“FITS” Oversight Committee Update 23 March, 2005

1. “FITS”Oversight Committee Update23 March, 2005 Aero–Tech, Inc.

2. 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!!

3. FITS Basic Concepts Technically Advanced Aircraft Scenario Based Training (SBT) Single Pilot Resource Management (SRM) Learner Centered Grading

4. FITS Progress 2003-2005

5. 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.

6. 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)

7. 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

8. FITS (accepted)Transition Training Commenced Feb 2005 • FITS Instructor submitted March 2005

9. 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

10. 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”

11. FITS Recurrent Training Seminar • Site Visit BPPP (Lakeland Florida), February 2005 • Reviewed the current program • Provided suggestions for FITS acceptance and improvement • Working Meeting 24 march at Daytona Beach • FITS acceptance to follow

12. Site visit (December 2004) • Transition Syllabus submitted March 2005 • Acceptance pending review

13. 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

14. Site visit, February 2004 • Site visit, March 22 March 2005

15. Avemco support! • FITS Insurability requirement for TAA’s

16. FBO’s and Other Training Providers • Aero Tech Inc. • ASA • Skyline Aeronautics • Garmin • HPTI • Hudson • CAP • Electronic Flight Solutions • King Schools • Magenta Line

17. “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

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

19. 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).

20. 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.

21. 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) Grades • Understand – 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.

22. 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 SRM 5P Check:

23. 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:

24. 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:

25. 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?

26. 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 

27. FITS Survey Efforts • 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/documents • Measurement of FITS application • Forms basis for a longitudinal study • Limitations • Manufacturers are uniformly protective of sensitive customer information • Customer participation is voluntary. • Good response to date • Information is dependant on customer setting and surrounding. • Requires an additional effort to track FITS vs. Non FITS data. • Industry consent • Protection of proprietary information • Discretion in how the data is used. • We need FOC suggestions and participation.

28. Technically Advanced Aircraft Performance (TAAP) Lab • Two locations ERAU/UND • Allows real time testing of FITS educational principles • Extensive data collection capability • Supports ongoing student research.

29. FAA Industry Training Standards,“FITS” Aero–Tech, Inc.