# Presentation: 573651

## Best Evidence for the FAA Industry Training Standards (FITS) Program for Pilot Training in the TAA

- Wayne A. Dornan,
- Paul Craig
- Steve Gossett,
- Wendy Beckman
- Middle Tennessee State University
- Murfreesboro, TN
- Contact:wdornan@mtsu.edu

## Definition of a TAA

- Integrated cockpit system consisting of a primary flight display, a
- multifunction display including an instrument-certified Global Positioning System (GPS) with traffic and terrain graphics, and a fully integrated autopilot.

## Slide 3

**FITS Group:** 16 MTSU students began their flight training in “glass” in DA-40 aircraft using the FAA-approved training program in August 2004
**Traditional Round (Archival):** 19 students who had taken their Private and Instrument flight training at MTSU

**Bottlenecks**: Additional time required to complete a lesson beyond syllabus requirements
**Setbacks**: Repeated lessons

## Setbacks Comparison

- Our data indicates that “FITS” trained pilots have fewer setbacks over the entire VFR/IFR training
- But what was the determining factor?
- TAA or “FITS”

## Second Phase – Fall 2005

**Second Phase – Fall 2005**
**TAA with traditional syllabus**

**Traditional Glass:  **11 students (7 have finished) who had taken their Instrument flight training at MTSU using a traditional syllabus in a TAA (glass cockpit)
**Traditional Round:** 19 students who had taken their Private and Instrument flight training at MTSU

## Identified Bottlenecks

- Traditional/Round Dials

- Syllabus Hours

## Identified Setbacks

- FITS

- TRADITIONAL ROUND

- TRADITIONAL GLASS

- *** = significantly different from traditional groups, p < 0.05

- 0

- 4

- 8

- 12

- 16

- 20

- MEAN NUMBER OF SETBACKS

- IFR TRAINING

- ***

- One of our “FITS” students passed her combined Private / Instrument check ride with a total of 55 airplane hours !

## IF WE ARE GOING TO BE CERTIFICATING PILOTS WITH FEWER HOURS WHAT KIND OF PILOTS WILL THEY BE ? 

## NTSB REPORT:2005 Accidents Released March 2006

- “GA Crash Stats Rise Significantly For 2005”
- 	................................................................AVweb, March 20, 2006
- “Accidents – End of Downward Trend”
- 	................................................Associated Press, March 20, 2006
- “The increase in accident statistics is disappointing”
- .....................................NTSB Acting Chairman
-                                  Mark Rosenker

## PHASE THREE

- “ THE EFFECTS OF  A “FITS” TRAINING PROGRAM THAT EMPHASIZES SCENARIO BASED FLYING ON PILOT DECISION MAKING SKILLS “

## METHODOLOGY

- 16 Students enrolled in the “FITS” group
- 7 Students enrolled in the Traditional / Glass Group
- 24 Pilots who completed their Instrument training within 6 months / Traditional Round

## METHOLODOLOGY 

- All groups were administered pencil and paper tests following the completion of their flight training

## Personal IFR Comfort Questionnaire 

- How comfortable are you to fly alone in the IFR environment?
- How comfortable are you to fly alone in IMC ?
- How comfortable are you to shoot an ILS approach to minimums ?
- What are your “personal minimums” ?

## Responses

- 1 = Not comfortable
- 2 = Somewhat comfortable
- 3 = Comfortable
- 4 = Very comfortable
- 5 = Absolutely comfortable, no problem!

## RESULTS

- Not Comfortable Flying Alone in the IFR Environment
- 			Traditional Round 	18 %
- 			Traditional Glass	  0 %
- 			FITS			  0  %

## RESULTS

- Not Comfortable Flying Alone in IMC
- 			Traditional  Round 	38 %
- 			Traditional Glass		  0 %
- 			FITS				 14 %

## RESULTS

- Not Comfortable Shooting an ILS to minimums
- Traditional Round	16 %
- Traditional Glass	0  %
- FITS			0  %

## RESULTS

- Would You Feel Comfortable Using a GPS When Flying IMC?
- Traditional Round: Yes (48 %)
- Traditional Glass: Yes  (100 %)
- FITS	 =  Yes (100 %)

## Mean Self-Reported Visibility

- FITS

- TRADITIONAL ROUND

- TRADITIONAL GLASS

- *** = significantly different from all

-    other

- groups, p < 0.05

- 0

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- STATUTE MILES

- IFR TRAINING

- ***

- ***

## Mean Self-Reported Ceiling

- FITS

- TRADITIONAL ROUND

- TRADITIONAL GLASS

- *** = significantly different from

- all other

- groups, p < 0.05

- 0

- 500

- 1000

- 1500

- 2000

- 2500

- 3000

- ALTITUDE IN FEET

- IFR TRAINING

- ***

- ***

## RESULTS

- What are your personal minimums ?
- 		Visibility: _Never thought about it !_
- 	Traditional Round	68 %
- 	Traditional Glass	60 %
- 	FITS			18 %

## SUMMARY

- Our results indicate that pilots have fewer setbacks over the entire VFR/IFR training using the FITS syllabus
- Our results suggest that the FITS training, and not the aircraft, makes the difference
- “FITS” trained pilots are:
- More comfortable with their IFR skills
- More comfortable with their automation
- More conservative with IFR decision making

## QUESTIONS