Over the past 50 years of statistically analyzed accident history in commercial aviation, Loss of Control In-Flight (LOC-I) is indisputably one of the leading causes of airplane crashes and crash-related fatalities worldwide.In a report issued by Boeing in July 2009, the Commercial Aviation Safety Team’s statistical research clearly shows LOC-I representing the most severe cause factor in commercial aviation over the past 10 years, resulting in the most crash-related fatalities from 1999 through 2008.

“Polaris Aviation Solutions is committed to providing the highest quality safety training available to its professional pilot team. We are a leader in the aviation management and charter industry in implementing comprehensive safety of flight mitigations identified through our ISBAO and Wyvern approved operations and safety management system. We recognize loss of control in-flight is the leading cause of fatalities in commercial aviation. It only makes sense to teach professional pilots upset recovery techniques starting today.” said Mike Santiago, President & CEO at Polaris Aviation Solutions, “APS Emergency Maneuver Training has demonstrated its ability to consistently provide the highest quality upset recovery training in a manner that directly compliments our unparalleled safety program”.

“It is a great pleasure to be working along side Polaris Aviation Solutions in its unwavering efforts to remain established at the forefront of aviation safety training practices.” says Paul BJ Ransbury, President of APS Emergency Maneuver Training. “APS fully supports upcoming industry regulatory changes to improve the safety of air travel by addressing the LOC-I threat head-on. Robust upset recovery training solutions must be proven effective and remain focused on recognition and avoidance through enhanced pilot awareness”.

Polaris Aviation Solutions

Polaris Aviation Solutions is an aircraft management and charter services company committed to providing transparency, integrity, and flexibility to the corporate aviation community. It was founded in 2007 by veteran pilots and aviation management professionals who realized a demand for personalization within the aircraft management and charter industry. Please visit us at Booth #1003 at the NBAA Conference. More information available at: www.polarisaviation.com

APS Emergency Maneuver Training

APS Emergency Maneuver Training, an FAA-approved 141 Flight School specializing in Upset Recovery, Spin Training and Instrument Recovery courses, offers what has been coined the “Master’s Degree Program in Upset Prevention and Recovery Training”. Each online, on-aircraft and full flight simulator training program provided by APS is compliant with the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid. The APS staff of instructors are all former military formal-course instructor pilots with vast airline experience to ensure the recovery techniques taught at APS are directly transferrable to commercial jet pilots. The APS fleet of German-built piston Extra 300Ls and turbo jet L-39 Albatrosses, in conjunction with CAE Level D Full Full Flight Simulators, offer the ideal training resources to safely instruct all aspects of the various APS upset prevention and recovery training programs.

More information available at: www.apstraining.com For media inquiries, contact the APS Public Relations Coordinator, Faye Hamilton, in Mesa, Arizona USA 480-279-1881or via email at faye.hamilton@apstraining.com.

- ## -

Please Click Play on the Image Below to View this Video

Video Narrated by APS President, Paul BJ Ransbury

All Pilots – Links that Could Save Your Life:

• Online Upset Recovery Training for All Safety Conscious Pilots
• Practical Hands-On Loss of Control In-Flight Training Programs in Arizona USA

CRITICAL WINDOW IN AIRPLANE UPSET EVENTS: Boeing and NASA research¹ revealed the critical window of time necessary to initiate corrective action to resolve an airplane upset is less than 10 seconds. Given the compressed survival time available, the threat posed by the interference of the untrained crew member is severe. In general terms, the crew must communicate & confirm the situation, transfer control to the most situationally aware pilot and work together through standardized call-outs to mutually enhance awareness of the flight condition to manage stress between crew members and mitigate fear in a life-threatening situation. Due to the counter-intuitive nature of the UPRT environment, the untrained crew member can be the most unpredictable element of the CRM-dependent airplane upset prevention and/or recovery scenario. CRM integration in the upset recovery training is crucial in commercial air carrier flight training.

cforms contact form by delicious:days

References:
1 Defining Commercial Transport Loss-of-Control: A Quantitative Approach – Aug 2004

I want to thank you for the four outstanding days of Emergency Maneuver Training I received at APS last week.

Let me say first how impressed I was with the personal treatment and attention I received from you and your crew. Enthusiasm, courtesy, commitment, and professionalism are words that come to mind when I think of the APS crew and the way you conduct your operations. It’s obvious that APS employees really enjoy what they’re doing when they come to work. I wish every small business were run as professionally and as expertly as yours.

Of course, it was the quality and scope of the training I received at APS that impressed me most. As a former U.S. Navy F8 “Crusader” pilot, I’m experienced in all-attitude maneuvering. In addition, I have received upset recovery training at Delta, United, Continental, and American Airlines. At Embry-Riddle, I have developed and regularly teach a simulator-based academic course “AS 471 All Attitude Flight and Upset Recovery.” So I already knew something about upset recovery maneuvering before I came to APS. Nevertheless, I came away from my APS training much more knowledgeable about the subject than when I arrived, particularly in the areas of cross-controlled stalls and rolling departures from controlled flight, spin avoidance and recovery, and the effect of angle of attack on roll damping, to mention just three. My training with you will make me a better AS 471 instructor. Equally impressive was the manner in which you conduct your training. You coordinate ground training with in-flight training to give your students the best possible opportunity to understand and retain the material you are teaching. The classroom instruction and flight briefs are comprehensive and to the point, and the flights that follow strongly reinforce the concepts taught in the classroom. The visual training aids – for example computer-based videos – are also extremely well done and very helpful. In short, your instructional method is highly effective.

Finally, to judge from my experiences flying with [Clarke 'Otter' McNeace], APS pilots really have the “right stuff.” At Riddle we offer an elective flight course called “FA 215 Upset Training” in our aerobatic Decathlon. In the course of conducting FAA-funded research in upset recovery training transfer, I’ve flown the Decathlon with the two Riddle flight instructors who regularly teach FA 215. These two young men are excellent pilots and very experienced in aerobatic maneuvering. Nevertheless, Otter is simply a much better stick and a more capable upset recovery instructor. I wish every Riddle FA 215 flight instructor could experience the same APS training that I received.

Thanks again for my APS training. It was professionally rewarding, and flying with Otter was a lot of fun. In my judgment, you’re doing things just right at APS. I wish you and your employees all the best in the future.

Overall: Excellent | Booking: Excellent | Service: Excellent | Staff: Excellent | Flight: Excellent

As an F/A-18 pilot, I thought I understood every aspect of unusual attitudes, [upset recovery], stall, and spin recoveries. I was wrong. Your program was extremely clear and concise and ensured that the maximum amount information was not only delivered by the instructor, but also retained by the student. Your instructors are extremely knowledgeable and proceed at a pace appropriate for each student. Additionally, they ensure the material taught, is understood by the student before proceeding on to additional [loss of control in-flight] concepts. I wish I had signed up for this course years ago! I now sit close to the cockpit when traveling on commercial air carriers to be within shouting distance so I can yell, PUSH- POWER-RUDDER-ROLL-CLIMB, if necessary. I know that regardless of a pilot’s previous flight experience, they can greatly benefit from the training you provide. Thank you for the outstanding training and flight experience. I will be sure to send all of my pilots through your program.

Overall: Excellent | Booking: Above Average | Service: Excellent | Staff: Excellent | Flight: Excellent

In preparation for the article below, please review the APS Transfer of Skill Discussion.

In Figure 1 below, it is well supported by analyzing the presented statistics that Primary Control Strategies must be the primary focus, however, Alternate Control Strategy (ACS) training cannot be dismissed. In fact, if a comprehensive solution is to be developed, statistically ACS should comprise approximately 20% of the effort.

Again, not sure where the 20% number comes from?
Please read the APS Transfer of Skill Discussion.

Figure 1: CAST Statistics (1999 through 2008) – Click for Larger Image

As we look into Alternate Control Strategies (ACS), we’ll find that they require the pilot to have a firm grounding in Primary Control Strategies (PCS) first and foremost. PCS remains the dominant line of defense in every pilot’s skill set. It is when a situation is diagnosed as requiring an alternate control strategy or, more likely, when the PCS is ineffective, that a pilot must understand each critical flight control has a back-up in most aircraft designs.

For example, in a nose-high unstalled unusual attitude situation in transport category aircraft, the primary control strategy to get the nose down is to use the elevator to lower the nose by pushing forward on the control column with the assistance of trim (if available). If the nose will not come down, or perhaps the condition was created by a runaway trim anomaly, then the pilot must understand there are back-up / alternate control inputs that will assist in getting the nose down. If, in this case, the aircraft had under-wing mounted engines, a reduction of thrust may reduce the associated nose-up rotational moment and allow the nose to come down. If there is still no success or overly slow response then utilizing aileron to roll off the lift vector could be the next valid step. If, due to the aircraft being in a high angle of attack condition, the ailerons were ineffective in rolling off the lift-vector, then judicial use of rudder using extreme caution may be required to accomplish the roll to allow the nose to be lowered to avoid the primary threat of a nose-high stall.

Each control has a back up in most situations. To effectively use a primary control in its alternate function, the pilot must thoroughly understand how the control is used in its primary role.

In the 22% of LOC-I scenarios that may require Alternate Control Strategies, the situation can vary from straightforward to complex. Advanced / complex alternate control strategy instruction is very challenging to develop a level of consistency and proficiency in pilots over the long-term. However, it does have significant value. The more complex the scenario, the more training the pilot requires to become competent at dealing with it. In addition, the relative performance of alternate control inputs to counter-act a failed primary control varies significantly between aircraft. Although a fundamental strategy and general know-how of ACS is crucial to a pilot’s skill set, these strategies must be implemented in a high-fidelity full-flight or programmable in-flight simulator that is a certified replica of the pilot’s specific aircraft.

For much more information on this topic, please review our APS Transfer of Skill Discussion.

This is valuable training to all pilots … I developed life-saving loss of control in-flight piloting skills.

In most aspects of aviation training, transfer of skill is one of the primary driving forces behind the implementation of various training devices, curricula, type conversions and the applicability of utilizing full flight simulator devices as valid skill development resources. For a thorough discussion on Transfer of Skill in Upset Recovery Training visit our Video Training Web Site for APS Members.

As an example, when I participated in my initial Airbus A320 rating in Miami, Florida, the course took about 6 weeks to complete in preparation for my eventual employment as a line pilot with the airline. The course was designed with several assumptions related to my established pilot skill. I already had advanced flight skills based on flying a variety of military aircraft, had an instrument rating, understood jet aircraft operations and had developed significant airmanship skills in my previous flying experience. The airline had certain expectations and a lot of my skills were taken for granted by them to consider me to be a trainable candidate in the allotted period. At the time, once I completed my type-rating course on the A320 and demonstrated proficiency flying that particular aircraft during IOE, the conversion course for the A330 was a 4-day program. That may seem to all be irrelevant to this discussion but the concept of core pilot skill versus type-specific pilot skill in relation to operating any specific aircraft safely will hit the topic of Transfer of Skill Concepts in Upset Recovery Training head-on as we proceed.

Just by reading that brief paragraph above, only hinting at the very basic highlights of how I was trusted to even get training in an Airbus, it is quite easy to see how pilots and training managers become understandably convinced all aspects of aviation training must follow a similar model. In other words, as our flying experience grows in aviation, all our skills must similarly become enhanced. As we get type-rating after type-rating, we start to take many of our basic skills as pilots for granted without realizing how just a small proportion of our flight skills in our day-to-day operations are actually type-specific.

Unfortunately, the story gets bleaker when we consider the reality of a typical pilot’s LOC-I skill. The assumption that pilots already have a safe level of measurable skill in dealing with upset scenarios outside their small flight-envelope/attitude comfort zone, is not supportable by statistics or formal research. In many ways, pilots need to be taught fundamental all-attitude flight skills as the core focus of upset recovery training as they do not have any experience whatsoever to fall back on. Even worse, in threatening upset situations, as pilots quickly become overwhelmed and start panicking on the flight controls, they tend to go with what they know. Typically, the panicking pilot has no idea their 20,000 hours of flight skills and learned flight control instincts are predominantly invalid when dealing with the loss of control in-flight threat beyond certain parameters.

Although pilots in general are excellent students of aviation, they have not been forced to receive the right kind of training to be armed to deal with the loss of control in-flight threat. It isn’t their fault, as they are simply learning what they are expected to learn by the industry. For pilots to be truly prepared to recognize, avoid and (if necessary) recover from life-threatening airplane upset scenarios, we need to start their training from knowledge of the demonstrated fact that they have very little skill at all.

With such a dismal snapshot of pilot competence in relation to loss of control in-flight situations, how can anything be done quickly, inexpensively and in a manner that truly arms pilots with the skills necessary to save the aircraft and the lives of those they are charged to keep safe? Fortunately, with the right kind of finely tuned upset recovery training, a pilot who is incompetent to deal with a wide variety of LOC-I threats, can be given knowledge, insight skills, and stress-managing strategies that can propel them to a high state of competence in just a few days. And the most exciting part is that the skills learned are enduring, and are skills that last if – again, ‘if’ – the training is done properly.

Why is Upset Recovery Training Such a Unique Challenge?

Although this document addresses the current training industry’s lack of resources to impart all-attitude recovery skills in the typical pilot, it is important to highlight that many aspects of upset recovery training can be accomplished in a traditional manner. As we’ll see a little later, loss of control academic training, type-specific transfer of skill training and some aspects of recognition and avoidance training are well within reach of the established training model.

OK, NOW THIS IS IT FOLKS: It is now time to say what nobody wants to say or hear (especially line pilots, flight schools and many other training institutions) :

The vast majority of skills that can be transferred are already being transferred. The problem is the skills that need to be transferred cannot be transferred because pilots do not have them to begin with. The primary issue in the industry’s task to produce pilots with skills necessary to address loss of control in flight is to give them the skills that they don’t have. When it comes right down to it, “Transfer of Skill” is the easy part as long as the “Core Skills” are taught properly, generically and simply.

It is our contention that more than 90% of the Transfer of Skill issue associated with upset recovery training is actually “Core Upset Recovery Skill Creation” not specifically the “Transferring of Skill”.

Recovering most any type, class or category of fixed wing aircraft from most airplane upsets involves straightforward manipulation of primary flight controls in a manner and order that maximizes the pilot’s ability to resolve the situation to recovery. Technically, the process of applying the core recovery strategy is not difficult. On the other hand, the skills required to do so are counter-intuitive to the pilot who has virtually no all-attitude flight experience of any kind. It is not a complex issue when we’re just talking about identifying the steps necessary for a pilot to recognize, avoid and, if necessary, recover an airplane from an upset. There is more to it than that.

On the down side, there is seemingly an endless supply of tips, tricks or try-this methods that float around the industry, often relayed from flight deck to flight deck, dozens – even hundreds – of times separated from the original sources that allude to recovery techniques which are quite frankly scary and too often unfounded. In some slightly more encouraging cases, the “tips” might actually work in an aerobatic aircraft but often provide no consistent application to safely recovering a non-aerobatic airframe with an untrained pilot at the controls.

A Core Upset Recovery Skill Set of Primary Control Strategies must be established as a fundamental recovery technique for all pilots, or as a minimum, commercial pilots and flight instructors. Defining the elements, application and processes that comprehend a thoroughly demonstrated and universally transferable upset recovery skill set are not the focus of this document. For further information on a thoroughly investigated, tested and practically proven Core Upset Recovery Strategy, please contact APS.

Aspirations with Future Training Developments

Transfer of Skill is a crucial factor in the development of an industry solution to the LOC-I threat. It is hoped academic, political and aviation training efforts made by APS Emergency Maneuver Training will motivate regulators, decision-makers and oversight committees to consider the following in relation to upset recovery training:

1. Transfer of Skill is primarily about Core Skill Development, as pilots do not have a competent skill set pre-established.
2. Over 90% of the core skill development necessary for a pilot to recover an airplane from an in-flight upset is not type-specific. However, type-specific ‘differences training’ in Level D full flight simulator of a pilot’s specific aircraft type would have significant value.
3. Pilots must receive specialized training to be given the fundamental tools to be able to recover any fixed-wing aircraft from a wide variety of stalled flight, unusual attitudes, upsets, control failures and wake turbulence situations. Similar to an Instrument Rating, the core concepts of how to recover a fixed wing aircraft remain relatively constant.
4. Pilots must be given more than just practical skills to deal with a wide variety of airplane upsets. They must be instilled with the mental discipline to not be overwhelmed by the threatening nature of an airplane upset, be able to contain panicked over-response (i.e. contain the startle factor) and have a trained ability to draw upon counter-intuitive skills in a high-stress life-threatening environment.
5. Making a measurable difference in a pilot’s ability to address LOC-I requires a specialized combination of the right kind of academics, threat assessment, decision-making, and skill development through repetition to proficiency and recurrent training. Making a minor change to how training is currently accomplished, although likely keeping regulators and training organizations comfortable will have minor results. Regulated intervention is required.
6. Change will need to be mandated by the regulators and insurance agencies. Airlines, training departments and individual pilots will not use their own initiative to take skill-altering steps to address LOC-I.
7. LOC-I has been appropriately noticed but, for the most part, dismissed since the beginning of aviation history and will continue to be ignored as it has been accepted that an easy solution does not exist. A solution does exist and only requires a few days of specialized training. Similar to the few hours of training mandated to receive high performance, tailwheel, complex aircraft and high altitude endorsements, a regimented requirement for all commercial pilots to have an upset recovery endorsement could potentially be aviation’s largest leap forward in history related to the improvement of safety of flight.

* END *

Please Install the Adobe Flash Player to View this Video

***
How Do I Get More of this Kind of Training? Click Here …

If you speak to any upset recovery instructor you can find who teaches a true fully comprehensive all-attitude all-envelope upset recovery program, they will tell you flight hours, ratings, certificate level and aerodynamic book study usually make very little difference in how practically prepared civilian pilots are to deal with a significant airplane upset scenario. Exceptions do exist but they are extremely rare. Non-aerobatic, non-military pilots believing they have relevant experience in dealing with an out-of-the-everyday-envelope situation are often very surprised when they have an opportunity to witness their performance during upset training. For those who slipped past that generalization due to current or past experience as an aerobatic or military pilot, our investigations at APS indicate the level of competence of these pilots to deal with the same scenarios is marginally better, especially the further removed they are from their aerobatic/military skills. In fact, just because a pilot knows how to recover an aerobatic airplane or fighter jet, that experience does not fully prepare them to recover a normal category light general aviation airplane, multi-engine airplane, business jet or transport category aircraft. We know this first hand at APS as we all started out as military fighter pilots, transitioned into being airline pilots, gained extensive general aviation experience and then melded the skill sets to generate universally effective tools for pilots to use in any fixed wing aircraft over the course of a decade.

Often, the conceptual chart in the above video is an illuminating diagram for pilots. What’s even more informative and often rejected by pilots on first review, is how very limited their skill sets are as certified pilots in comparison to the all-attitude environment. Now, compound that reality with the minimal stall/spin training received by pilots and the fact that traditional instinctual avoidance and recovery skills rapidly drop off the effectiveness chart as the scenario approaches the maximum certified training limits represented by the 30 degrees pitch and 60 degrees bank window discussed in the video. Simply put, the majority of pilots are only comfortable and reliably capable of operating within the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid definition of an airplane upset: 45 degrees of bank, 25 degrees of nose-up pitch to a maximum of 10 degrees of nose-down pitch. This narrow definition is less than 5% of the full flight envelope accessible to the pilot in an airplane upset as shown in the video above …

Is this peaking your interest? If so, you’re going to love our video training course titled Preparing for Practical Upset Recovery Training starting at just $1 for the 1st month …