating, even more, discussion and facilitation, which was for a long time neglected. But one of the best ways to learn, especially in the human-machine interface, is practise. Getting hands on. If I give you a 20 minute lecture on a particular switch on an A350 you will only understand a fraction. In the simulator, even if you are not a pilot and I show you this switch and how it works and you can try it out and practise, then within minutes you will understand not only what it means but how it is operating. It is very effective,” says Norden.

“We want the trainees to find their way as much as possible themselves

We want to put people in the environment on day number one.

and the instructor only intervenes when they need help and even then intervenes only in a way in which they ask the trainee questions and move them on. You can tell a child ten times not to touch something because it’s hot but it is only when he touches it he really knows it is hot. It is more about discovery. Trainers are much more passive but much more attentive as to what is going on in saying how far can I let the trainee go on before I intervene. ” A critical key to this “hands on” approach is the development of new tools. Airbus has developed a new laptop program, a sort of super Microsoft Flight Simulator,featuring the A350 cockpit. Called ACE, or Airbus Cockpit Experience, it allows self-paced study and functional learning for theory and practise. Students can be taken through every possible procedure step by step, right down to parking the aircraft, either being shown or doing it themselves without help. “At your first day at school there was an instructor standing in front of you. Times have changed. Now, we are involving you in discussion and in something that is much more interactive and allows you to discover with assistance and without assistance how to do it. ”Computer-based training (CBT), in which trainees sat in front of a computer animation of the technical systems, has also been revolutionised with new equipment. The Airbus Pilot Transition trainer (APT) is far more realistic. “CBT was state-of-the-art 20 years ago but is now out of date. It involved pilots sitting on office chairs and being given instructions on systems on the aircraft. We thought this was very inefficient. There was no central yoke, no side stick and no rudder pedals. A big part of how the pilot had to interact with the machine was missing. It was an efficient tool but we wanted to do more and introduce new training with flight controls. Now it is a tool not only for showing and demonstrating as today but can also be used to practise much more, with trainees sitting as a crew using thrust levers, rudder pedals, facing forward and using side sticks. ” Norden said the training emphasis is very much on practice. “Thus on the A350 we have a new training focus. We have new training tools using the functional approach. Practising is very efficient so we want to very much a focus on keeping them in their environment, in their office where they will be later on, the A350 cockpit. It’s not like a traditional course where you go through two weeks of CBT. We want to put people in the environment on day number one. ” Indeed the APT has proven farmore efficient. With the A380, trainees spent 26 hours on CBT.

With the new system this has been reduced to less than 20 hours, which is completed before the move onto the ACE. “That allows trainees to go through and understand what they have to do. They can interact in the laptop, switching and swapping the six big computer screens in the A350 cockpit. We have guided lessons and free play lessons. So already in the classroom we have a lot more ability to practise. For the first time, ACE also gives credits from the authorities for system knowledge and standard operating procedures. At a future stage you will even be able to connect the laptops so you as Captain in room number 1304 in your hotel and your first officer in room 1109 can work together as a crew electronically. ” After this, on day number eight of the 23 day course, pilots are taken into the full-flight simulator for the first time, with the first three sessions dedicated to flying without automation.

CRM (cockpit resource management) is also part of training from day one, placing emphasis on crew communication, decision-making and leadership, which are assessed and rated from the very beginning. Norden says the public often thinks the pilot’s job is keeping the aircraft straight and level and making a soft landing but this isn’t quite true. “The pilot’s job is something which is a little bit more complex. It’s managing the threats and the errors that we as humans commit, that we as operators commit whether it’s what engineers commit on the ground or through operating the aircraft wrongly. We have to deal with all the errors and the errors of others and with the automation. We as pilots have to develop countermeasures to ensure the threat stays as low as possible.

“What accident and incident investigators have found out in the last years, especially with our aircraft which are operating in much more dynamic, much more challenging environments with different means of automation is that surprise is much more an element in our accident event. It is not simple engine failure, it’s much more complex. QF32 is an example. Do we have tools for that? Our tools are competencies, which describes what knowledge, skills and attitudes we have to successfully address threat and error management. ” All in all, the A350 training program has introduced new, state-of-the-art tools and new instruction principles. It is, says Norden, more motivating, especially for pilots, bringing them back to earth where they are flying the aircraft. “It is introducing competency-based training, functional learning from day number one, being in the real environment and on day number eight being in the full-flight simulator. We are introducing this learning by discovery which is a much better way to train pilots. ”