SAFETY IN FLYING TRAINING

Juris Ignatovičs – Head of Training, ERIVA FTO

OVERVIEW

What we miss in our safety procedures Airmanship vs Procedures What is in regulations? Proposed safety procedures Proper identification of training threats Importance of CRM principles Things to improve

ACCIDENT – P2006T, YL-SVN

Very experienced and disciplined examiner Qualified student (almost CPL-holder) Brand-new modern airplane WHY THEY CRASHED???

THREATS

General threats Applicable for all flights Counteracted by training, regulations, general

airmanship Example: engine failure on SE airplane, counteracted by

specific training and minimum altitude regulations Flying training-specific threats

Applicable only for flying training activities Counteracted by instructors’ training and experience,

school procedures Example: unexpected control input by the student,

counteracted by overtaking of the controls by instructor Excercise-specific threats

EXERCISE-SPECIFIC THREATS

Counteracted only by instructors’ airmanship and skill, maximum by school procedures No regulatory guidances exist to assist instructors! Example:

“Unusual attitudes” exercise How far we can go in terms of pitch, bank, airspeed? PA-28 airplane operated by Patria Pilot Training

(leading FTO in Finland) crashed after airframe overstressing during unusual attitudes training

MORE EXAMPLES IN A MOMENT...

THIS PRESENTATION IS NOT ABOUT:

Discipline If somebody ignores any kind of rules,

new set of limitations will not change anything General airmanship

Absolutely necessary but airmanship alone is too general and person-dependant, therefore it doesn’t work very well for training threats

General hazards Real problems during training flights are pretty rare

compared to instructor / student induced

ALL THAT IS REQUIRED AND SHALL BE TEACHED BUT THIS IS SEPARATE TOPIC

WHY EXISTING SYSTEM FAILS?

What safety measures specifically related to flight training are in place around the industry?

School’s procedures – ATO-SPECIFIC Instructors’ initial and recurrent training –

ATO-SPECIFIC Instructors’ standartization – ATO-SPECIFIC Pre-flight briefings – INSTRUCTOR’S-SPECIFIC Judgement and airmanship – CREW-SPECIFIC

Nothing in the list is INDUSTRY-WIDE

BRIEFINGS, TEM, PLANNING ETC...

CURRENT POPULAR SAFETY MEASURES CANNOT ACT AGAINST EXERCISE-SPECIFIC THREAT!

Briefings are useful only if specific procedure is defined

Example: airline operations Operator has very detailed operating manuals (OM-A, OM-

B) Briefings are conducted on basis of operating manuals Examiners are airline-stndartized and shall strictly follow

procedures Planning is strategic tool, not tactical

Good weather, airspace compliance or MBL in limits cannot prevent airframe overstressing doing unusual attitudes

BRIEFINGS, TEM, PLANNING ETC...

Threat and Error Management (TEM) theory Very good safety tool, BUT... It is too general Its application heavily depends on individual And it is still ATO or Instructor specific

AIRMANSHIP vs PROCEDURES

Currently great emphasis is placed on instructor’s / student airmanship as an accident prevention tool This could be similar to an airline without detailed operations manual (OM-A, OM-B)

Airline captain (ATPL holder) in most cases has much more experience and airmanship than school instructor BUT...HE IS REQUIRED TO OPERATE AIRPLANE STRICTLY IN

ACCORDANCE WITH LIMITATIONS SET OUT IN THE MANUALS!

AIRMANSHIP IS SUPPLEMENTARY TO PROCEDURES, NOT THE REPLACEMENT

WHAT IS IN THE REGULATIONS?

AMC1 ORA.ATO.230(a) TRAINING manuals for use at an ATO conducting

integrated or modular flight training courses should include the following:(a)(8) Safety training:

- individual responsibilities- essential exercises- emergency drills (frequency)- dual checks (frequency at various

stages)- requirements before first solo flights

THIS TRAINING COVERS GENERAL THREATS(i.e. real fire or engine failure)

WHAT IS IN THE REGULATIONS?

AMC1 ORA.ATO.230(b) OPERATIONS manual for use at an ATO conducting

integrated or modular flight training courses should include the following:(b) Technical:- aircraft descriptive notes- aircraft handling (checklists, limitations, ...)- emergency procedures- radio and radio navigation aids- allowable deficiencies

THESE PROCEDURES AGAIN COVERS GENERAL THREATS (i.e. real failures, icing etc.)

WHAT IS IN THE REGULATIONS?

ARA.FCL.210 Information for examiners The competent authority may provide examiners it

has certified and examiners certified by other competent authorities exercising their privileges in their territory with safety criteria to be observed when skill tests and proficiency checks are conducted in an aircraft.

THIS COULD BE EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED BUT THAT INFORMATION IS TARGETED ONLY TO EXAMINERS...

WHY WE NEED COMMON SAFETY STANDARDS?

EXAMPLE: STALL TRAINING ON MEP AIRPLANE(ME airplanes are not tested for spin recovery)

Based on risk assessment, ATO procedures prescribe initiation of recovery on first indication of stall (i.e. aural stall warning)

Student haven’t experienced full stall during training and therefore is not prepared for it

Examiner has different interpretation of stall training and requests a developed stall demonstration from the student

Examiner may not realize that student has never done full stall

RISK OF STALL/SPIN DEVELOPMENT

WHY WE NEED COMMON SAFETY STANDARDS?

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DIFFERENT INSTRUCTORS, ATO’s AND EXAMINERS HOW SPECIFIC EXERCISES ARE FLOWN

Minimum altitude for stalls Limits for unusual attitudes BIFM advanced exercises – IMC or VMC? Stall recovery initiation (VFR, IFR, SEP, MEP) Simulated engine failure procedures (SEP, MEP) OEI exercises on MEP airplanes:

Actual engine shutdown or simulated (idle thrust)? Minimum altitudes or other safety considerations

Safety in cross-country flights (ELT, FPL, Fuel, Daylight) Night flying safety (Altitudes, Fuel, Safety Equipment etc.)

EVERYBODY SHALL BE INVOLVED!

Authority Publishes safety procedures and guidelines

Examiners Know what to ask and expect from the student

ATO’s and instructors Operate in accordance with safety guidelines

Students Act as a “last defence line”, i.e. don’t accept unsafe

practices CAA guidelines shall be available to students!

INFORMATION CHAIN

SAFETY PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES

DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION

TRAINING OF INSTRUCTORS AND EXAMINERS

TEM, SAFETY BRIEFINGS

SAFE TRAINING

SOME PROCEDURE EXAMPLES

SEP stall exercises Full Stall and Incipient Spin exercises may be

performed only on airplanes certified in utility category SEP simulated engine failure exercises

Shall be terminated not later than reaching 500 ft height AGL

MEP OEI (One Engine Inop) exercises Actual engine shut-downs may be performed not lower

than 2500 ft AGL, at a safe (cruising) speed Speed shall never drop below Vyse (blue line) Instructor shall be ready to reduce power on remaining

engine in case of any controlability problems

PROPER IDENTIFICATION OF THREATS

We shall identify and prioritize threats properly It would be useless to name too many threats for any specific

exercise, some of them may be overlooked The key threat may be masked with secondary or obvious

tasks EXAMPLE: Simulation of engine failure on MEP airplane

Watch altitude Guard controls of operating engine Monitor engine instruments Perform good look-out Monitor speed Apply carburator heat

TOO MANY TASKS and THEY ARE TOO GENERAL...

PROPER IDENTIFICATION OF THREATS

More safety-efficient approach: Name 1-2 threats or tasks, be specific

EXAMPLE: Simulation of engine failure on MEP airplane

Guard controls of operating engine, reduce power in case of controlability issues

Monitor speed – not below Vyse (blue line)

Also: Poor OEI performance of MEP airplanes is not a training-

specific threat

WHAT ELSE COULD HELP?

CRM principles SEP training

Call-outs during taxi(i.e. Left side / Right side clear)

Call-outs during takeoff (Speed alive / Checked) MEP training, additionally:

Confirmation of engine controls / switches during securing the “failed” engine

FAILURE TO OBTAIN CONFIRMATION FROM THE INSTRUCTOR / EXAMINER BEFORE OPERATING “FAILED”

ENGINE CONTROLS SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS A SERIOUS THREAT AND SERIOUS ERROR BY THE

STUDENT

THINGS TO IMPROVE...

Safety procedures shall be produced for everyone involved in flight training or checking activities

Examiners ATO’s Instructors Students

Airspace shall be available for safety-critical training exercises

Not far from training aerodromes With more flexible attitude from LGS and minimum

formalities Foreign examiners shall be briefed about local airspace and training procedures

ABOUT AIRMANSHIPCAA-ISSUED GUIDANCE WOULD BE USEFUL

ON SOME SUBJECTS:Carburator heat operation

Too many carb ice accidents in Latvia for the hours flown Still unsatisfactory related knowledge and procedures

observed by the students Fuel planning

Students try to plan flights with 30..45 min. final res. fuel, no contingency fuel, no extra fuel

Unrealistic “book” cruise performance figures, which underestimates real fuel consumption by 10% and overestimates airspeed by 5% at average

Emergency briefings Bad discipline for emergency briefings Often unrelated to real conditions, excessive or with

decision-making errors

QUESTIONS?