flightglobal.com 13-19 January 2015 | Flight International | 33
PHILOSOPHY
The industry has been warned that it must update a training regime with its roots in the 1950s
Rex Features“We have included a task in
our rulemaking programme
to address EBT and the ATQP”
EASAThe situation today, Barrett observes, does
not represent a failure to agree that change is
needed; it is failure to implement the new
SARPs that would bring about the change.
But while Capt John Bent, chairman of the
IPTC’s training practices workstream, laments
the failure of implementation, he has noted that
at least “a broad global interest is being generat-
ed.” It seems to be this faith that the word is get-
ting through – even if nothing is being imple-
mented yet – that led Barrett to propose a
three-year extension of the IPTC and its work
programme through 2017. He said to the IFCTC
as he closed it: “We will publish a report [sum-
ming up the findings of the IPTC workstreams
as reported to the conference]. Please do not
read that report and do nothing about it.”
DIMINISHING
Barrett also announced that there will be a
meeting at ICAO’s Montreal headquarters in
spring 2017 as the three-year mandate ap-
proaches its end, to review progress on imple-
menting the IPTC’s recommendations.
Meanwhile last year, the FAA-led study con-
firmed beyond argument that traditional pilot
training methods often leave pilots ill-prepared
for complex modern aircraft. The ultimate result
is, said the report, that pilots from time to time,
lose control of a perfectly serviceable aeroplane
with fatal consequences for everyone on board.
The FAA-led report, The operational use of
flight path management systems, was based on
extensive study by the performance-based op-
erations rulemaking committee working with
Commercial Aviation Safety Team’s flight deck
automation working group (FltDAWG). Its con-
clusions were entirely data-driven.
FltDAWG warns that in future operations, au-
tomatic systems will become even more domi-
nant in pilots’ working lives, so it is vital to find- quickly – a way of enabling pilots to retain
their skills and situational awareness with the
advanced systems. The IPTC has, independent-
ly, come to the same conclusion.
But the FAA has now handed the problem
back to the industry to work out practical solu-
tions for adapting pilot training in the USA to to-
day’s needs. It would rather that US carriers, hav-
ing been provided with a stark picture of the
existing system’s failings, come up with the an-
swers because after all they – and the world’s air
training organisations – are supposedly the ex-
perts in what it takes to conduct safe operations.
The FAA may be leading global thinking
with this ground-breaking report, but it does not
intend to impose a solution on its own carriers,
let alone foreign ones. It is also one of numerous
NAAs that has not adopted ICAO’s new training
SARPs. Neither has Europe’s EASA. In fact the
FAA is particularly badly placed at present as
far as global training harmonisation is con-
cerned, because legislation passed recently by
Congress requiring a minimum 1,500h flying for
copilots flying commercial passenger aero-
planes means that the MPL training and licens-
ing system, which is competency-based not
hours-based, would not work in the USA.
And the fact that neither EASA nor the
FAA has openly adopted ICAO’s updated
PANS-TRG (procedures for air navigation ser-
vices – training) leaves the world rather short
of regulatory role models where pilot training
and licencing is concerned.EVIDENCE
ICAO’s PANS-TRG Doc 9868 addresses the
new system known as evidence-based training
(EBT) that an increasing number of top-line
carriers – unwilling to wait for the regulators –
are adopting for their crews’ recurrent training.
This is a system of monitoring real pilot perfor-
mance in line operations via flight data moni-
toring (FDM) and line operation safety auditing
to identify where training is clearly needed,
and supplying it accordingly. However, these
airlines are based in countries where the NAA
is prepared to approve an alternative training
and qualification programme (ATQP).
EASA, however, says it was involved in one
of the IATA-led working subgroups in develop-
ing the EBT documents released by ICAO.
EASA says it does indeed plan action: “We
have included a task in our rulemaking pro-
gramme [RMT.0599] in order to address this
subject [EBT] and the subject of the ATQP.”
It adds that the review will include the fol-
lowing items: “EBT taking into account recent
ICAO amendments; ATQP taking into ac-
count experience gained in commercial air
transport aeroplane operations and extension
to CAT helicopter operations.”
So at least EASA is on the case, even if imple-
mentation will take a few more years. The FAA
says it has already acted in the spirit of ICAO
Doc 9868, explaining: “The FAA offered a vol-
untary competency-based training programme
to its operators starting in 1990 in the form of the
Advanced Qualification Program [US equiva-
lent of ATQP]. At this point, 90% of pilots have
transitioned to this programme and 10% have
not. There is no need for the FAA to engage in
additional rule-making, as the AQP rules pro-
vides all the flexibility offered by EBT.” The in-
consistency is that the old rules remain on the
books as well as the voluntary AQP.
The objective of the 2014 RAeS IFCTC was to
assess where the IPTC’s work stands, and where
it is to go from here. The verdict at the meeting
was that the IPTC can show none of its planned
deliverables – yet, but awareness of the need for
change is growing. For that reason, the confer-
ence decided, the IPTC should continue in ex-
istence but focus on implementation. There is
distress that most NAAs are not prepared to
push EBT and ATQP, and that “petty politick-
ing” takes place in corners of the IPTC.
So the IPTC has had its life extended, but
only with a fragile sense of confidence. As out-
going chairman Barrett observed as he closed
the show: “I don’t think this industry will get a
second chance if they don’t take this one.” ■