# Stick Pusher and Adverse Weather Event Training (SPAW) Section 208 Aviation Rulemaking Committee

Final Report

1 2 December 2012FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | i Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### T ABLE OF 

### C ONTENTS

Table of Contents

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... i

Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. iii

Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 1
Group Composition

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 2
Abbreviated Answers to the FAA’s 13 Questions

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4 Upset Prevention and Recovery Training in an Airplane

................................ ................................ ..................... 4 Upset Prevention and Recovery Training in an FSTD

................................ ................................ ......................... 5

Recommendation Guidance

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 7

Training Element Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 7 Using this section

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 10

Clarifications and Rationale

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 11
Instructor Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 32

UPRT Instructors

— Initial and Recurrent Training Requirements and Prerequisites

................................ .......... 39
Device Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 40
Airplane Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 40
FSTD Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 41
Instructor Support

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 42

V

- n Diagram: Flight Envelope

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 44 Simulator Fidelity and Validated Data Envelope

................................ ................................ .............................. 45

M alfunctions

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 45 Aerodynamic Simulation

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 46
Completion Criteria

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 47 Aircraft Training Risk Mitigation

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 49

On

- Aircraft Training

— Risk Mitigation Strategies

................................ ................................ ............................. 49 Additional Risk Mitigation Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 50 FSTD Training Risk Mitigation

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 50

Additional Recommendations

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 52
Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 54

APPENDIX A

— OEM Upset Prevention and Recovery Recommendations

................................ ............................... 1 OEM Recommendations for Training

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 2
Energy Awareness

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 2 Flight Control Effectiveness

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 3

OEM

- Recommended Training Sequen ces

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 3

Environmental Factors

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 3FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | ii Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012

Wake Vortex

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 3 Mechanical/System In duced

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 4

Stall

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4

Pilot Factors

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 4
Energy Management

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 4 Engine Performance/Power

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 4

Aircraft Acceleration

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 4 High Altitude Engine Powe r Management

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 5 High Altitude Energy Management

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 5 Flight Control Effectiveness

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 5

Buffet

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 5 Roll Capabilities

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 5 Pitch Capabilities

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 6

APPENDIX B

— Proposed Revisions to 14 CFR Part 60

................................ ................................ ............................. 1

APPENDIX C

— Safety Recommendations

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1

APPENDIX D

— Abbreviations and Definitions

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 1

APPENDIX E

— Presenters/SME List by Organization

................................ ................................ .............................. 1

APPENDIX F

— Member Information

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 1FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | iii Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### E XECUTIVE 

### S U MMARY

Th is report is directed to the attention of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety and recommends improvements for flightcrew member training in the a rea of Loss of Control

– Inflight (LOC

– I)

. T o have the greatest impact on safety, the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010, § 208 Public Law 111

– 216 Aviation Rulemaking Committee’s (208 ARC) recommendations place special emphasis on knowledge and skill s in manual flight operations

. During its delibera tions, the 208 ARC reviewed many previous working group reports , some of which are outlined in appendix E, from the past two decades. The ARC commend s its predecessor s ’ excellent work in their respective subject areas. The ARC adopted the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid Revision 2 (AURTA 1 ) and the A viation C ircular 120

– 109 2 ” as the basis of their recommendations

. The ARC recommends the FAA retain these two documents as source documents. While AURTA, Revision 2 was designed for swept

- wing airplane w ith more than 100 seats, the general concepts are applicable to most high

- performance airplane . As this document makes significant reference to the AURTA, Revision 2

, the ARC recommends original equipment manufacturers ( OEM ) review the AURTA, Revision 2 t o determine whether it contains recommendations in appropriate for their airplane

. The ARC also recognizes that many OEMs have coordinated their efforts and are completely in agreement with both stall recovery procedures and upset recovery recommendations and techniques. It is important for users to study and understand the AURTA, Revision 2 and FAA AC 120

– 109 beyond simply reading the parts that highlight procedure s /recommendations or techniques.

One issue identified by the 208 ARC was the lack of instruc tor knowledge, qualification, and standardization for upset prevention and recovery training. Instructors must know the limitations of the devices (airplane or Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD)) and not instruct beyond their knowledge on the subjec t. It is imperative that the instructor not use the device for any purpose for which it was not designed or intended.
Based on surveys, presentations, and experiences of 208 ARC members

, it was apparent that while standardization may exist among instructo rs within a training organization, there was limited instructor standardization among the industry training providers. The ARC believes that incorporating th is report’s recommendations will provide better standardization of training delivery and improved quality of training, as well as risk reduction for airplane training during the commercial pilot phase of a pilot’s career.

A second issue identified was the lack of knowledge with pilots and instructors on items that could lead to a loss of control

. The 208 ARC recommends improved academic training at all levels of certification including t ype r ating training

. In addition to the tasks assigned to the 208 ARC, an airplane OEM group was established to

create standard OEM guidance for the recovery from nos e

- high/ nose

- low upsets. The recommendations from this group are attached in appendix A, and should serve as a

1 http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/training/media/AP_UpsetRecovery_Book.pdf

2 http://www.faa.gov/do cumentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%20120

- 109.pdfFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | iv Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 template for all airplane manufacturers for the development of, and revisions to, OEM

- recommended Upset Prevention and Recovery Training and flig htcrew guidance.

The 208 ARC recommends changing the training paradigm from Upset Recovery/Unusual Attitude Training to Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (hereafter to be referred to as UPRT)

. This is to stress the requirement for knowledge to creat e awareness and the ability to prevent an occurrence, rather than waiting for recovery

. This report separately addresses training conducted for the commercial pilot certificate and during type rating training . Therefore, it includes on

- airplane training at the commercial pilot certificate and FSTD training at the type rating level. In addition

, manual flight operations training should be emphasized in order to consolidate the principles of airplane energy management skills

. The term prevention as used in this report refers to any pilot’s actions to avoid any divergence from a desired airplane state

. Recovery refers to any pilot ’s actions that return a n airplane that is diverging in altitude, airspeed

, or attitude to a desired state from a develop ing or f ully developed upset

. Awareness and prevention training serve to avoid incidents ; recovery training serves to reduce accidents as a result of an unavoidable upset event.
All of the recommendations made by the 208 ARC achieved majority consensus and thus, for the purposes of this report, the terms ARC, committee, subcommittee, and subgroup may be considered synonymous.

The members of the 208 ARC wish to thank the Administrator for the opportunity to offer recommendations on these important issues confrontin g the air carrier industry. We remain available for further consultations as necessary.
Respectfully submitted,

Philip Adrian Lou Nemeth

Co

- Chair of 208 ARC /LOCART Co

- Chair of 208 ARC /LOCARTFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### I NTRODUCTION

The Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) con vened an Aviation Rulemaking Committee ( ARC ) to address § 208 of the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010, P ublic L aw 111

− 216 (208 ARC) to make recommendations to the FAA regarding critical training elements involving s tall and u pset. The ARC was convened in 2010 and made the initial report to the FAA in July 2011. This report supplements the content and provides more detail to the ARC report on the subject of Upset Prevention and Recovery T raining (UPRT)

. The ARC was reconvened in March 2012 with additional participants and observers of international regulatory agencies. The meetings were held at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in Montreal, Canada, with ICAO reference to Loss of Control Avoidance and Recov ery Training ( LOCART )

. The 208 ARC was tasked by the FAA to provide recommendations for the development of guidance for UPRT. In order to target the recommendations, the FAA provided t he ARC with 13 questions. The 13 questions are addressed throughout the report

. The FAA requested the ARC provide joint recommendations and answers to specific questions that arose from the 2011 208 ARC report. The 13 questions focused on UPRT training for the incremental development of a professional pilot ’s knowledge and skills

. The ARC di vided into four subcommittees to complete its tasking. These groups were identified as follows:

• One group representing all aircraft original equipment manufacturers ( OEM )

• One group addressing instructor requirements,

• One group addressing device ( aircraf t / Flight Simulation Training Device ( FSTD ) ) requirements, and

• Ο ne group addressing academic and flight training requirements.
The ARC has acknowledged that a great deal of work has been done in this area and invited subject matter experts (SME) to present opinions to the group. The ARC also reviewed numerous documen ts from other working groups that provide guidance on upset prevention and

recovery . A summary of SME presentations is included in appendix E.
In addition to presentations, the ARC requested surveys from international industry to establish current practic es within UPRT. The results of these surveys provided the ARC with two conclusions: industry is aware of the need for UPRT, and there is no standardization within the industry on UPRT training.
For the purposes of this document “commercial pilot certific ate training” is used to denote prerequisite aircraft training for the commercial pilot certificate. Although the FAA does not offer Multi

- crew Pilots License ( MPL ) as a certification option

, recommendations for “commercial pilot certificate training” wou ld also be applicable to MPL training should the FAA adopt an MPL certificate “Type Training” is used to denote aircraft type

- specific training in an FSTD. Because MPL training encompasses both commercial pilot certificate training and type training, the ARC expects both the commercial requirements and the type rating training requirements will be completed within a MPL course.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 2 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### G ROUP 

### C OMPOSITION

Co

- Chairs

Philip Adrian The Boeing Company

Lou Nemeth CAE
Subgroup Chairs

Susan McHaffie FlightSafety Inter national

, Inc.

Itash Samani CAE

Dave McKenney/Chad Balentine Air Line Pilots Association, International ( ALPA )

Larry Rockliff Airbus

Members

Noam Morgenstern The Coalition of Airline Pilots Association s ( CAPA )

Larry Rooney CAPA

Paul Kolisch Regional Airline Association

Paul Railsback Airlines for America

Gilson Russo Embraer

Mark Elliott Bombardier

Jerome Bonetto ATR

Rudy Canto Airbus

Jim Burin Flight Safety Foundation

Karsten Liljegren Boeing
Regulatory Agency Observers

ICAO

EASA

Trans port Canada

UK CAA

Australian CAA

French DGAC
FAA Representatives

Robert Burke Designated Federal Official, Air Carrier Training and Part 142 Training Center Branch

Robyn LaPorte Aviation Safety Inspector

, Air Carrier Training and Part 142 Trainin g Center Branch

Jeffrey Schroeder Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor,FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 3 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Flight Simulation Systems

Kathy Abbott Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor Flight Deck Human Factors

Larry McDonald Engineering Section Supervisor, National Simulator Program

Gerry Baker Manager, Flight Test and Program Management Branch

Tim Shields Aviation Safety Inspector , General Aviation and Commercial Division

FAA Advisor

Gautam Shah National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA )FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 4 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### A BBREVIATED 

### A NSWERS TO THE 

### FAA’ S 

### 13 Q UESTIONS
The following are the 13 questions submitted to the 208 ARC from the FAA in order to target their recommendations towards airplane and FSTD training

. Th e answers are expanded with greater detail throughout the body of the report . Page numbe rs/sections are indicated at the end of each question

.



### U PSET 

### P REVENTION AND 

### R ECOVERY 

### T RAINING IN AN 

### A IRPLANE

1. Define the scope and objectives of upset prevention and recovery training in

an airplane

. UPRT will be required for all commercial pilot certificat ed training

. The knowledge elements of UPRT must be completed before the associated flight training element.

Within the context of commercial pilot certificated training , pilots should demonstrate in an airplane the applied knowledge and skills to prevent an upset

, or if not prevented, recover from one. See page 7.

2. Define the aircraft requirements for upset prevention and recovery training in

an airplane

. The airplane used for conducting UPRT elements must be capable of support ing the specific training ex ercises for which it is being used. Though no specific category of airplane is identified in this report, different elements may have different airplane requirements. See

page 40.

3. Define the instructor requirements for upset prevention and recovery train ing in

an airplane

. Instructors conducting UPRT must be approved to teach UPRT

- specific elements , assess (determine the pilot ’ s ability to achieve the objectives) and debrief the applicable elements. In addition, instructors providing on

- airplane UPRT tra ining must be trained on how to recognize and recover from improper student inputs and recover the airplane to safe flight. The ARC recommends Certified Fight Instructors (CFI) conducting UPRT be under strict oversight by the FAA. See page 32.

4. Define the academic training elements required before beginning upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane

. Academic training elements must be accomplished before the commencement of the associated practical element. Though a given timeframe has not been indicated, academic elements should be accomplished within a reasonable time before the training event to ensure sufficient retention. See page 7

5. Define the flight training elements required for upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane

. Spec ific training exercises and integrated elements are identified in the Recommendation Guidance section of this report. These include

, but are not limited to

, Energy Management, Aerodynamics and Human Factor elements that are intended to focus on awareness and prevention of upsets, rather than the current focus on recovery only. This is intended to buildFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 5 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 on existing training, not to replace it. The ARC recommends that the FAA provide strict oversight of the curriculum content of UPRT programs.
Proper found ation of elements and concepts are required during the commercial pilot certificated training phase of a pilot ’ s career to provide knowledge and skills that will prevent upsets, or if not prevented, support the recovery from upsets. See page 7.

6. Define the completion criteria for upset prevention and recovery training in

an airplane

. The student shall demonstrate knowledge and skill recognizing, preventing

, and if necessary

, recovering from a developing or developed upset

. See page 47

7. Define the risk mitig ation strategies required for upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane.
In order to mitigate the inherent risk involved in o n

- airplane UPRT, enhanced safety measures during training must be followed , as outlined in the Recommendation Guidance section

. See page 49.



### U PSET 

### P REVENTION A ND 

### R ECOVERY 

### T RAINING IN AN 

### FSTD

8. Define the scope and objectives of upset prevention and recovery training in an FSTD.
UPRT will be required for all pilots operating airplanes that require type rating training. This training is to be conducted at the initial p ilot t ype r ating, t ransition, requalification, and

u pgrade training. Because UPRT is not a developed skill, it will have to be developed with repetitio n over time. T he UPRT elements are to be included in r ecurrent training not to exceed 3 years
. Pilots enrolled in rec urrent training may have the UPRT academic and f l ight training elements spread out over time. UPRT elements should be covered during each training event to promote recency of experience.

In add ition to the aforementioned training programs, the ARC recommends introducing

a UPRT Fundamental curriculum. This course is for current professional pilots who have not previously undergone UPRT training during their commercial pilot certificate or Airlin e Transport Pilot certific ate

. UPRT Fundamental t raining and subsequent recurrent curricul ums are discussed at the end of this report under the Additional Recommendation s section

. To prevent repetitive training the exercises are recommendations and can be varied provided they cover the training elements prescribed in this document.

For type

- specific training, pilots should demonstrate the applied knowledge and skills to prevent an upset

, or if not prevented, recover from one. This should be continuously

r einforced throughout the pilot ’ s career. See page 7.

9. Define the training device requirements for upset prevention and recovery training in an FSTD

. The FSTD used for conducting UPRT elements must be capable of support ing the specific training exercises fo r which it is being used. Training elements may have different level requirements

, as outlined in the Recommendation Guidance section. See page 41.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 6 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 10. Define the instructor requirements for upset prevention and recovery training in

a n FSTD

. Instructors cond ucting UPRT must be qualified to teach, assess (determine the pilots ability to achieve the objectives) and debrief the applicable elements , as outlined in the Recommendation Guidance section of this report. See page 39.

11. Define the academic training eleme nts required before beginning upset prevention and recovery training in an FSTD

. Academic training elements must be accomplished before the commencement of the associated practical element. Though a given time frame has not been indicated, the academic el ements should be accomplished during the same training syllabus

. See page 7.

12. Define the training elements required for upset prevention and recovery training in

an FSTD

. Specific training exercises and integrated elements are identified in the Recommendat ion Guidance section of this report. These include

, but are n ot limited to

, Energy Management, Aerodynamics and Human Factor elements that are intended to focus on awareness

, prevention, and recovery of upsets , rather than the current focus on recovery on ly. This is intended to build on existing training, not to replace it. See page 7

. 13. Define the completion criteria for upset prevention a nd recovery training in an FSTD

. The student shall demonstrate knowledge and skill recognizing, preventing

, and if nec essary , recovering from undesired airplane states. See page 47.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 7 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### R ECOMMENDATION 

### G UIDANCE

The ARC determined the FAA questions could be addressed more clearly by grouping them into the following categories :

• Training Element Requirements

• Instructor Requirem ents

• Device Requirements

• Completion Criteria

• Risk Mitigation



### T RAINING 

### E LEMENT 

### R EQUIREMENTS

Questions Addressed:

Define the academic training elements required before beginning upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane

. Define the flight trainin g elements required for upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane

. Define the academic training elements required before beginning upset prevention and recovery training in an FSTD

. Define the flight training elements required for upset prevent ion and recovery training in an FSTD

. The ARC recommends the a cademic training elements directly related to a given flight training element be accomplished before commencing practical training . This would be limited to the associated knowledge

- based eleme nt for each flight training element as outlined in the table below. This training could be accomplished before flight training or during flight training as long as the knowledge element is covered before the associated flight training element. Though

a g iven time frame has not been indicated, the academic elements should be accomplished within a reasonable time before the flight trainin g and must be completed during the same syllabus (or training program) to ensure sufficient retention. UPRT knowledge el ements should be taught by a qualified UPRT instructor in a classroom setting, or distance learning with a qualified UPRT instructor immediately available to answer questions and supplement the presentation as well as to ensure student understanding of the material. Specific academic training elements are listed in the training matrix below.

Table 1 provides high

- level guidance for the ARC’s recommended training elements to be incorporated into a program to provide integrated or stand

- alone training for up set awareness, prevention, and recovery. The UPRT course referenced in this document would include the content of this section. The ARC acknowledge s these recommendations are made with the information and research currently available and recommend s the F AA m onitor the effectiveness of the recommendations implemented and determines whether changes are necessary

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 8 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Table 1. UPRT Training Elements

Training Element Knowledge (Academic)

Based Flight Training (A irplane /

FSTD) Commercial Pilot Certificate Trainin g Type Rating Training

A. Aerodynamics

i. General Aerodynamic Characteristics • • •

ii. Advanced Aerodynamics • • •

iii. Aerodynamics (High and Low Altitudes) • • •

iv. Aircraft Performance (High and Low Altitudes) • • • •

v. Angle of Attack (AOA) Awareness • • • •

vi. Mach Effects

– if applicable to aircraft type • • •

vii. Aircraft Stability • • • •

B. Causes and Contributing Factors of Upsets

i. Environmental • • •

ii. Pilot Induced • • •

iii. Mechanical • • •

C. Safety Review of Accidents and Incidents re lating to Aircraft Upsets • • •

D. G Awareness

Positive/Negative/Increasing/Decreasing g Loads • • •

ii. Lateral g Awareness (Sideslip) • • •

iii. G Load Management • • • •

E. Energy Management

i. Kinetic Energy vs. Potential Energy vs. Chemical
E nergy (Power) • • • •

ii. Relationship between Pitch and Power and performance • • • •

F. Flight Path Management

i. Automation I nputs for Guidance and Control • • • •

ii. Type

- S pecific C haracteristics • • •

iii. Automation Management • • •

iv. Manual Handling Skills • • • •

G. Recognition

i. Type

- Specific Examples of Instrumentation D uring Developing and Developed Upset • • •

ii. Pitch/ Power /Roll/Yaw • • • •

iii. Effective Scanning (Active Monitoring) • • • •

H. Upset Prevention and Recovery Techniques • • • •

i. Timely and Appropriate Intervention • • • •

ii. Nose High/ Wings

- L evel R ecovery • • • •FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 9 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Training Element Knowledge (Academic)

Based Flight Training (A irplane /

FSTD) Commercial Pilot Certificate Trainin g Type Rating Training

iii. Nose Low/ Wings

- L evel

- R ecovery • • • •

iv. High Bank Angle Recovery Techniques • • • •

v. Consolidated Summary of Airplane Recovery Techniques • • • •

I. System Malfun ction

i. Flight Control Anomalies • • •

ii. Power Failure (Partial or Full) • • •

iii. Instrument Failures • • •

iv. Automation Failures • • •

J. Specialized Training Elements

i. Steep Spiral • • •

ii. Slow Flight • • •

iii. Steep Turns • • •

iv. Nose High / High Speed • • •

v. Nose High/Low Speed • • •

vi. Nose Low /High Speed • • •

vii. Nose Low / Low Speed • • •

viii. High Bank Angle Recovery • • •

ix. Line

- Oriented Flight Training ( LOFT ) or Line

- Operational Simulation ( LOS ) • •

K. Human Factors • • • •

i. Human Information Processing • • • •

ii. Threat and Error Management • • • •

iii. Crew Resource Management (CRM) • • • •

iv. Situation Awareness • • • •

v. Decision Making • • • •

i.) Cognitive Bias • • • •
ii.) S urprise and Startle Factor • • • •

vi. Problem Solving • • • •

i.) F ixation • • • •

vii. Physiological Factors

i.) Spatial Disorientation • • •
ii.) I nstrument Interpretation • • •
iii.) E rrors in Adjusting Attitude/Power • • •
iv.) P ilot

- induced oscillation ( PIO ) Avoidance / Recovery • • •FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 10 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Training Element Knowledge (Academic)

Based Flight Training (A irplane /

FSTD) Commercial Pilot Certificate Trainin g Type Rating Training

v.) P ilot Inattention/Complacency • • •
vi.) I llusions in Flight • • •
vii.) V isual Illusions • • •
viii.) V estibular Angular Illusions • • •
ix.) V estibular Linear Illusion • • •



### U SING THIS SECTION
In order to provide further guidance to the training elements in the table, clarification of the intended c ontent and rationale is below.

• H ighlighted items are specific extractions from the given training element or instructor requirement s table

. Example:

A. Specialized Training Elements

i. Steep Spiral

• In order to clarify the focus for the area of training t he following abbreviations are provided.

AW

– Awareness

P

– Prevention

R

– Recovery

• The Content section provide s further guidance into what should be included during the training of a given element for both commercial pilot certificated training and typ e rating training . This section is to assist with training course development and refers to both training types

. Where an element requires additional information specific to an area of training it will be specified as commercial pilot certificated trainin g or type rating . This categorization will continue to the next title and provide additional information for that specific training area

. Where no such specification exists it will be assumed to be for both training areas.

• Commercial training refers to t raining that is conducted at the commercial pilot certificate level. Type rating training refers to training that is conducted as type specific

to a given aircraft.

• The Rationale section provide s guidance into why the ARC has made recommendations for

spec ific training elements are to be trained.

• The Human Factor Integration section, where included, provides guidance on including critical CRM elements as integrated elements when developing course material.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 11 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • The Reference section, where included, refers to sp ecific accidents and incidents highlight ing the given training element. This section also references information the ARC used from additional sources.



### C LARIFICATION S AND 

### R ATIONALE

A. Aerodynamic Effects ( AW , P)

Content
Students should be knowledgeable ab out aerodynamics in the altitude stratum in which they will be operating.

T his element provide s the pilot with in

- depth knowledge of aircraft aerodynamics in areas affect ing the performance and handling of the aircraft

, and which if not adequately understo od have the potential of causing an aircraft upset condition or the prevention thereof.
Aerodynamic knowledge should be established to include, but not be limited to the following :

• General Aerodynamic Characteristics

o Aerodynamic flight envelope

o Load fact or

o Directional and lateral control

o Weight and Balance effects on handling

o Trim

o Sideslip

• Advanced Aerodynamics

o L/D curve and significance on aircraft performance in general

- and L/D Max in particular

o Relationship between L/D curve and airspeed

o Aircr aft Energy state and its application in various flight altitudes, airspeeds and attitudes.

o Optimum Climb Speed, Crossover Altitude, Optimum Altitude and Maximum Altitude as they relate to aircraft performance and the effect of deviations (environmental or aircraft) on performance

o Thrust required vs. Thrust available

o Thrust

- Limited conditions and recovery

o Airplane stability and its effects in flight including Maneuvering stability and characteristics at high and low altitude

o Environment impact on aerody namics and handling (e

. g. , Temperature, Ice

, etc

. )

o High

- altitude considerations

• Aerodynamics (High and Low Altitudes)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 12 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 o Airplane flight e nvelope

o Load factor

o Directional and lateral control

o Weight and Balance effects on handling

o Trim

o Sideslip

o L/D curv e and significance on aircraft performance in general

- and L/D Max in particular

o Relationship between L/D curve and airspeed

o Airplane Energy state and its application in various flight altitudes, airspeeds and attitudes.

o Optimum Climb Speed, Crossover Altitude, Optimum Altitude and Maximum Altitude as they relate to aircraft performance and the effect of deviations (environmental or aircraft) on performance

o Thrust required vs. Thrust available

o Thrust

- Limited conditions and recovery

o Aerodynamic stabil ity and its effects in flight including maneuvering stability and characteristics at high and low altitude

, Environment impact on aerodynamics and handling (e

. g. , Temperature, Ice

, etc

. )

o High

- altitude considerations

• Aircraft Performance (High and Low Alti tudes)

o Use of aircraft ( type

- specific ) performance charts to determine the effects of environmental changes on planned flight performance

o Use of aircraft ( type

- specific ) performance charts to determine the effects of aircraft configuration or system chang es on planned flight performance

C

ommercial Pilot Certificate Training

Students in commercial pilot certificated training should be familiar with not only aerodynamics at the altitudes at which they will be operating, but also with high

- altitude aerodynam ics as a building block for the progression of the ir career

. The flight training portion of the aerodynamic elements should expose students to the limits of the aircraft envelope.

Type Rating
Students should be knowledgeable about aerodynamic effects at b oth high and low level s

. The FSTD training should be accomplished at both high altitudes (within 5, 000 ft of the service ceiling of the aircraft), where applicable and for low altitude (below 10, 000 ft above ground level ). Use of normal operational cruis e altitudes for high

- altitude training should be encouraged.

Students should also

—FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 13 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • Recognize, when encountered, high speed buffet (if applicable to aircraft type) and low

- speed buffet.
With regards to AOA awareness, students should be taught

—

• The importan ce of AOA as it relates to aircraft performance and wing stall angle.

• The relationship of AOA to various aircraft systems

, particularly warning systems (stall warning, stick shaker, stick pusher

, etc. )

• General knowledge as well as aircraft

- specific knowled ge.

• The impact of environmental and system factors on AOA indications and their relationship to the stall AOA and various aircraft warning systems ( for example

, type

- specific knowledge of the stall warning system).

• Airplane type

- specific AOA information

, and if that information is presented to the pilot

, what the indications are

.

• Airplane

- specific handling to u s e AOA

- derived information to prevent or recover from an upset (including stall).
Students should also be trained with respect to the effects of mac h including

— m

• Definitions of mach tuck and mach buffet and the reason for them.

• Buffet

- limited max altitude

.

• Critical mach number and aerodynamic forces acting on the wing.

• Control surface effectiveness at high speed

. Note: This training , for AOA and m ach effects, should be accomplished only to the extent the topics are applicable to the specific aircraft.
Students at the type rating level should apply their aerodynamic knowledge by including the following in FSTD training:

• The pilot shall maneuver the air craft (simulator) at high altitudes at various speeds and automation levels. The pilot shall apply the aerodynamic principles studied to prevent

an upset.

• P ilots should be aware of the AOA from available data shown on the flight deck and demonstrate the use of those data to prevent an upset or recover from one.

• Speed controlled by elevator inputs or speed controlled by thrust

, aircraft energy state as it pertains to the type being flown, and demonstrate use of that knowledge to avoid or recover from an u pset

.

• The pilot shall demonstrate knowledge of the type

- specific systems that u s e AOA with emphasis on warning systems and the limitations of those systems.
Additional details regarding most of these areas can be found in the Airplane Upset Recovery Traini ng Aid Revision 2 ( AURTA )

, s ection 2.5. While the training aid was designed for swept

- wing aircraft with more than 100 seats, the general concepts are still applicable to most high

- performance aircraft

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 14 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Rationale

Evidence from numerous stick shaker events at high altitude has illustrated the general lack of pilot understanding of aerodynamics and aircraft performance and the relationship between high

- altitude and low

- altitude operations. Information obtained from members of the ARC also supports the belie f that pilots need a better understanding of aerodynamics, specifically with respect to upsets. This know ledgebase is a fundamental building block to providing the pilots with the information they need to be aware of and prevent upsets.

Human Factor Integ ration

Pilots should u nderstand airplane performance across all flight phases, including how to respond as pilot flying (PF) and pilot monitoring (PM)

. Pilots should u nderstand basic aerodynamics and flight dynamics to mentally integrate an understanding of the airplane AOA and energy state throughout the normal envelope of operations and be able to communicate that awareness to the other pilot.

B. Causes and Contributing Factors of Upsets (AW, P)

Content
Students should be knowledgeable in the various c auses and factors that can contribute to an upset. This training is accomplished academically.
This training should include

—

• Environmentally Induced Upsets, which could be caused by clear air turbulence, mountain wave, windshear, thunderstorms, microburs ts, wake turbulence, temperature changes, or airplane icing.

• Pilot

- Induced Upsets, which could be caused by misinterpretation or slow instrument

cross

- check, improper adjustment of attitude and power, improper pilot input, inattention, distractions, spatia l disorientation, pilot incapacitation, improper use of airplane automation, and POI

.

• Mechanical

- Induced Upsets, which could be caused by flight instrument anomalies/failures, autoflight anomalies/failures, flight control malfunctions/failures, or other sy stem anomalies.

The ARC recommends the use of the AURTA, Revision 2

, s ection 2.4 for details regarding these factors.

Rationale

U nderstanding the causes and contributing factors for upsets increase s pilot situation awareness and provides knowledge to recog nize situations that may lead to airplane upsets so they may be prevented

. Familiarity with c auses and factors that contribute to upsets help s pilots understand the importance of UPRT

. Human Factor Integration
Pilots should receive academic training o n c ommon illusions associated with LOC events. It should be e xplain ed why they occur and the importance of following procedure to avoid susceptibility to illusions.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 15 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Train pilots in what to monitor and when, cross

- checking, verification, during all phases of flight to prevent a n LOC event. Stress c ommunicat ion behavior between pilots to share understanding of airplane state so that both pilots recognize when either of them might be introducing a pilot

- induced upset. Develop ment and train ing on procedures, i ncluding PF and PM roles, for normal operations and deviation recovery limitations, what to monitor during recovery, how to identify and communicate deviations between pilots and guide recovery should focus on LOC prevention

.

C. Safety Review of Accidents and Incidents R elating to Aircraft Upsets (AW, P)

Content

Commercial Pilot Certificate Training
Students should be shown actual accidents and incidents related to general and commercial aviation aircraft upsets. These should include a variety of upsets emphasizing an understanding of the events, as well as the proper and/or improper decision making and actions which contributed to the upset and, if applicable, recovery.

Type Rating
Students should be shown actual accidents and incidents related to transp ort category aircraft upsets. These should include a variety of upsets emphasizing an understanding of the events, as well as the proper and/or improper decision making and actions which contributed to the upset and, if applicable, recovery.

Rationale

One method to train pilots on avoiding and preventing upsets is by showing them previous upset accidents and incidents. These upset events should be discussed within the training program with an emphasis on avoiding or preventing the upset, along with the pr oper recovery techniques if the upset was unavoidable

.

D. G Awareness (AW, P, R)

Content

Commercial Pilot Certificate Training
Airplane training of g awareness is specifically required to expose the student to the physiological aspect of g loading (+/

- /la teral). Students need to develop the manual handling skills to be able to apply the appropriate amount of g loading for a given situation to maintain the aircraft performance within its designed certification envelope.
The physiological g loading exercise s must be completed with a building block approach. Positive and Negative g loading should be completed with pullups , various bank angles, and pushover(s) to develop awareness and manual handling skills to apply various levels of g loading at various airc raft attitudes

, bank angles , and energy states within the airplane ’s flight envelope

. Lateral g loading should be demonstrated with steady state sideslip maneuvering.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 16 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Type Rating
Students should be provided academic reinforcement of the effects of g , espe cially during aircraft upsets. It must be emphasized that g loading in transport category airplanes feels significantly more pronounced than in other airplanes, due specifically to the cockpit environment. If any practical exercise regarding g awareness is accomplished in an FSTD, careful consideration should be taken to avoid negative transfer of training. Because there will be a visual aspect associated with g loading, the training program will need to validate whether the g awareness training in the F STD will be effective and can be accomplished without negative transfer of training.
Airline pilots are normally uncomfortable (for the sake of passenger comfort and safety) with aggressively unloading the g forces on a large passenger airplane. Pilots must overcome this inhibition when faced with the necessity to quickly and sometimes aggressively unload the airplane to less than 1 g

. Most simulators cannot replicate sustained g forces; therefore, the cockpit situation must be envisioned during less th an 1

- g flight. For example, the pilot may be floating up against the shoulder harness and seat belt making i t difficult for the pilot to reach the rudder pedals. Unsecured items may be flying around the cockpit.

Rationale
Students should be exposed to various levels of g loading to be able to recognize the condition to determine when to adjust the g loading.

Human Factor Integration
Explain how motion a ffects pilot perception and how to respond to it. Expose pilots to g

- loading conditions associated wi th LOC events. Explain the importance of following procedure to avoid susceptibility to physical disorientation.
Expose pilots to these sensory illusions in training to provide experience with their effects.

E. Energy Management (AW, P, R)

Content

The En ergy Management training objective addresses the following pilot performance issues :

• Inappropriate inputs to an event,

• Inappropriate understanding of energy state, and

• PF overload
The training should include integrated CRM training for developing crew kn owledge and skills for energy management and techniques for reducing pilot error. Following training

, the s tudents should be knowledgeable regarding energy management

, to include

—

• T he energy states of the airplane for all types of LOC events

.

• H ow the airpl ane gets in a high

- or low

- energy state and the input options available to change the energy state to a stable and safe state

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 17 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • H ow external factors can change energy state and how to correct for them.

• What parameters to focus on to decide an appropriate r esponse. Cross

- check with the other pilot to establish a shared understanding.

• W hat to monitor during an event and how the PM should coach the PF in the recovery using appropriate callouts and other verbal feedback.

Students should understand the interre lationship between kinetic energy (airspeed), potential energy (altitude), and chemical energy (power) (such as the relationship between pitch and power).

Commercial Pilot Certificate Training
In order to fully understand the concepts discussed above in ac ademic training students should demonstrate acceleration performance when on the back side of the power curve.

Type Rating

T o fully understand the concepts discussed above in academic training students should demonstrate the following:

• A cceleration between two speeds of which the aircraft is capable at low altitude, medium and high altitude (e.g., 200

– 250 at low altitude and high altitude which corresponds to m ach at h igh a lt itude)

.

• A cceleration performance from s econd r egime (back side of power curve) at l ow altitude and high altitude.

• T he relationship between Max imum Cruise/Climb/ Continuous Thrust and Takeoff/Go

around ( TOGA ) at high altitude

.

• A cceleration capabilities through descent versus power application

.

• R oll rate performance of the airplane at diffe rent speeds and different configurations and with flight spoilers retracted/extended if a difference exist s ( e.g. , B727)

.

• P itch rate performance of the airplane at different speeds and different configurations and with flaps retracted/extended. Also demon strate an aft center of gravity ( CG ) versus forward CG if flight qualities are significantly different

.

Rational e Students must understand the concept of energy management for upset awareness, prevention, and recovery training. The elements discussed abo ve must demonstrate the following :

• The performance decrement at high density altitudes

.

• Potentially different recovery technique from flight in the second regime at low altitude

versus high altitude.

• Identify that TOGA is not likely to produce more power at max imum altitude than cruise

power , etc

.

• The inability of the aircraft to power out of a high

- altitude upset

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 18 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • An appreciation of high

- altitude response differences to the same flight control input

.

• C orrectly identify the low

- and high

- speed buffet with corresponding recovery techniques

.

• T he full pitch and roll capabilities of the airplane

. Human Factor Integration
Explain the energy states of the airplane for all types of LOC events. Describe how the airplane gets in a high

- or low

- energy state and the input options available to change the energy state to a stable and safe state. Describe how external factors can change energy state and how for correct them.
Explain what to monitor during an event and how the PM should assist the PF in the recovery usi ng appropriate callouts and other verbal feedback.
Explain the difference between kinetic, potential, and chemical energy and the relationship between pitch

, power, and performance. Know w hat parameters to focus on to decide on an appropriate response. E ach pilot must understand the current energy state of the aircraft and how to effectively manage the aircraft energy to avoid and recover from an upset. E ach pilot, whether acting as PF or PM, must be able to effectively communicate the current energy st ate of the aircraft with the other pilot to be able to reach a shared understanding of how to avoid a potential upset or how to recover from a developing/fully developed upset.

F. Flight Path Management (AW, P ,R )

Aircraft used in commercial pilot certific ated training and type training will have various types of automated systems. Flight Path Management training should be developed with regard to what automated systems are on the airplane being used for the specific training, including type

- specific autom ation anomalies

.

Content

i. Manual or Automation I nputs for Guidance and Control

The Manual or Automation Inputs for G uidance and Control training objective addresses correct pilot control inputs to avoid undesired flightpath deviations.
This training obj ective should include the control strategies pilots should use in both developing and developed upset event s

. Pilots must know the conditions under which it is best to allow automated systems to control the airplane and those under which manual interventi on by the pilot is best. This should include Primary/Alternate Control Strategies.

ii. Type

- specific characteristics (e

. g
., V ertical Speed (VS) or indicated airspeed ( IAS ) based on alt itude )

. Training provided on type

- specific characteristics will help a void inadvertent LOC events because of automation surprise. Integrated CRM training should include communication between pilots of their understanding of the current airplane state. P ilots should create a mutual mental picture of airplane status and keep it updated. In addition, pilots must be able to work as

a crew to be aware, identify, and prevent.
This will include instrument interpretation as it applies to recognizing LOC events

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 19 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 iii. Automation Management The automation management training objec tive addresses correct pilot control inputs to avoid undesired flightpath deviations.

Pilots must know how to use the automated systems (if installed) during prevention and recovery from an upset event. This training should include the following :

• Common e rrors to avoid and why they occur

.

• Specific automation modes to use for specific contexts

.

• Cross

- check and verification of mode use and understanding of how it has been directed to command the airplane.

• Advantages and disadvantages of using automated syst ems for prevention and recovery

.

• The importance of ensuring correct inputs to the automation systems , which are commanded by pilot input and the consequences of failing to do so

. The Manual or Automation Inputs Control training objective addresses correct pilot control inputs to avoid undesired flightpath deviations.
This training objective should include the control strategies pilots should use in both developing and developed upset events. Pilots must know the conditions under which it is best to allow

a utomated systems to control the airplane and those under which manual intervention by the pilot is best

. This should include Primary/Alternate Control Strategies.
It is imperative that the PF keep the aircraft in trim while flying with an engine out on a multi

engine airplane. At slow speed, the autopilot is incapable of holding the correct attitude against an adverse yaw condition caused by an engine failure resulting in an upset.

iv. Manual Handling Skills The manual handling skills objectives are to address correct pilot control inputs to avoid undesired flightpath deviations. Refer to the discussion in section G below ( ii. Pitch/Power/Roll /Yaw) on how to develop pilot skills for making the correct control inputs to arrest the divergence or recovery from the upset. A secondary benefit of UPRT is improved manual handling skills acquired during the development of skills for prevention and recovery from the edges of the envelope. These manual handling skills should be developed during the Specialized T raining Elements in section J of the Table 1. UPRT Training Elements

. Training should include the practice of manual handling at the operational edges. Pilots must know the common errors to avoid and why they occur , as well as the importance of

c ross

- che ck ing and verification of inputs and a shared understanding among the pilots of why the pilot is flying the airplane manually. Pilots must know how the airplane responds to inputs across flight regimes.
Manual Handling Training should include training on the u se of f ull c ontrol i nputs

. Flight control forces become less effective when the airplane is at or near its critical AOA or stall. The tendency is for pilots not to use full control authority because they rarely are required to do so. Pilots must o vercome this habit when recovering from severe upsets

. Note: Rudder control is still effective at a high AOA, and special care must be taken in the use of rudder during upset prevention and recovery . It is important to guard against control reversals. To maintain structural integrity rapid full

- scale reversal of control deflections should be avoided

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 20 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 In addition, Manual Handling Training (Pitch/Power/Roll/Yaw) should include training on

non

- intuitive factors . For example , i t may be counter

- intuitive to use greater unloading control forces when recovering from a high AOA , especially at low altitudes. If the airplane is stalled while already in a nose

- down attitude, the pilot must still push the nose down (unload) in order to reduce the AOA

. Additionall y, for under

- wing mounted engines it may be necessary to reduce thrust in order to reduce the AOA due to the strong pitch up forces from added thrust. Altitude cannot be maintained in a stall and should be of secondary importance.
The training should high light when it is appropriate to fly manually versus using automation. S pecific aspects of the transition from automated to manual flight should also be covered

.

Rationale
Airmanship in the form of aircraft manual handling skills may still be the last line of defense. With the use of automated systems increasing, any training that can develop and assist in averting the erosion of manual handling skills is an asset. UPRT in an airplane and in an FSTD provides effective manual handling training. Manual han dling skills developed during UPRT will be critical to allowing t he pilot to handle unexpected upsets.

Human Factor Integration
Pilots need to know when it is best to use the automated systems to control the airplane versus manual flying

. Human factors con siderations with automation management should include type

- specific description s of automation use, with an emphasis on common automation errors. Training should also include communication between the pilots of their understanding of the current airplane state. Pilots should be able to create a mental picture of the airplane status and keep it updated.
Automation management should also include how to use the automation during upset events, common errors to avoid, why they occur, and specific automation mo des to use for specific situations. Pilots should have a shared understanding of the cross

- check and verification of mode use and an understanding of how it has been directed to command the airplane.
Pilots should understand the human factors issues rega rding when to fly manually versus when to use the automated systems. Training should include the practice of manual handling at the operational edges. Pilots must know the c ommon errors to avoid and why they occur as well as the importance of c ross

- check ing and verification of inputs and a shared understanding among the pilots of why the pilot is flying the airplane manually. Pilots must k now how the airplane responds to inputs across flight regimes.

G. Recognition (AW, P, R)

Content

i

. Type

- Specific Examples of Instrumentation D uring Developing and Developed Upset A key aspect to upset awareness, prevention, and recovery training is for students to recognize developing and developed upset conditions. Students should understand that anytime the airpl ane begins to diverge from the intended flightpath or speed that they must identify and determine what, if any, action must be taken. The emphasis is on using examples ofFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 21 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 type

- specific instrumentation and visual cues to train upset awareness, prevention, and recognition of a developing/developed upset in order to train effective aeronautical decision making to prevent upset events.
This academic training should include visual representations of the outside view and type

- specific instrument indications of a variety of developing and developed upset conditions, with a focus on pitch, power, roll

, and what is happening to the speed . Students should be provided context for each event in order for them to identify the divergence. The training should also inclu de some normal situations so students can identify what is normal versus what is not. If possible and applicable

, other cues

, such as, but not limited to audio or buffet cues

, should also be discussed.

ii. Pitch/Power/Roll /Yaw A key aspect to upset aware ness, prevention, and recovery training is for students to recognize developing and developed upset conditions so they can make control inputs based on desired aircraft reaction. Control deflections at one point in the flight envelope might not be appropr iate in another part of the flight envelope. Pilots must have a fundamental understanding of instrumentation and flight dynamics in Pitch/Power/Roll/Yaw in order to recognize the current state of the airplane and make the correct control inputs to arrest the divergence or recovery from the upset. S tudents should understand that anytime the aircraft begins to diverge from the intended flightpath or speed they must begin to identify what, if any, action must be taken

. The Attitude Direction Indicator ( ADI ) is the primary control instrument for recovery from an upset. Due to varying visibility conditions, one cannot depend on having adequate outside visual references.

The ARC recommends the use of the AURTA, Revision 2

, s ection 2. 5.5.5

– section 2.5.5.9 for

s pecific details for training Pitch/Power/Roll/Yaw

.
iii. Effective Scanning Effective instrument scanning techniques should be trained as appropriate to recognize normal states and divergence from normal flight parameters and the appropriate CRM technique s to work as a crew to return the aircraft to normal flight.

To avoid upsets related to the monitoring of airplane state, pilots should be t rained on what to monitor and when, cross

- checking, verification, during all phases of flight to prevent a n LOC

even t. Training should also be provided on communicating airplane state between pilots, including CRM callouts to improve situational awareness

. To reduce delay s in deviation detection as well as surprise events, pilots should be trained on type

- specific desc ription of what instrumentation to monitor during developing and developed upset s

. Appropriate communication patterns need to be developed between pilots toward understanding the current airplane state. Pilots must create a mental picture of the airplane status and keep it updated and cross

- checked with the airplane and the other pilot throughout the flight.

To reduce pilots missing deviation s or the poor interpretation of deviation, effective communication between pilots and between pilots and airplane should be based on knowledge of the airplane normal states, detect deviations, interpret the meaning of the deviation, decide on a response, and take action. This also addresses Pilot inattention and complacency.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 22 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Rationale
A key aspect of upset awarenes s, prevention, and recovery training is for students to be able to identify when an aircraft is diverging from the desired path. This is one of the initial building blocks for the remainder of the upset awareness, prevention, and recovery training. An ef fective scan is essential for pilots to identify the precursors and the initial development of the upset and then using that recognition to make timely and appropriate responses to bring the aircraft back to the desired path.

Human Factor Integration

Pilot s should be trained on what to monitor and when, cross

- checking, verification, during all phases of flight to prevent a n LOC event. This should include type

- specific description of what to monitor and identification of the type

- specific instrumentation th e aircrew should monitor when they recognize a developing or a developed upset, so as to quickly establish the aircraft state and the effectiveness of any recovery actions taken. In addition, pilots should be able to effectively communicate between themse lves to share an understanding of the airplane state. Techniques should be trained for normal operations and deviation recovery techniques, including what pilots should monitor during recovery and how to identify and communicate deviations in order for th e PM to assist the PF during recovery.
Pilots need to focus on stabilizing the airplane. They need to know the appropriate pitch and power levels for stabilization. The PM should know how to assist the PF to return the aircraft to a stable state. The t raining should d efine appropriate inputs whether manual or automated and how to distribute the tasks between PF and PM so as not to overload individual pilots

.

H. Upset Prevention and Recovery Techniques (AW, R)

Content

i. Timely and Appropriate Interven tion Training should emphasize that recovery to a stabilized flight path should be initiated as soon as a developing upset condition is recognized. The amount and rate of control input to counter a developing upset must be proportional to the amount and rate of pitch, roll, and/or yaw experienced. This action may prevent what might become a more serious event.
Training should emphasize the need for the PF or PM to recognize a divergence as early as possible and immediately ensure corrective action is tak en to return the airplane to a stabilized flight path rather than waiting until the aircraft has developed into an established upset . Anytime the aircraft starts diverging away from the intended state, the pilot should take corrective action to arrest the divergence, and return the aircraft to the desired path.

Based on the pilot ’ s flying skills and airmanship, the pilot will normally respond to minor upsets and make corrections to stop the divergence and return the aircraft to the desired flight path an d energy state. If the pilot ’s inputs do not arrest the divergence

, then the pilots should follow the ir airplane’s flight manual recommended guidance. The attitude direction indicator ( ADI ) is the primary control instrument for recovery from an upset. D ue to varying visibility conditions, one

cannot depend on having adequate outside visual references.

Airlines and OEMs may already have policies on how to handle minor divergence from the desired flightpath for items such as bank, airspeed, heading, etc.

, including callouts. The intentFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 23 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 of these procedures or CRM techniques is for the PM to draw attention to any divergence that exceeds parameters set by the company and for the PF to take corrective action.

Evidence show s in some incidents/accidents that the PM may have been more aware of the aircraft flight condition than the PF. This might suggest that the PM then take over from the PF; however

, this may not always be the best solution. Further complications could happen during the role reversal between P F and PM, especially if the crews have not been properly trained in the exchange. While the Captain always retains authority to take the aircraft at any time, the PM taking the controls in a chaotic upset could worsen the outcome. Correct crew interactio n would be to vocalize the divergence conditions, and use CRM to stop the divergence and return the aircraft to stabilized flight.
There are infinite potential situations that pilots can experience while flying an airplane. The techniques presented in thi s section are applicable for most situations and provide the crews with the knowledge and skills to handle developing and developed upsets

. Training must emphasize that a developing upset will define how prompt or aggressive the required control inputs wi ll be to recover from the event. In all cases the pilot response to an upset must be appropriate to arrest and recover the condition. Up to full

- scale control deflections may be necessary; however, initiating recovery with arbitrary full

- scale control de flections could actually aggravate the situation. An excessive or inappropriate control input that overshoots the desired response

can startle the pilot and cause one upset to lead to another ( see section 2.6

, page 81 of the AURTA, Revision 2 )

.

• The follow ing three activities should be part of every recovery from an upset and provide an overview of actions taken :

• Manage the energy,

• A rrest the flightpath divergence, and

• Recover to a stabilized flightpath.

The ARC recommends the use of the AURTA, Revision 2

, s ection s 2.6.3.2

– 2.6.3.5, for details to train the academic portion of the recovery techniques for the four elements below

. For instructional purposes, the AURTA, Revision 2 addresses several different aircraft upset situations (elements ii

– v below ). This provides the basis for relating the aerodynamic information and techniques to specific situations.

ii. Nose

- High/Wings

- level recovery

iii. Nose

- Low/Wings

- level recovery

iv. High Bank

- Angle Recovery Techniques

v. Consolidated Summary of Airplane Re covery Techniques

C

ommercial Pilot Certificate Training
Upset prevention and recovery techniques should be accomplished in an airplane using published flight manual upset prevention and recovery procedures. O perator s must include these techniques in their Aircraft Operating Manual ( AOM )

, Flight Crew Operating Manual ( FCOM ) or other operator equivalent and must use OEM recommendations for upset prevention and

recovery when available

. The academic portion of the training must discuss these techniques which will be applied practically during the flight training.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 24 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Type Rating
Upset prevention and recovery techniques should be accomplished in the highest fidelity FSTD qualified for the training using published operator upset prevention and recovery procedures. The operator is required to include in their AOM, FCOM or other operator equivalent OEM recommendations for upset prevention and recovery and must follow these recommendations

. See appendix A

.

Rational e Several recent accidents demonstrate that pilots may not have the knowledge and experience to recover from an upset. While the goal of upset awareness, prevention, and recovery training is to avoid the upset and correct any diverging situation, pilots must be able to recover from an y upset they encounter.

Human Factor Integration
Training for these elements should include an understanding of the maneuvers, potential load factors, and techniques on how to maintain situational awareness during the event. Pilots should know and be able to perform recovery man euvers across different situations

. They must also know the roles of the PF and the PM in the recovery maneuver and how to work as a crew to recover the airplane from an upset condition. The PM should assist the PF as necessary to recover from the upset, to include the following:

• Monitor airspeed and attitude throughout the recovery and announce any continued divergence

.

• Call out attitude, airspeed, and altitude throughout the recovery

.

• Verify all required actions have been completed and call out any omis sions.
Pilots should understand the human factors that could affect maintaining proper energy and be able to maintain appropriate use of energy, as well as know the parameters to monitor across all flight situations and correct parameter ranges. They shou ld also understand spatial disorientation characteristics, how it impairs performance, and factors that can reduce spatial disorientation. Pilots should also understand the effects of illusions on recognition and the recovery role of the PM in a shared un derstanding of the situation.

I. System Malfunction (AW, P)

Content

C

ommercial Pilot Certificate Training

Students in commercial pilot certificated training should understand the systems of their aircraft and how these systems can cause or contribute to a n upset. In

- flight training students should be exposed to simulated system malfunctions with an emphasis on preventing an upset. Examples of simulated malfunctions could include covering instruments to simulate a pitot

- static or vacuum failure or having the instructor block a flight control and have the student use an alternate control strategy. Extreme care should be taken to ensure any risks associated with the simulated malfunctions are addressed and mitigated. OEMs, if available, should be consulted for possible system malfunctions which could cause or contribute to an upset.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 25 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Type Rating
Students in type rating training should understand the systems of their aircraft and how these systems can cause or contribute to an upset. FSTDs allow instructors to safely induce malfunctions that would not be possible in the aircraft. Operators should refer to OEM checklists and procedures , which cover s ystem and component failure s

. Failures/malfunctions related to systems, instruments, power, and automation sho uld all be incorporated into training

, whenever applicable. Inaccurate information, if possible, should also be part of the training program (e.g.

, unreliable airspeed)

, so students must recognize the error, prevent an upset, and maintain control of the a ircraft.

Review a dditional information from the AURTA, Revision 2

, s ection 2.4.2.

Rationale

Several accidents have demonstrated that the failure of a system can cause or contribute to an upset. Students must be aware of how these malfunctions can cause up sets, with the focus on preventing the upsets from occurring after a malfunction, and if un avoidable

, how to recover.

J. Specialized Training Elements

Content

The ARC recommend s several specific elements be incorporated into both the commercial pilot

cert ificated training and type rating training. Each element teach es a specific skill

- set to help students prevent and

, if needed

, recover from an upset.

i. Steep Spiral

In this maneuver , sometimes called a graveyard spiral, the airplane is at a high bank a ngle and descending. Students will learn in this situation that applying up

- elevator in an attempt to arrest both the speed and sink rate caus es the spiral to tighten. The skill learned is that it is imperative to get the wings close to level before begi nning any pitching maneuver. This orients the lift vector away from the gravity vector so the student can manage the forces acting on the airplane in a controlled way. Students must decrease the bank angle and then apply up

- elevator to

recover. If g loa ding is large the pilot may need to offload some g to regain adequate roll control. See AURTA , Revision 2, section 2.5.5.8.

ii. Slow Flight Although slow flight is already included in the Commercial Pilot certificate t raining flight training elements, the ARC believes it is important to include the maneuver in the type rating training as well

. Slow flight exposes the student to flight right above the stall speed of the aircraft and maneuvering the aircraft at this speed without stalling

. The purpose i s to reinforce the basic stall characteristics learned in academics and allow the pilot to obtain handling experience and motion sensations when operating the airplane at slow speeds during the entire approach to stall regime in various aircraft attitudes, configurations, and bank angles.

iii. Steep Turns Steep turns provide the student with some practical experience of load factor and maneuvering the aircraft at higher than normal bank angles

. Steep turns are already included in the flight training elem ents of both the commercial pilot certificated training and type rating training, and the ARC recommends retaining this maneuver

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 26 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 i v

. Nose High/ High Speed

v. Nose High/ Low Speed

v i. Nose Low/ High Speed

vii. Nose Low/ Low Speed

v iii

. High Bank

- Angle Rec overy These maneuvers are specifically designed for upset prevention and recovery , with the academics and appropriate exercises contained in the AURTA , Revision 2

. The ARC recommends accomplishing these maneuvers at various angles of pitch and bank, as we ll as high/low speeds maneuvers. This training will expose the students to conditions close to the limits of the operating envelope and high bank angles as well as demonstrate appropriate recovery techniques.
Further information for training the academi c portion of these elements is contained in the AURTA, Revision 2

, s ection s 2.6.3.2

– 2.6.3.5. Chapter 3 of the AURTA , Revision 2 includes reference material for conducting the flight training exercises

. Commercial Pilot Certificate Training

The on

- aircraf t training should include a variety of developing and developed upset conditions, with focus on pitch, power, roll, and yaw. The on

- aircraft training should include demonstrations and practice for various upset scenarios, to include n ose

- high and n ose

- low scenarios with various bank angles and speeds, including high bank angles (defined by the AURTA, Revision 2 as greater than 45 degrees through inverted flight). High bank

- angle recovery exercises should be practiced in both nose

- high and nose

- low situati ons. On

- aircraft training should be done in both visual and simulated instrument conditions to allow the student to practice recognition and recovery under both conditions as well as experience and recognize some of the physiological factors related to e ach

.

Rationale
A review of aircraft major incidents and accidents shows that bank angles have exceeded 90 degrees in actual upsets. The ARC heard testimony from those organizations conducting

on

- aircraft UPRT on the benefits of developing pilot skills by including inverted flight training. ARC testimony on practical experience and studies show that most pilots who went inverted for the first time incorrectly added back pressure (in one case 80

– 90 percent responded with pull instead of push) even though t hey received academic training and briefings before flight not to increase back pressure. Current industry best practices for on

- aircraft UPRT include inverted flight training. Because type rating training should include AURTA

- recommended training of hig h bank

- angle recovery

, between 45 and 180 degrees, initial skill development should be accomplished in a suitable aircraft during commercial pilot certificated training rather than in a simulator to develop initial pilot skills.

The ARC considers that trai ning for recovery from bank angles exceed ing 90 degrees c ould add

to a pilot ’ s overall knowledge and skills for upset recognition and recovery. For such training, additional measures should be taken to ensure the suitability of aircraft and that instructo rs are appropriately qualified. The ARC recommends the FAA conduct further research to establish the human performance factors and training methods required for training with bank angles greater than 90 degrees.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 27 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Type Rating
The FSTD training should incl ude a variety of developing and developed upset conditions with focus on pitch, power, roll, and yaw. The FSTD training should include demonstrations and practice recovery techniques for various upset scenarios, to include nose

- high and nose

- low scenarios with various bank angles and speeds, including bank angle greater than 90 degrees

. Students should practice high bank

- angle recovery exercises in both nose

- high and nose

- low situations. FSTD maneuvers training should be done in both visual and instrumen t conditions to allow student s to practice recognition and recovery under both conditions and to train them to recognize some of the physiological factors. Upset training in an FSTD that exceeds the airplane envelope provided by the OEM could increase the risk of negative transfer of training.

ix

. LOFT or LOS Training should expose s tudents to situations or malfunctions through LOFT or LOS scenarios which if not corrected could cause an upset. The focus of each scenario should be awareness and prevent ion of the upset. The operator should integrate the various LOFT /LOS scenarios into the LOFT /LOS training and rotate them to ensure a wide exposure to a wide variety of possible upset scenarios.

Rationale
These maneuvers are the culmination of the upset t raining and are designed to reinforce the knowledge and practical experience gained throughout the training. T o maximize safety and minimize unlearning and to reinforce proper pilot upset prevention and recovery prevention, recognition, and recovery compe tencies and skills the training and procedures provided at the commercial pilot certificated training level should be as consistent as possible with the type rating training in order

. On

- aircraft training should be accomplished at the commercial pilot

cer tificated training level for initial upset prevention and recovery skill development with all the cues available in the actual aircraft . Once the student has learned the skills in the aircraft, the foundation is set to allow the use of a simulator for ups et prevention and recovery training for type rating programs

. On

- aircraft training is also important to assist the student through the startle and surprise factors associated with upset events and to remain in control of the airplane when an upset happens later. Many sources provided e vidence to the ARC showing the importance of training these maneuvers, which includ ed bank angles greater than 90 degrees. This included upset prevention and recovery training programs conducted at Western Michigan Universi ty, University of North Dakota, and by many MPL training programs based on the requirement in Annex 1 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation . The evidence also includes studies and testimony by Aviation Performance Solutions

. Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 operators in the United States who are already providing UPRT are following the AURTA, Revision 2 to include training bank angles greater than 90 degrees. The AURTA, Revision 2 also cites accident data to support trai ning high bank

- angle recovery techniques.

K. Human Factors Human factors are an overarching, integral part of UPRT. The area of human factors explicitly related to human skilled behavior is known as human performance, and as such, is one of the central tenets of skilled operational performance. The purpose of discussing human factors in UPRT is to address the physiological and crew responses in the event of a flightpath divergenceFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 28 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 or a sudden upset. It is also important for integrating human factors in to UPRT to help develop airmanship

, which requires perceptual, cognitive, and psychomotor knowledge and skills.
Human factors include but are not limited to CRM, the cognitive process, the learning process and the ability of the student to recall and apply appropriate knowledge and skills at a later date. While human factor s concepts may appear vague or nonfunctional, these theories serve an important purpose in actual operational flying, including assisting the flightcrew ’ s correct reactions to unplanned events

, overcoming human limitations and breakdown in the cognitive

process.

Therefore , separate human factors integration sections are included in the training elements above where applicable, providing suggested human factors issues applicable to each tr aining element. This section, which is not all inclusive, includes further information and recommendations regarding human factors issues relating to UPRT that supplements the human factor s integration discussions above.

i. Human Behavior and Performance

The ARC recommends the FAA conduct research into methods to help pilots improve communicat ion and increase human performance and overall safety as it relates to UPRT and line operations. In reviewing aircraft upset incidents and accidents, sometimes the disorientation of the crew was such that other trained practices were not executed

. The ARC recommends further studies to include human performance factors and disorientation that may make trained practices ineffective

. A n example of such a situation is when the aircraft exceeded bank angles of 90 degrees

. Airlines should be able to integrate these methods into the way they currently train.
The understanding of inherent human performance issues in aviation are essential not only for those who are operati onal, but also those who design, create, test, deploy and maintain equipment and those who train and manage these teams.

ii. Threat and Error Management

Threat and Error Management (TEM) as it relates to upset prevention and recovery should be integrated in the UPRT

. TEM training should include the following communication/interaction techniques between pilots (pilot

- to

- pilot) and between pilots and airplane (pilot

- to

- airplane): the airplane normal states, detect ion of deviations, interpret ation of the me aning of the deviation, decision on how to respond , and response

.
iii. Crew Resource Management The crew’s capacity to think effectively in an area to which they have not previously been exposed may be challenged during an upset event. Pilots should f ocu s on stabilizing the airplane

as a team , with c learly define d PF and PM roles, especially if one pilot is fixated. Training should emphasize the importance of evaluating whether a solution is working and not rush ing into an action that may be detrimental. Pilots should reevaluate what is working ( the available

resources ) instead of focusing on what is not working.
Methods and training should include the following :

• Appropriate assessment techniques (i.e., what to monitor and when, what to cross

- check,

prop er verification) during all phases of flight to prevent a LOC event

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 29 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • Communication patterns between pilots to share understanding of airplane state

.

• UPRT techniques for normal operations and deviation recovery limitations

.

• What to monitor during recover y

.

• How to identify and communicate deviations and guide recovery for PF and PM roles

.

• Airplane type

- specific description of assessment techniques during developing and developed upset

.

• Develop ment and application of appropriate communication patterns betw een pilots for understanding of current airplane state.
Pilots should be able to create a mental picture of the airplane status and keep it updated and

cross

- checked with the airplane and other pilot throughout the flight. Crew communication

awareness ca llouts may assist in leading the crew into a recovery strategy.
Training should define appropriate inputs

, whether manual or automated

, and how to distribute the tasks between the PF and PM to avoid overload ing either pilot. The training should also incl ude appropriate communication techniques between the PF and PM for deviation avoidance and recovery.
To facilitate energy management, techniques should include pilots understanding the difference between kinetic, potential, and chemical energy and the rel ationship between pitch and power and performance. Pilots should also understand on which parameters to focus to choose an appropriate response, and be able to effectively communicate with the other pilot to establish a shared understanding of the aircraf t’s current energy state.

iv. Situation Awareness Pilots must maintain situation awareness at all times. Pilots do this by maintaining a mental model while creating mental pictures of developing situations

. A breakdown of a pilot’s mental picture or the model, which can be caused by several factors including surprise, can result in a loss of situation awareness. Complacency can also lead to a loss of situation awareness.

T raining should include what to monitor to maintain situation awareness for preven ting upsets as well as during recoveries

. Students must learn what to monitor during an upset event and how the PM should assist / coach the PF in the recovery using appropriate callouts and other verbal feedback.

After a deviation, it is important that th e first actions be correct and timely to avoid the recovery from one upset lead ing to a new upset. Troubleshooting the cause of the upset is secondary and can wait. Pilots should use the primary flight instruments because darkness , weather conditions,

an d the limited view from the cockpit will make it difficult to effectively use the horizon. The ADI is a primary reference.
Situation Analysis Process:

• Communicate with crewmembers.

• Locate the bank indicator.

• Determine pitch attitude.

• Confirm attitude by reference to other indicators.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 30 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • Assess the energy state.
The phrase

, “recognize and confirm the situation

, ” will be used frequently in discussing recovery techniques. The process outlined above is used to accomplish this.

v. Decision Making Training m ust stress the importance of the pilots effectively communicating verbal ly and nonverbal ly

. Another important subject is the criteria for a PM to decide whether to take control of the airplane if the PF is overwhelmed. The pilots should use a s hared deci sion

- making process where both are engaged in the response.

P ilots should focus on stabilizing the airplane. They must k now the appropriate pitch and power ratios for stabilization. The pilots should understand the r ole of the PM in coaching the PF to a stable state.

i.) Cognitive Bias

ii.) Surprise and Startle F actor Training should include b ehavior management so pilots know how to deal with anxiety and stress response in decision

- making. During an extreme event , including cases of surprise and

stres s, the pilots’ ability to regulate their thoughts and behaviors diminish. In aviation, the extreme operational environments a pilot can be subjected to during an unexpected upset or under conditions of uncertainty and fear can result in the pilot freezing or making the incorrect or incomplete corrective action.

P ilot s may become surprised when an unexpected event during flight contradicts their expectations. If an unexpected event is sufficiently serious, and/or arises during a critical phase of flight, the correct response to that uncertainty becomes vital for survival.
Upset prevention and recovery training is different from aerobatic training. In aerobatics training

, the pilot knows what the maneuver is and they are expecting it

, s o there is no threat of consequences or perception of risk by the pilot

. T his is also true in the simulator. Upset t raining should strive to include the element of surprise pilots will experience in a real

- world application. When pilots encounter an upset in an airplane and suddenly find themselves in a n unexpected and excessive attitude, there is a threat and perception of risk.

Rationale
Upset prevention and recovery training conducted in a mixed attitude/ envelope environment that includes progressively increasing the a eronautical challenges in on

- aircraft training, results in the student gradually becoming desensitized to the extreme performance requirements and the fear and threat that goes with it , thereby reducing the surprise element

. S pecific training in situation awareness and management strategies for handling surprise and effective decision making is also

necessary

. P ilots who undergo upset prevention and recovery training are in a better position to handle the situation

. T he ARC received evidence showing that the lack of training in all

- attitude/ all

- envelope training resulted in an adverse effect. O ne study included 20 LOC

– I accidents, 16 of which had enough information to be used for comparison. O f the 16 accidents studied, all the pilots behaved in a n unrel iable manner ( for example , pull ing back on the stick when in a stall or fight ing the stick pusher), and the training they received was not applicable to the upset prevention and recovery domain. T he ARC also received a study conducted with 18 B

– 747 pilots contrasting theirFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 31 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 recognition of abnormal events when they were expected versus when they were not expected. This study showed evidence of s tartle /surprise and underdeveloped recognition skills based on training discrete, expected maneuvers.

A National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA ) study showed that pilots on average have 6

– 10 seconds to recover once the aircraft leaves normal flight. The on

- airplane upset prevention and recovery training during the commercial pilot certificated training n eeds to be robust, including surprises

, to have the desired result when the pilot encounters a threatening upset situation. If properly train ed in u pset p revention and r ecovery techniques at the commercial pilot certificated training level, the ab initio pilot will experience the surprise factor, threats, and perception of risk in the actual airplane. It is reasonable to assume the pilot can then transfer that experience learned in an airplane to the simulator

, s o at the type

- rating level and beyond, type

- specific and recurrent UPRT can be accomplished in a n FSTD

.
vi. Problem Solving

Pilots should be able to communicate verbal ly or nonverbal ly to the other pilot if stress overwhelms them. Training should include cognitive overload and how to self

- assess impending incapacitation because of stress.

vii. Physiological Factors
i.) Spatial Disorientation

ii.) Instrument Interpretation
iii.) Errors in Adjusting Attitude/Power
iv.) PIO Avoidance/Recovery
v.) Pilot Inattention/Complacency

vi.) Illusions in Flight
vii.) Visual Illusions
viii.) Vestibular Angular Illusions
ix.) Vestibular Linear Illusions

Vertigo or Spatial Disorientation
Spatial disorientation has been a significant factor in many airplane upset accidents. The definition of spatial disori entation is the inability to correctly orient oneself with respect to the Earth’s surface. Humans are all susceptible to sensory illusions. Pilots who are unable to resolve a perceive d conflict between bodily senses and the flight instruments are spatial ly disoriented

. Allowed to continue, spatial disorientation will lead to airplane upset. Attention to flight instruments and a good cross

- check are the keys to remaining spatially oriented

.

Inattention or Distraction f rom Primary Cockpit Duties

A review of airplane upsets reveals that inattention or neglecting to monitor the airplane’s performance can lead to extreme deviations from the normal flight envelope. Neglecting to monitor the appropriate instruments or fixating on a certain instrument can lead to performance deviations. Distractions can be very subtle, such as warning or caution lights illuminating during critical phases of flight. Many airplane upsets occur while the pilot is engaged in some task that takes attention away from the flight inst ruments. “Control the airplane first” should always be the guiding principle.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 32 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### I NSTRUCTOR 

### R EQUIREMENTS

Define the instructor requirements for upset prevention and r ecovery training in an airplane.

Define the instructor requirements for upset prevention and recovery training in an FSTD.

UPRT instructors must meet the following requirements :

1. Instructors conducting training in either an airplane or an FSTD must be trained in and qualified to conduct training in the device they are using. UPR T instructors for commercial pilot certificated training in an airplane must hold a CFI.

2. Instructor s must have completed the applicable UP R T program as a student

. 3. UPR T i nstructors must be able to teach, assess, and debrief the elements included in the training programs they are conducting.

4. Instructors must d emonstrate the ability to teach, assess and debrief UPRT to a qualified regulator or delegate for the programs for which they are training.

5. UPR T instructors must hold a certificate and rating in the category, class a nd type of airplane for which they are training.

6. Considering all other qualifications are the same, the ARC recognizes the benefits of instructors with operational experience on type and recommend s FSTD UPRT instructors with time on type are preferred.

7. UP R T instructors must have received UPR T instruc tor training in matrix A below

. Note: T hough most of these elements are included in the training e lements required within the URPT, the ARC has determined that instructors providing UPRT should receive further knowledge and teaching skill development specific to the training of these elements

. 8. For all elements indicated for training in an FSTD or airplane, instructor s must be able to demonstrate in the appropriate device the ability to train and assess the st ude nt on the applicable element.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 33 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Table 2

. Instructor Requirements

Matrix A Element Knowledge (Academic)

Based Flight Training (Airplane/

FSTD) C ommercial
P ilot C ertificate Training /MPL Type Rating Training

A. Knowledge of Device

i. Limitations of Dev ice • • •

ii. Instructor Operating System (IOS) Operation • • • •

B. Review of LOC Accidents • • •

C. Energy Management Factors • • • •

D. Disorientation • • •

E. Workload Management • • • •

F. Distraction • • • •

G. Specific OEM Recommendation s • • •

H. Recognition and Recovery Strategies • • • •

I. Recognition of Student Errors • • • •

J. Airplane Type

- specific Characteristics • •

K. Operating Environment • • • •

L

. How To Do a Flight Risk Assessment (Airplane) • •

M. How To Induce the Startle Factor (FSTD) • • • •

N. Value and Benefits of Demonstration (FSTD) • • • •

O. How To Assess Pilot Performance Completion Standards • • • •

A. Knowledge of D evice

Content

i. Limitations of device Instructors should receive training in th e limitations of FSTDs in the areas of s tall and UPRT with emphasis on areas that have the potential to introduce negative transfer of training. Instructors should learn to brief and debrief pilots on these limitations

. Instructors providing UPRT in airpl ane s and simulators must be aware that different airplane s will have different characteristics and recognition and recovery techniques may be specific to individual airplane.

FSTD i nstructors should be aware that valid responses may be limited to the param eters to which the FSTD is tuned. Motion cuing information may not accurately simulate the associated forces that would be felt in an aircraft. The dynamic nature of flight may cause the airplane to react differently in each situation.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 34 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 ii. IOS Operation (FSTD)

Instructors must receive additional simulator operat or training that includes specific IOS indications and controls that will be used to provide training and feedback during
UPRT elements

.

Rational e

N egative transfer of training has occurred as a r esult of the instructor’s lack of knowledge of the limitations of the associated device or airplane FSTD. It is important to note that the FSTD is only a training device and qualified to limited parameters and that operating outside of these parameters ma y result in misleading indications.

B. Review of LOC A ccidents

Content

A wareness of LOC events, incidents, and accidents can assist in emphasizing the importance of diligence in a variety of flight regimes

. Training and r eview of the LOC accidents is used to apply the lessons learn ed to the knowledge and skill development to recognize and recover from an airplane upset.

Rational e A review of LOC events will provide pilots with a focus and a context for the consequences of allowing the airplane to develop into an upset condition. This can provide the appropriate training l aw of e ffect throughout the U P RT.

C. Energy Management Factors

Content
Instructors need to be trained in the importance of effective energy management in addition to

c ause and effect co rrelation during UPRT . It is also important that instructors not only have proper understanding of energy management, but also the ability to integrate and emphasize the concepts throughout all training as a constant means of upset prevention. Airplane U PRT i nstructors should be trained on specific techniques and maneuvers to effectively demonstrate and train energy management during flight.

Rational e An improper understanding of airplane energy state including power, pitch and load factor, has been indic ated as a contributing factor in a pilot ’ s poor understanding of airplane control. The improper understanding of any of these factors was relevant in the improper training of stall

recovery

. It is therefore important that the instructors have an understa nding of how energy management is a factor in all phases of flight including most of the training elements identified
as UPR T elements.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 35 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 D. Disorientation

Content

Instructors should be trained in the effects of the physiological factors that both the moti on and visual cues of the airplane can cause. Instructors should be aware that some of these effects

cannot be reproduced in an FSTD.
Instructors should be trained in a variety of causes of disorientation, prevention strategies, recognition cues, and reco very from disorientation.

Rationale

S patial disorientation training may not be effectively represented in an FSTD.

E. Workload Management

Content
It should be demonstrated to crews throughout their training that proper workload management can improve situ ation awareness.

Instructors should be trained on assessment when and when not to increase workload to achieve the best training results.
Training is needed on the importance of pilots adhering to standard operating procedures ( SOP )

to manage workload and avoid an upset.

Rational e Evidence has shown that failure to adhere to SOPs has led to upset accidents.

F. Distraction

Content

UPRT instructors must learn the different distractions than can affect a flightcrew. These distraction topics can include bo th internal ( such as, cockpit and crew) and external ( such as, air traffic control ( ATC) causes of distraction. C rew c omplacency can make distraction more likely

. UPRT instructors need awareness of how distractions can lead to disorientation and to airp lane upset and how to use them in training

. This can be used to assist in properly training events that may cause startle, which can function to teach appropriate crew response

. Instructors should be trained in methods of creating distraction to enable th e crew to learn to manage them.

Rationale

Distractions have been identified as causal factor in pilot

- induced upset

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 36 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 G. Specific OEM R ecommendations

Content

Different s may have specific procedures for prevention and recovery from upset. Reference to the airplane manufacture r s ’ procedures and/or recommendations must be applied for specific airplane s

. Training should address s ituations in which procedures or recommendations applicable to one airplane may not be applicable to another and which may have the potential for negative results . I dentifying procedures from previous airplanes which may not be applicable to the current type can be beneficial during training

. Training should make r eference to specific OEM guidance and developed general procedures.

R ationale

Evidence indicate s that training programs incorporating operating procedures from other types of airplane s may have a detrimental effect if carried over on to certain types of airplane s and can lead to an upset.

H. Recognition and Recovery Strateg ies

Content
Instructors must be able to convey to the student how to recognize upset conditions and to apply appropriate recovery strategies

. Training must include s pecific examples, in both academic discussion and practical demonstration, of how to recogn ize and apply recovery strategies . A irplane UPRT i nstructors should be trained on specific techniques and maneuvers to effectively demonstrate and train recognition and recovery strategies during flight

. The following chart is a general approach/concept t hat can be applied to various types of upsets and the final response will depend on the specific situation

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 37 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Rationale

Evidence shows that an absence of complete and correct recovery strategy has led to improper action in an upset.

I. Recognition of S tud ent E rrors

Content
Failure to properly identify and readily correct student errors can lead to a negative transfer of training. Instructors must be aware of the consequences of failure to recognize and correct student errors.

Instructors must know what th e common student errors are , be able to identify the root cause, and provide training to avoid errors and incorrect inputs that can create undesired airplane states ( such as, o ver controlling for Traffic Collision and Avoidance System R esolution A dvisorie s)

.

Rationale
Negative transfer of training can occur if errors are allowed to persist uncorrected.

J. Airplane T ype

- specific C haracteristics

Content
OEMs have recognized that different airplane s have unique characteristics that may both assist in and det er from the recognition and recovery of an airplane upset. UPR T instructors must know specific unique characteristics regarding a irplane handling and recognition, such as how the airplane responds while approaching stall buffet.

Rationale
Incorrect proced ures, such as tailplane stall recovery, may not be applicable to certain airplanes, and the procedure applied in the wrong aircraft could lead to a worse upset.

K. Operating E nvironment

Content

Instructors should be trained in how to demonstrate the effe cts of the operating environment and how these will affect the airplane handling characteristics and potentially lead to an airplane upset.
This should include how changes in the environment al conditions will affect the airplane.

Rationale

Current trainin g does not take into consideration the different handling characteristics in all areas of the operating envelope

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 38 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 L. How to do a F light

- risk A ssessment ( Airplane )

Content

UPR T instructor s must be trained in conducting a flight risk assessment to ensure th at appropriate risk mitigation is ensured.
The flight risk assessment should include but not be limited to the following factors :

• Training elements

• Pilot skills

• Instructor experience

• Weather

• Training a irplane

• Equipment

• Environmental

Rationale
Risk Mitiga tion

M. How to I nduce the S tartle F actor in the FSTD

Content

Instructors can cause a crew to enter into an unintended approach to stall or airplane upset by manipulating the IOS or by distracting the crew while adjusting the energy condition of the airpla ne

. Instructors must be aware of the cap ability of simulators. These may allow speed slew, which can be used to cause a sudden stall warning when pilots are in a slow flight condition. The PM may be engaged as a collaborator with the instructor to indu ce an upset , but with the caution that the PM must resume proper functions from recognition to recovery.

Rationale

Because upsets that occur in normal flight operations are unplanned and inadvertent, pilots must learn to recognize and recover from such eve nts.

N. Value and B enefits of D emonstration FSTD

Content
Effective training may require FSTD instructors to take a pilot seat position to adequately demonstrate certain elements of UPRT.

Rationale

Some elements in UPRT may be more assessable and trainab le through use of demonstration from a pilot seat

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 39 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 O. How to A sses s P ilot P erformance C ompletion S tandards

Content

Instructors should be trained on how to assess the students’ performance on the UPRT elements and determine whether the required complet ion criteria level has been met

.

Rationale
Training is effective only when an appropriate level of proficiency is achieved. Instructors must be able to asse ss this.



### UP R T I NSTRUCTORS



### — I NITIAL AND 

### R ECURRENT 

### T RAINING 

### R EQUIREMENTS AND 

### P RE R EQUISITES

UPRT Airplane Instructors
Prerequisite :

• Airplane CFI
Initial Training:

• Receive a UPR T airplane course as a student.

• Receive training in the additional UPR T instructor requirements defined in Table 2, M atrix A Elements above.

• Present and teach the academic elements of t he UPR T airplane program to an acceptable standard as evaluated by the regulator or designate.

• Teach the practical elements of a UPR T airplane program to an acceptable standard as evaluated by the regulator or designate.

• Receive training in an aircraft on how to recognize and recover from improper student inputs and how to recover the airplane to safe flight.
Recurrent Training:

• Receive r ecurrent training on the specialized training elements every 12 months.

• Receive r ecurrent training and assessment not les s than every 24 months coincident with the CFI renewal.

• Attend a recurrent UPR T instructor airplane course that covers representative elements from each section and complete all elements within the 24 month period.

• B e evaluated on representative segments of the UPR T during both the academic and practical training phase.

UPRT Simulator Instructors

Pre r equisite:

• Qualified to act as an FSTD instructor

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 40 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • Considering all other qualifications are the same, the ARC recognizes the benefits of instructors with oper ational experience on type and recommends that FSTD UPRT instructors with time on type are preferred when other qualifications are equal.

Initial Type Training:

• Receive a UPR T simulator course as a student.

• Receive training in the additional UPR T instructo r requirements defined in Table 2 M atrix A Elements above.

• Present and teach the academic elements of a UPR T simulator program to an acceptable standard as evaluated by the regulator or designate.

• Teach the practical elements of a UPR T simulator program to an acceptable standard as evaluated by the regulator or designate.
Recurrent Training:

• Conduct r ecurrent training not less than every 12 months coincident with the FSTD instructor renewal.

• Attend a recurrent UPR T instructor simulator course that covers re presentative segments of the initial training program above.

• B e evaluated on representative segments of the UPR T during both the academic and practical training phase.



### D EVICE 

### R EQUIREMENTS
The response to the FAA questions is based on and in relation to the questions on the training requirements for aircraft and FSTDs. Specifically the aircraft and FSTD requirements are limited to supporting the training elements where training in aircraft or FSTDs is prescribed/recommend ed

. Under the FAA system, type ratin g training is primarily completed in either a l evel C or l evel D device and the requirements in this section apply to these devices

. The ARC believes some training elements which do not require simulator motion may be completed in a Level 6 flight trainin g device ( FTD ) . F or example

, flightpath management does not necessitate motion and could be trained in a l evel 6 FTD.

FSTDs used for commercial pilot certificated training are generally low

- level

, non motion

- based devices and are generally considere d to be inadequate for providing UPRT. Accordingly

, there

are no additional FSTD requirements discussed herein that relate to such devices

.



### A IR PLANE 

### R EQUIREMENTS

Define the aircraft requirements for upset prevention and recovery training in an airplane.
The airp lane used for conducting UPRT elements must be capable of support ing the specific training exercises for which it is being used. Though no specific category is identified in this report, different elements may have different airplane requirements.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 41 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 A revie w of the training elements as outlined in Table 1 does not extend any specific or additional aircraft certification requirements beyond those in place today for completing such

maneuvers. T he airplane used must be suitable, by its commercial pilot certifi cated training certification category, to perform such maneuvers and the organization conducting the training must have the necessary approvals for the use of the airplane in performing such maneuvers.



### FSTD R EQUIREMENTS

Define the training device requirem ents for upset prevention and recovery training in

an FSTD.
Today FSTDs are a key part of a pilot training program . T he use of simulators provide for a

cost

- effective and safe alternative to performing training in the actual airplane

. Furthermore

, simula tors provide the capability to train certain tasks which cannot be easily trained in the actual airplane

. A bnormal and emergency procedures which could not be trained in the actual aircraft can be trained in a simulator in a risk

- free environment, and wit h a high level of fidelity.

T raining in the flight simulator is in a synthetic environment which cannot fully replicate the exact experience of that in the aircraft . There is, however

, statistical reason to trust that the appropriately qualified simulato r has extremely good fidelity for training normal, abnormal and emergency procedures. N otwithstanding the normal limitations of flight simulators

, there is concern that UPRT could include inadvertent excursions during recovery

, which may extend b eyond the normal flight regime and the fidelity of the simulation in these areas may not be adequately validated. Nonetheless

, there is significant evidence that simulator training better prepares the pilot for the real

- world environment

. W ith a better understand ing of the simulator limitations

, they can be overcome through a n effective training program. Accordingly

, the ARC reviewed the training elements and associated tasks and maneuvers to verify the fidelity requirements to perform this training, and it ident ified and summarized in

a ppendix B any limitations found in the current standard

. The ARC recommends the FAA incorporate changes to 14 CFR

, part 60, through due process, and make these requirements applicable to new full flight simulator ( FFS ) equipment ba sed on an effective date coordinated with the effective date of new training requirements as defined in the body of this report. Furthermore, because the training requirements recommended in this report will likely be conducted in FSTDs previously qualifi ed either under part 60 or an earlier standard, the recommended simulator standards be published through an FSTD directive as defined in § 60.23. Note that the publication of an FSTD directive addresses safety of flight issues and is applicable to each qu alified FSTD, regardless of its original qualification standard.
T he ARC intends that any retroactive simulator requirements be published as an FSTD directive which will address additional qualification requirements (see § 60.16) applicable only to those simulators being used to conduct training tasks as defined in this report.

The SPAW ARC , chartered as a result of Public Law 111

– 216

, § 208 made certain recommendations with regard to FSTD requirements

. In view of the additional work performed during this ARC

, the ARC recommends that the requirements specified herein supersede the previous recommendations.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 42 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### I NSTRUCTOR 

### S UPPORT
To ensure a positive transfer of training the ARC believes a number of areas merit special attention. Therefore

, in support of UPRT in an FSTD the ARC recommends the instructor have the following tools to support the briefing, training, and debriefing:

1. Cockpit video and audio capability that allow s the marking of events

.

a. The system should allow the instructor to easily review any par t of the
UPRT session.

b. The cockpit audio, including the instructor ’s voice should be recorded and integrated with the video recording.

c. The system should allow the mark ing of events to enable the instructor to easily locate segments of the video.

d. The system should allow the instructor to erase, and verify deletion of, all evidence of recorded cockpit video and audio in the presence of the students.

2. A data recording system to allow for real

- time instructor monitoring of pertinent parameters and for use during the debriefing of the UPRT session. At a minimum the following parameters should be included:

a. Weight and CG

. b. Attitudes, a irspeed

, a ltitude , AOA, b eta

, g load

.

c. Primary flight control input (position and force)

. d. Secondary flight controls

— trim/stab, speed b rake, flap

.

e. Warnings (audible and shaker), shaker/pusher trigger, and limits (C L

- max )

. f. Throttle/power lever position

. The data output may be in a graphical format or in time domain plots. Strict simulator training safeguards shall be enforced to ensure th at all data collected during training sessions is deleted fully following lesson completion.

3. A set of instructor controls which can aid the instructor in developing distractors

.

a. The distraction should be a nonstandard event such that the crew thought pro cess and the actions they take are not based on the use of the checklist.

b. These may be weather

- related, traffic, ATC , or other such inputs which may

create a distraction.

4. A dynamic set of upsets, which may be a result of internal or external factors.

a. A se t of upset initiation features designed to assess the prevention of an upset event by the crew.

i. The objective of this upset feature is to generate a condition that

, if the crew does not recognize it and take timely corrective action

, it will continue to de velop and result in an upset.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 43 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 b. A set of upset initiation features designed to lead the crew to initiate recognition measures.

i. The objective of this upset feature is to generate a developing upset condition so that crew action will prevent a fully developed upset condition.

c. A set of upset initiation features designed specifically to progress in severity so that the crew has to initiate recovery measures.

i. The objective of this upset feature is to generate a developed upset condition so that the crew has to ini tiate appropriate recovery action to prevent further loss of control.

d. Instructor control to vary the intensity of the above features causing the upset, to a level where the crew may react on over control.

5. A set of malfunctions designed to support automatio n anomalies and which lead the crew to deviate from normal function; the malfunction effect should occur in a manner which surprises the crew, and should be realistic and accurate in the manifestation of the upset condition. OEM guidance should be used in creating these malfunctions to assure correct use of malfunctions.

6. A preprogrammed stall demonstration.

a. This feature should allow the instructor to demonstrate a full aerodynamic stall which is performed automatically through the simulation. Note this is similar to the automated tests performed during Qualification Test Guide (QTG) testing.

b. Instructors should warn the crew to keep clear of the controls which may move to the extreme positions.

7. Instructor indication of the exceedance of operating limits inc luding the following :

• Airspeed limitations

a. Maximum operating limit speed

b. Maneuvering speed

c. Flap extended speed

d. Minimum control speed

e. Landing gear speeds

f. Rough air speed

• Altitude limitations

• Weight, CG

• Power plant limitations

• Maximum operating altitude

• Man euvering flight load factors including simultaneous roll and pitch
The instructor should be provided with an indication of when a limit is

—FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 44 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 1. Approached (cautionary warning

— amber), or

• Reasonable margins as appropriate can be used ; the intent is to give the instructor an initial indication that the aircraft is operating close to a limit.

2. E xceeded (exceedance warning

— red)

.

• For UPRT the simulation should not freeze unless the limit is exceeded by a predefined margin that voids the training or can cause an unsaf e condition on the simulator.
If the simulator is programmed to detect a crash condition and a feature to inhibit (crash inhibit) the simulator from freezing when such a condition is reached this should be automatically activated.

The limits shall be based on aircraft OEM

- provided data as applicable for the specific aircraft type.



### V

- N 

### D IAGRAM 

### : F LIGHT 

### E NVELOPE
The flight envelope demonstrates the variations of airspeed versus load factor (V

- n). This diagram is an important part of UPRT as it provides the limits of load factor and speed and defines the maneuvering capabilities of an aircraft for safe flight. Accordingly the ARC recommends that the concepts and limits associated with the V

- n diagram are fully covered during the academic training.

The ARC ne ither recommends nor requires the use of a real time V

- n diagram at the IOS for use during the simulator training. However, if the pertinent information is available

, then it is the ARC ’ s view that this will provide value during the UPRT briefing and debr iefing

. If the V

- n diagram is used for debriefing

, the following guidance should be considered:

1. The V

- n diagram should be from the aircraft OEM and specific for the aircraft being trained.

2. The instructor should be aware of the following aspects of the V

- n diagram:

a. The diagram is unique for each aircraft

. b. The diagram is three

- dimensional , the 3 d axis is weight

— the diagram s provided in flight manuals are typically at maximum gross weight.

c. The data on the V

- n diagram will vary with flap setting, altitude and with gust

. d. The V

- n diagram depicts the normal operating envelope and does not show the safety factor (50 percent under 14 CFR part 25).

e. The simulator, because of limited motion, does not adequately represent the load factor.

f. The qualified FSTD does not mo del the structural characteristics of the airplane structure.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 45 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### S IMULATOR 

### F IDELITY AND 

### V ALIDATED 

### D ATA 

### E NVELOPE

Simulation mathematical models u s e data extrapolation as a means to extend the simulation beyond available data. In effect

, the process uses the c oncept of estimation of the data beyond that which is validated with either flight test data or wind tunnel data or which may have been obtained through computation al fluid dynamic s methods. While the extrapolation is based on scientific relationships

, it is subject to greater uncertainty and therefore poses concern with regard to the simulation fidelity when operating in an extrapolated region. Furthermore

, the type of extrapolation used, such as, linear and biquadratic, may also provide varied degrees o f accuracy. In UPRT the extrapolation of data related to AOA (Alpha) and sideslip angle (Beta) are of key importance and

, as such

, the validity of the simulation can be assessed with the use of

a n Alpha/Beta plot showing the region s which are (a) validate d with flight test data, (b) validated with wind tunnel or engineering data and (c) the extrapolated boundary. During the ARC deliberations much discussion took place on this topic and some argued the importance of instructor understanding of the limitati on of the simulation in the extrapolated region, while others argued that having such information would not necessarily provide value. The ARC neither requires nor recommends the use of Alpha/Beta plots at the IOS for use during UPRT; the ARC does, howeve r , recommend instructor s be given an indication (Validated

- data/ Extrapolated

- data) of exceeding the validated data envelopes. The primary purpose of such a flag in the first instance is to help the operator and instructor establish that recovery maneuver s, while applying the recommend techniques, can generally be completed within the validated envelope. If the operator chooses to use a graphical Alpha/Beta plot, which shall be based on data provided by the aircraft OEM, then this could be on a maintenanc e page of the instructor operating station.



### M ALFUNCTIONS
Simulators are commonly used for performing abnormal and emergency procedures and

, as such

, are typically equipped with numerous malfunctions that allow for training of the related procedures. Some of the malfunctions already available may in some respects be adequate to support the training of certain elements defined in the UPRT program. However, it is also necessary that additional malfunctions be developed

. For example, a pitch trim runaway is a vailable as part of the abnormal training ; however

, the ARC considers that in a simulator training environment crews are mentally focused on expecting malfunctions and as such their responsiveness may be different to that when such a malfunction manifests in a real world situation.
Automation failures should be designed to meet the training need/intent. When there is degradation of aircraft protection

, this should be developed in conjunction with or in accordance with the aircraft OEM guidance.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 46 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### A ERODYNAMI C 

### S IMULATION

A. Aerodynamics

iii. Aerodyn amics (High and Low Altitudes)

. iv. Aircraft Performance (High and Low Altitude s)

.

v. AOA Awareness

. vi. Mach Effects

.
Content

A review of 14 CFR p art 60

, c hange 1, the requirements for the qualification of FST Ds , confirms the D simulators standard for qualification support the required level of fidelity for the training of these elements; the ARC therefore does not recommend any improvements regarding aerodynamic simulation to the requirements for a l evel D sim ulator.

However, current l evel C and l evel 6 FTD qualification requirements do not require the aerodynamic modeling for low

- altitude level

- flight ground effect, mach effect at high altitude, aeroelastic representations and nonlinearities because of sidesl ip

. A s such

, these devices may be further limited in providing the necessary fidelity to perform certain parts of the aerodynamic training. While these additional areas are not a requirement in the regulation

, it is often the case that the simulation mod el includes the required programming

. T herefore

, the ARC recommend s that level C and l evel 6 devices be assessed individually. The ARC recommends level C and level 6 devices be allowed to provide this training when the programming supports the additional fidelity

, so the devices are adequate for training this element, or parts thereof.
In reviewing p art 60

, c hange 1, the standard supports the required level of fidelity for the training of AOA up to the critical AOA in the second segment climb configuratio n and approach or landing configuration. The QTG for the device should be reviewed to determine whether the approach or landing configuration test has been included, and only this configuration should be currently used ; h owever, the SPAW ARC recommended i mprovement s in FSTD fidelity for training beyond the critical AOA.

Rationale

The ARC consider s it necessary to use only those FSTDs that require type

- specific simulation models for the simulation of the aerodynamic modeling.

T he general simulator requireme nts for qualifying an airplane FFS are described in part 60

, c hange 1 , dated October 30, 2006 and p art 60

, a ppendix A ( c hange 1)

, dated May 9, 2008

. T hese general requirements for l evel C and l evel D FFS require a statement of compliance

as follow s :

“A fl ight dynamics model that accounts for various combinations of drag and thrust normally encountered in flight must correspond to actual flight conditions, including the effect of change in airplane attitude, thrust, drag, altitude, temperature, gross weight , moments of inertia, CG location, and configuration.”
The requirements for a l evel D simulator improve on the fidelity of a l evel C simulator and require the aerodynamic modeling in the simulator which include s (1) l ow

- altitude level

- flightFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 47 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 ground effect

, (2) mach effect at high altitude

, (3) n ormal and reverse dynamic thrust effect on control surfaces

, (4) a eroelastic representations

, and (5) n onlinearities because of sideslip.
Similarly, the general requirements for level 6 require a statement of complia nce as follows : “The FTD must provide the proper effect of aerodynamic changes for the combinations of drag and thrust normally encountered in flight. This must include the effect of change in airplane attitude, thrust, drag, altitude, temperature, and co nfiguration.”
“Level 6 additionally requires the effects of changes in gross weight and center of gravity.”

Reference

P art 60

, c hange 1 , dated October 30

, 2006 and p art 60

, a ppendix A ( Change 1)

, dated May 9

, 2008

.

D. Awareness

iii. G Load Management

Content

The hexapod

- based motion systems are limited in the amount of movement and thus ability to provide sustained cuing

. The normal method for providing acceleration cuing is to provide an onset cue, which simulates the initial acceleration for a short duration, and then through low

- pass washout filters to provide the effect of a sustained cue through the tilting of the platform and using the gravity vector to provide the simulated g cue. Whil e the level of sustained acceleration cue is limited in the longitudinal (surge) and lateral (sway) axis, it is not possible to generate any sustained cuing in the vertical axis and this is a significant limitation with respect to providing

g training in a simulator.

The ARC recommends that in the academics instr uctors provide emphasis to the lack of g cue ing in the simulator and the potential, in the airplane, for the student to hesitate or have the tendency to pull less than appropriate or necessary

.


### C OMPLETION 

### C RITERIA

Define the completion criteria for UPRT in an airplane

. Define the completion criteria for upset prevention criteria for UPRT in an FSTD

. The student shall demonstrate knowledge and skill in recognizing, preventing and

, if necessary

, recovering from undesired airplane states. NOTE: Upset prevent ion and recovery is a training maneuver and should not be used in a checking event.
While prevention is the ultimate goal, t he pilot shall be able to recognize and recover the airplane from an upset in accordance with the manufacture r’ s / operators recommend ed guidance (or in the absence thereof

, with the guidance provided in appendix A of this report) and return the airplane to a desired airplane state

. As the completion standards for the p revention phase of UPRT are not currently defined, the ARC recommend s the following be recognized as completion standards : A pilot who has completed UPRT

—FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 48 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 • I s aware of his /her surroundings, is vigilant, asks questions, scans the internal and external environment, and raises crew awareness of the factors that may lead to an undesired airplane state

.

• W ill create, communicate, and manage alternat iv e courses of action that reduce the likelihood of an upset event or undesired airplane state.

• Prompt ly recognizes a divergence from the desired airplane state

.

• T akes prompt action in the event of a divergence from a desired airplane state.

• Makes or commands the appropriate control inputs to recover the airplane without exceeding the airplane’s limitations.

• Correct ly applies the manufacturer’s/operator’s recovery techniques according t o guidance material

.

• I nvolves the necessary resources available to timely and appropriately return the airplane to the desired state.

• D emonstrate s an ability to recover from a simulator

- induced or instructor

- induced upset in a manner that would not damage the aircraft or injure the passengers or crew.

• Will, if the aircraft is stalled, demonstrate recovery from the stall before initiating recovery from the upset.

Assessment example s airplane :

• A trend toward uncoordinated maneuvering

.

o Expected behavior: tren d announced and corrected

.

- Rationale: Uncoordinated stall/LOC

– I accident data

.

• While executing an intentional slip

—

o The student includes in the briefing the impact cross

- control maneuvering has on stall AOA and IAS

.

- Rationale: Uncoordinated stall/LOC

– I a ccident data

.

• With the student’s eyes closed or in another way where the student is unable to have visual reference, the instructor flies the aircraft and establishes an unusual attitude (either nose high or nose low, with bank) and has the student recove r.

o The pilot makes the appropriate control responses to recover the aircraft to safe flight without exceeding the airplane’s limitations.

- Rationale: General aviation accident data of an unknown upset event

.

• While maneuvering in turbulent conditions

.

o The s tudent briefs the impact of increased g on stall AOA and IAS

.

- Rationale: General aviation in

- flight breakup accident data

. Assessment example s FSTD (LOFT/LOS/ special purpose operational training ) :

• The radio altimeter system fails

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 49 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 o C rew awareness and commu nication of the impact of this system on other systems that

may result in an undesired airplane state

.

- Rationale: Accident data of LOC

– I accidents where system anomalies played a role

.

• The flight control laws are in a degraded mode because of system anoma lies

.

o Crew awareness and communication on which protections were lost

, and the creation of

an action plan to mitigate workload and risk for the remainder of the flight

.

- Rationale: Flight envelope

- protected LOC

– I accident data in degraded mode

.

• With the st udent’s eyes closed or in another way where the student is unable to have visual reference, the instructor/PM flies the aircraft and establishes an unusual attitude (either nose high or nose low, with bank) and has the pilot recover.

o The student makes the appropriate control responses to recover the aircraft to safe flight without exceeding the airplane’s limitations.

- Rationale: Accident data of an unknown upset event

.

• The aircraft is operating at its thrust

- limited altitude and weather appears on the

weat her radar.

o Crew awareness and communication of an action plan that changes altitude or lateral flightpath, or both, considering the thrust limit concern and consequences.

- Accident/ i ncident data of high

- altitude stall or approach to stall

. Examples are give n to stimulate the thinking of the training manager. T he training manager should develop s cenarios specific to the operating environment and applicable to the category and class of aircraft flown by the pilot to add relevance to the learning experience.

D uring dual received instruction

, the student must show achievement of the completion standards.
UPRT scenarios may be completed separately or may be combined with other training tasks.



### A IRCRAFT 

### T RAINING 

### R ISK 

### M ITIGATION

Define the risk mitigation strategie s required for UPRT in an airplane.



### O N


### - A IRCRAFT 

### T RAINING



### — R ISK 

### M ITIGATION 

### S TRATEGIES

Based on the training prescribed to be conducted in the aircraft, the ARC consider s there are no additional risks posed by the nature of this training. However

, to minimi ze the inherent risks in this specialized training, the ARC recommends that any training facility conducting in

- airplane UPRT meet the following requirements:

1. Conducts training with due consideration of geographical and weather limitations, and any other l imitations as provided for by the regulations under which such training is performed. 2. Is e valuated by an adequately trained inspector with UPRT experience on their ability to provide such training in the context of air transport operations.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 50 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 3. The instructor providing UPRT training has undergone specific UPRT i nstructor training for academics and o n

- airplane training and has been evaluated and qualified to provide UPRT. 4. Completed the pertinent a cademics training elements support ing the flight training before the

o n

- aircraft training.

5. The i nstructor should be trained in the aircraft on how to recognize improper student inputs and recover the airplane to safe flight.

6. Receives briefing and debriefing on each UPRT element to be trained in flight.
7. UPRT is provide d in dual instruction only. 8. UPRT is provided in day visual meteorological conditions only, but should include training in both visual and simulated instrument conditions. 9. Completed a risk assessment acceptable to the A dministrator pertaining to the UPRT

ma neuvers, with due consideration to the types of event s which may occur during this training, the probability of such events, the impact the event may have on the training or otherwise, an appropriate mitigation strategy and any contingency plans toward min imizing risk. 10. Instructors and students must do a risk assessment and briefing prior to each UPRT flight

cover ing the anticipated risks of the flight, and include TEM strategies and possible emergency scenarios. 11. Aircraft used for performing UPRT are certif ied to a suitable category for performing the specific training elements. For example, inverted flight may be completed only in an aircraft in the aerobatic category, or in an airplane certified for inverted flight.



### A DDITIONAL 

### R ISK 

### M ITIGATION 

### R EQUIREMENTS
In addition to the above requirements, those organizations conducting training beyond 60 degrees bank angle should ensure the following:

1. The training organization is a pproved to provide aerobatic flight training in an airplane, to include the use of parac hutes. 2. For applicable training elements the instructor should be approved to provide flight training in an aerobatic airplane, to include the use of parachutes

. 3. The recommendations in this report regarding the o n

- aircraft training primarily apply to

commer cial pilot certificated training . However, if the pilot is receiving o n

- aircraft training while holding a type rating on and flying a transport category aircraft

, then as a pre caution the in aircraft training g loads should be within the normal limits for the transport category aircraft that the pilot normally operates

. That is, if the transport category aircraft is limited to 2. 5 g , then regardless of the training aircraft capability the 2. 5 g limit should be respected to prevent the transfer of negative training.



### FSTD T RAINING 

### R ISK 

### M ITIGATION

Define the risk mitigation strategies regarding negative transfer of training required for UPRT

. The most significant concern with UPRT pertains to the potential of negative transfer of training, which may result fr om many factors including the improper simulation of the upset condition, the improper behavior of the simulator to the upset condition , the improper response of the keyFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 51 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 feedback cuing (motion, visual, sound) during the upset condition

, or improper instruc tion. Furthermore

, because the simulator environment is free of physical danger the pilot ’s performance can differ from that in the aircraft, which could be different depending on the specific maneuver and the overall performance of the simulation environ ment.
For UPRT, the potential of negative transfer of training is increased for a number of reasons

. I t is therefore imperative that each of the training elements be closely reviewed in view of the possible effect of the simulation on any transfer of nega tive training

. Simulator training must

not lead the student to contribute to or compound an upset condition if experienced in the actual aircraft.
Specific consideration should be given to the following:

Inducing an Upset
One of the key concerns stemming from the review of LOC events is the surprise or startle factor

, and the ARC consider s this an important factor for effective UPRT

. However

, to ensure a positive transfer of training

, it is equally important that upset s are induced both unexpected ly and

r ealistic ally

. F urthermore

, to prevent the negative transfer of training , there must be no artificial inputs

, and the simulator should respond to the pilot inputs appropriate ly for the flight condition.

In at least one accident

, the National Transportatio n Safety Board ( NTSB ) found that the

manner in which the unusual attitude maneuver was programmed was potentially a factor in the pilot ’s response to the aircraft upset and may have contributed to the probable cause of the fatal accident.

Instructor Feedba ck
The instructor role in the delivery of UPRT is a core part of the effectiveness of performing this training in a n FSTD

. To effective ly mitigat e the limitations of the simulation environment

, the instructor would need to be fully cognizant of the overal l behavior of the simulated aircraft response, in particular the pilot inputs and the following :

• Attitudes, a irspeed

, a ltitude , AOA, b eta

, g load

.

• Primary flight control input (position and force )

.

• Secondary flight controls

— trim/stab, speed brake, flap

.

• W arnings (audible and shaker), shaker/pusher trigger and limits ( C L

- max )

• Automated full/aerodynamic stall sequence, which can be initiated by the instructor at low or high altitude ( f or use in a demonstration mode only)

.

• Overall aircraft view

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 52 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### A DDITIONAL 

### R ECOMMENDATION S
In addition to the recommendations made in this report the ARC wishes to address the gap that will occur between currently trained pilots and pilots who will receive this training in the future. Once UPRT guidance is published with an imple mentation date, the ARC recommends the new UPRT requirements for commercial pilot certificated training be required for pilots obtaining their commercial pilot certificate after the implementation date.
The ARC understands the difficulty with introducing U PRT into the current training environment. The ARC recognizes the impracticality and high risk of introducing on

- aircraft UPRT to all pilots who hold a commercial or ATP certificate. In light of this , the ARC recommends the FAA provide to all current pil ots information on the benefits of obtaining

on

- aircraft UPRT and recommend s that all current commercial pilot certificate holders choose to obtain the optional on

- aircraft UPRT in the interest of safety.

T he ARC considers that for type

- rated pilots who ha ve not experienced UPRT during their commercial pilot certificated training or any other training (such as military flight training)

, they can obtain some of this training and knowledge within current training programs

. H owever , there may be a need during this transition period to improve the knowledge and skill s of the current pilot population with an enhanced training program during recurrent training (academic and FSTD). This enhanced training, hereby called UPRT Fundamental training should include a

p roper foundation of elements and concepts that are required during the commercial pilot certificated training phase of a pilots’ career. This training should be completed using academics and FSTD (no airplane training) and provide an emphasis on the knowl edge and skills to prevent upsets, or if not prevented, support the recovery of upsets. For all type

- rated pilots, the ARC believes the FAA will need to propose a way for operators to transition and introduce UPRT into both type and recurrent training. B ecause UPRT is a new skill, it will have to be developed with repetition over time.
Thus, the ARC recommends that at the first occurrence of UPRT at the type

- rating level

, either during i nitial or re current, all type

- rated pilots and instructors shall unde rgo UPRT Fundamental training. UPRT Fundamental training is a dedicated course of academic and FSTD training to introduce the UPRT knowledge elements from the commercial pilot certificated training level, in addition to the i nitial academic and flight tra ining type rating elements prescribed in this document. This training may be combined with other scheduled training events.
The fundamental training curriculum shall provide adequate FSTD time to allow the pilot to consolidate the theoretical and practica l knowledge and to demonstrate proficiency in aircraft upset prevention and recovery.
Once pilots undergoing their first UPRT training have completed the UPRT Fundamental training, which includes all academic and FSTD flight elements prescribed in this doc ument, pilots undergoing rec urrent training shall be trained in representative academic and flight training elements prescribed in this section every recurrent training cycle for three cycles. This is to provide maximum training to all pilots and raise UP RT knowledge levels in an effort to mitigate LOC accidents.

As mentioned in the i nstructor q ualification section, as well as the r isk m itigation section s (see pages 49 and 50), of this document, the quality of the instructors teaching UPRT is crucial to th e UPRT program success. The ARC recommends instructors at the type

- rating level shall firstFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 53 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 undergo the UPRT Fundamental training curriculum as a student, then be trained as instructors to teach the various UPRT programs at their training entit ies

. The F AA shall prescribe and oversee
UPRT p rogram manager requirements and train

- the

- trainer instructor requirements consistent with the many comments in this report regarding UPRT instructor qualification, experience level, standardization, and requalification.
One strategy to improve UPRT knowledge throughout an organization would be, for example, to choose senior instructors who will become the SME s on UPRT for their respective organization s

. These instructors will undergo on

- aircraft UPRT provided at the com mercial pilot certificated training level by approved training entities, followed by the UPRT Instructor (Airplane) course. Once these SMEs return to their own training organizations, they can then train the other instructors and oversee the UPRT curricul um and instructor standardization.

Once all instructors have learned upset prevention and recovery skills, the goal should be for them to integrate u pset p revention , recognition, and recovery throughout the entire training curriculum while still offering d edicated UPRT during type

- specific and recurrent training sessions.

Because the AURTA, Revision 2 was initially developed for large transport category aircraft

, and the goal is to align UPRT as much as possible between commercial pilot certificated trainin g and type training to minimize unlearning and negative transfer of training, the ARC recommends the FAA sponsor research to define areas of possible negative transfer of training for UPRT at the commercial pilot certificated training level for pilots who will attend type training. The research should also produce training guidance and mitigation strategies for avoiding and minimizing risk associated with any identified problem areas.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | 54 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### S UMMARY

In conclusion, the ARC recommends improvements for flightcrew tr aining in the area of LOC

– Inflight

. The ARC recommends that for the greatest impact on safety, the FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety adopt recommendations placing special emphasis on knowledge and manual flight operations development through out a pilot’s career.
Following review of many previous working group reports from the past two decades t he ARC commend s its predecessor s ’ excellent work in the subject areas and has highlighted

two documents of particular interest to aviation safety

. The AURTA, Revision 2

, has functioned as not only background, but also as a source document. Further, FAA AC 120

– 109, issued recently by the FAA, addresses an important part of the upsets studied, namely training in stall and approach to stall. The ARC reco mmends the FAA retain these as source documents.

I ssue s identified in this report include the lack of instructor knowledge, qualification, and standardization

. Based on surveys, presentations, and experiences of ARC members

, it was apparent that while s tandardization may exist among instructors within a training organization, there was limited instructor standardization among the industry training providers that were surveyed

. The ARC concludes that incorporating th is report’s recommendations will provi de for better standardization of training delivery and improved quality of training, as well as providing risk mitigation for on

- airplane training during the commercial pilot certificated training phase of a pilot’s career.

A second issue identified was th e lack of knowledge on items that could have an impact on LOC

. The ARC recommend ed improved academic knowledge training at the commercial pilot certificated training level as well as the type rating level. This knowledgebase can lead directly to the abil ity to prevent an event, and should be introduced as a requirement during commercial pilot certificated training and type rating training.
In addition to the tasks assigned to the ARC, the airplane OEM group established

r ecommendations attached in appendix A that should serve as a template for all aircraft manufacturers for the development of, and revisions to, UPRT and flightcrew guidance.
The ARC recommends changing the training description from Upset Recovery/Unusual Attitude Training to Upset Awareness

, Prevention, and Recovery Training. This is to stress the requirement for knowledge to create awareness and being able to prevent an occurrence is the desired result of training, rather than waiting for recovery

. This training includes on

- airplane train ing at the commercial pilot certificated training level for professional pilots and FSTD training at the type rating level and should include hands

- on skill

- based training on airplane responses and energy management.

To minimize risks for on

- airplane train ing, this report includes several recommendations for consideration.

The term recovery is used often in this report to mean any pilot’s actions to avoid any divergence from a desired airplane state, and not to wait until a specific assigned attitude or spe ed is achieved

. Awareness and prevention serve to avoid incidents; recovery serves to recover from

an event.
The members of the ARC wish to thank the Administrator for the opportunity to offer these recommendations. We remain available for further consul tations as necessary.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### APPENDIX A

— OEM U PSET 

### P REVENTION AND 

### R ECOVERY 

### R ECOMMENDATIONS
The following upset prevention and recovery template was created by Airbus

, ATR

, Boeing, Bombardier and Embraer

. The OEM recovery techniques will be updated in their respective manuals and remain consistent with the information contained in the AURTA, Revision 2

. It is importa nt to note that correct interpretation and application of techniques and recommendations can only be determined when the supporting information is well understood.
The following techniques represent a logical progression for recovering the aircraft. They are not necessarily procedural. The sequence of actions is for guidance only and represents a series of options for the pilot to consider and to use depending on the situation. Not all actions may, or should, be necessary once recovery is underway. If n eeded, use pitch trim sparingly. Caref ul use of rudder to aid roll control should be considered only if ro l l control is ineffective and the airplane is not stalled
These techniques assume the aircraft is not stalled. A stalled condition can exist at any attitude and may be recognized by cont inuous stall warning activation accompanied by one of the following:

• Buffeting, which could be heavy at times

.

• Lack of pitch authority and/or roll control

.

• Inability to arrest descent rate

. If the aircraft is stalled, recovery from the stall must be accomp lished first by applying and maintaining nose

- down elevator until stall recovery is complete and stick shaker activation ceases.

NOTE: Operators should work with their airplane manufacturer(s) to ensure they have the manufacturer

- approved, airplane

- specif ic upset prevention and recovery guidance and techniques in their operating manual.

NOTE: The manufacturer’s procedures take precedence over the following recommendations :

Nose

- High Recommendation

1 Recognize and confirm the developing situation. Announ ce: "Nose High"

PF PM

2 AP

- DISCONNECT Monitor Airspeed and Attitude throughout the recovery and announce any continued divergence. A/THR

- OFF APPLY as much nose down control input as required to obtain a nose

- down pitch rate.
Thrust

- Adj ust (if required)
Roll

- Adjust (if required) not to exceed 60 degrees When Airspeed is sufficiently increasing: 3 RECOVER to level flight

1 If the AP and/or A/THR are responding correctly, it may not be appropriate to decrease the level of automati on while assessing if the divergence is being stopped.

2 A large out of trim condition could be encounter ed when the A/P is disconnected

.
3 Avoid stall because of premature recovery or excessive g loading. Recovery to level flight may require use of pitch trim

. Warning : Excessive use of pitch trim or rudder may aggr avate the upset situation or may result in high structural loads.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 2 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Nose

- Low Recommendation

1 Recognize and confirm the developing situation. Ann ounce: "Nose Low "

PF PM

2 AP

- DISCONNECT Monitor Airspeed and Attitude throughout the recovery and announce any continued divergence. A/THR

- OFF RECOVER from stall if required

3 ROLL in the shortest direction to wings level

. Thrust and Drag Adjust (if required)

4 Recover to level flight

1 If the AP and/or A/THR are responding correctly, it may not be appropriate to decrease the level of automation while assessing if the divergence is being stopped.

2 A large out of trim condition c ould be encountered when the A/P is disconnected

.
3 It may be necessary to reduce the g loading by applying forward control pressure to improve roll effectiveness.

4 Avoid stall because of prema ture recovery or excessive g loading. Recovery to level flight may require use of pitch trim.
Warning: Excessive use of pitch trim or rudder may aggravate the upset situation or may result in high structural loads



### OEM R ECOMMENDATIONS F OR 

### T RAINING
With focus upon awar eness and avoidance, it is the OEMs ’ motivation to ensure pilots are properly taught to operate their airplanes. Passing a type rating check ride is not a measure of how well the pilots understand s the performance of the airplane throughout the entire ope rating envelope, because the check is completed in a very narrow band of operating performance. Training programs leading up to type rating checks usually focus on the environment to be tested, rather than the larger operating environment to which the pil ots will be systematically exposed

. Moreover, autopilots systematically manage the larger portion of the operating envelope where the pilots will usually fly

. Therefore, it is impossible for any pilot to become aware and avoid an upset without practical knowledge of the performance available (or not available) throughout a wider portion of the airplane ’ s capabilities.
It is unreasonable to develop training sequences at the edges, or even beyond the normal envelope, without first exposing pilots to the air plane’s capabilities within the operating envelope. Combined with adequate training for recognition and recovery from stalls, simple exercises to expose the pilot to airplane capabilities will add volume benefits toward upset avoidance.
Upon completion of academic training

, the se FSTD exercises are a prerequisite for the performance envelope demonstration training of a given airplane.



### E NERGY 

### A WARENESS
Demonstrate acceleration between two speeds at which an airplane is capable of flying at low altitude, m edium and high altitude. For example, 200

– 250 knots at low altitude and high altitude

, which corresponds to M ach at high a lt itu de : Observe time to reach target speed

. Demonstrate acceleration performance from the second regime (back side of power curve) at low altitude and high altitude : Observe capability and determine only option (if available thrust will not permit acceleration, the only option will be to accelerate by descending )

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 3 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Demonstrate the relationship between Max Cruise

, Climb

, MCT

, and TOGA power settings at high altitude

. Demonstrate acceleration capabilities through descent versus power application

.

• The objective is to understand the advantage of using elevator instead of thrust levers to regain control.

• Observe a rapid acceleration durin g descent versus the slow acceleration previously demonstrated with only the use of power.



### F LIGHT 

### C ONTROL 

### E FFECTIVENESS

Demonstrate a defined control deflection at a fixed V c at both low altitude and high altitude.

• For example, a 2

- cm deflection of pitc h control at a common V c between mean s ea l evel ( MSL ) and Max Alt itude

.

• Observe the airplane reaction

.

• Demonstrate high

- speed buffet (if applicable) and low

- speed buffet.

• Observe the airplane performance

.

• Demonstrate roll rate performance of the airplane at different speeds and different configurations

.

• Maximum CG range can be included in pitch sensitivity demonstration if necessary

.

• Demonstrate M ach buffet exercises

, if applicable

.



### OEM

- R ECOMMENDED 

### T RAINING 

### S EQUENCES

Regulatory Subset

• Training Assumptio n: Regulatory subset is irrelevant for commercial operations

. Flight Control Automation

• Training Assumption: All scenarios will be demonstrated to effectively teach the student when (or if) to disconnect the autoflight system. For example, if transition ing a wake encounter, it may be best to leave the autoflight system engaged rather than disconnecting it as long as the autoflight system is performing.



### E NVIRONMENTAL 

### F ACTORS

Conditions: For example, Mountain Wave, Rotor Cloud, Horizontal, and Vertical W i nd shear.
Training: Demonstrate how a rapid windshear can alter the flightpath of a high

- altitude aircraft

. Rationale: High

- Altitude Upset with environmental factors as a causal factor

.



### W AKE 

### V ORTEX

Conditions: Takeoff and Approach configuration

— behind a Heavy aircraftFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 4 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Training: Demonstrate how a prompt roll can alter the flightpath of an aircraft

. Rationale: Awareness of how a v ortex can affect the aircraft, that is, different roll capabilities and mass of the aircraft would affect how a pilot would res pond to a wake encounter. Particular emphasis on time to transition through the v ortex and effective mitigation strategies

.



### M ECHANICAL 

### /S YSTEM 

### I NDUCED

Conditions: Upset as a functions of roll, yaw and pitch path failures

. Training: Demonstrate how a fail ure or degradation of flight controls affecting each axis can create an upset. Training has to be aircraft

- specific to correctly reflect failure mode of that aircraft ( for example, h ydraulics / fly

- by

- wire/autopilot failure)

. Rationale: Aircraft

- specific t raining to showcase how a flight control failure can create an upset and how to mitigate ( for example, rudder hard over/runaway

, demonstrate stab/spoiler float/engine loss).



### S TALL
According to AC 120

– 109 and the SPAW ARC recommendations.



### P ILOT 

### F ACTORS

Con ditions: Loss of pilot s ituational a wareness leading to LOC.
Training: Highlight how loss of situational awareness can allow a flightpath degradation leading to LOC ( for example, loss of autothrottles ; mis using pitch, roll or yaw trim ; engine loss ; airsp eed loss from International Standard Atmosphere devia tion when too high ; forgetting to

reengage autothrottle after making an entry in an engine monitor log)

. Rationale: Recent accidents have shown a failure of crews to effectively monitor their aircraft

e nergy state and/or understand system logic



### E NERGY 

### M ANAGEMENT



### E NGINE 

### P ERFORMANCE 

### /P OWER

Conditions: Demonstrate a cceleration between two speeds of which the aircraft is capable at low altitude, medium and high altitude

. For example, 200

– 250 knots at low a ltitude and high altitude which corresponds to mach at h igh a lt itude

. Training: Observe time to reach target speed in level flight and in descending flight

. Rationale: Demonstrate and highlight the performance decrement at higher density altitudes

.



### A IRCR AFT 

### A CCELERATION

Condition: Demonstrate acceleration performance from the s econd r egime (back side of power curve) at low altitude and high altitude.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 5 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Training: Observe capability and determine the only option (if available thrust will not permit accelera tion, the only option will be to accelerate by descending)

. Rationale: Demonstrate the potentially different recovery technique from flight in the s econd

r egime at l ow a ltitude versus h igh a ltitude

.



### H IGH 

### A LTITUDE 

### E NGINE 

### P OWER 

### M ANAGEMENT

Condition: Demons trate the relationship between Max Cruise/Climb/MCT and TOGA at high altitude

. Training: Highlight to the student the practical relationship between available engine power modes at high altitude

. Rationale: Teach the student that TOGA is not likely to pr oduce more power at max altitude than cruise power , for example

.



### H IGH 

### A LTITUDE 

### E NERGY 

### M ANAGEMENT

Condition: Demonstrate acceleration capabilities through descent versus power application

. Training: Objective is to understand the advantage of using elevat or instead of thrust levers to regain the desired energy state (observe a rapid acceleration during descent versus the slow acceleration previously demonstrated with only use of power).

Rationale: Demonstrate the inability of the aircraft to power out of a high

- altitude slow

- down

.



### F LIGHT 

### C ONTROL 

### E FFECTIVENESS

Condition: Demonstrate a defined control deflection at a fixed V c at both low altitude and high altitude.
Training: Demonstrate how a fixed flight control deflection is different at low and high alt itude (for example, a 2

- cm deflection of pitch control at a common V c between MSL and Max Altitude and observe the airplane reaction ).

Rationale: Student appreciation of high

- altitude response differences to same flight control input

.



### B UFFET

Condition: D emonstrate high

- speed buffet and low

- speed buffet.
Training: Demonstrate the aircraft behavior at the low

- and high

- speed buffet entry. Highlight how loading the aircraft in a high

- speed buffet will aggravate the condition

. Rationale: Teach the student to correctly identify the low

- and high

- speed buffet with corresponding recovery techniques.



### R OLL 

### C APABILITIES

Condition: Demonstrate roll rate performance of the airplane at different speeds and different configurations and with flight spoilers retracted /extended if a difference exist s ( for example, on the B727)

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | A

– 6 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Training: Demonstrate roll response at V ref versus clean

, an d IAS 250 knots , V mo and M mo . Rationale: Demonstrate the full roll capabilities of the aircraft are

.



### P ITCH 

### C APABILITIES

Condition: D emonstrate pitch rate performance of the airplane at different speeds and different configurations and with flaps retracted/extended. Also

, show an aft CG versus a forward CG if flight qualities are significantly different

. Training: Demonstrate pitch re sponse at V ref versus clean

, an d IAS 250 knots , V mo and M mo . Rationale: Demonstrate the full pitch capabilities of the aircraft

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | B

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### A PPENDIX B

— P ROPOSED 

### R EVISIONS TO 

### 14 CFR P ART 

### 60

Table A1A

— Minimum Simulator Requirements, Entry No. 2.m.

Entry # General Simu lator Requirements A B C D Notes

2.m

(append) Upset Prevention, Recognition, and Recovery. The simulator shall be capable of performing upset prevention, recognition, and recovery training as approved under the sponsor’s training program.

Aerodynamic Eva luation: The simulator must be evaluated for each specific upset prevention and recovery maneuver for the purpose of determining that the combination of AOA and sideslip does not exceed the range of validated data or wind tunnel/analytical data while perf orming the

recovery maneuver. The following minimum set of upset prevention and recovery maneuvers must be available to the instructor/evaluator.

1. A nose

- high, wings

- level aircraft upset.

2. A nose

- low, wings

- level aircraft upset.

3. A high bank

- angle aircraft upset.

Other upset prevention and recovery scenarios as developed by the FFS sponsor must be evaluated in the same manner. To avoid a potential negative transfer of training, the intentional degradation of simulator functionality to drive an airc raft upset is generally not acceptable unless used purely as a tool for repositioning the FSTD with the pilot unaware

. Special consideration should be given to the motion system response during UPRT maneuvers. Notwithstanding the limitations of simulator motion, specific emphasis should be placed on tuning out any responses of effects that have the potential for the transfer of negative training.

Aircraft system malfunctions or other malfunctions may be used to cause an aircraft upset; however, the effects of these X X This section applies to the qualification of all upset prevention, recognition, and recovery maneuvers that are to be cond ucted on the FSTD.

The upsets should be primarily based on criteria defined in the AURTA Revision 2.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | B

– 2 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 malfunctions should be representative of the aircraft and where possible supported by data.
Specific features and/or malfunctions for use in UPRT are not prescribed, the operator may use appropriate available features/malfunctions or ensure a mi nimum are available to allow for the following:

• Selection of features, or malfunctions, specifically tailored to allow for the training of crew

a wareness of a potential upset condition should be provided.

• Selection of features, or malfunctions, to allow f or the training of crew “Recognition” of a developing upset condition should be provided.

• Selection of features, or malfunctions, to allow for the training of crew “Recovery” of a developed upset condition should be provided.

These features/malfunctions sh all be evaluated in conjunction with the aerodynamic assessment described above.

Instructor Operating System (IOS):

To allow for controlled training of upset prevention and recovery the following features as listed below, or equivalent, must be provided:

- A means to play back audio and video.

- A means to record and play back pertinent parameters including

—

- Weight and center of gravity.

- Attitudes, airspeed, altitude, AOA, beta,

g load.

- Primary flight control position and force.

- Secondary flight controls: sta bilizer/trim,FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | B

– 3 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 speed brake, flap, gear.

- Warnings (audible and shaker), shaker/pusher trigger, and limits (C L

- max ).

The data recording may be in time history or graphical format.

Selectable aircraft upsets must provide guidance to the instructor concerning t he method used to drive the FFS into an upset condition including any malfunction or degradation in the FFS functionality required to initiate the upset.

The simulator must have a mechanism in place to notify the instructor/evaluator when the simulator’s flight test validated and/or wind tunnel/analytical envelope, in terms of angle of attack and sideslip, have been exceeded during an UPRT task.

The simulator must also have a mechanism in place to notify the instructor/evaluator when the aircraft operating limits have been exceeded during an

UPRT task.

Statement of Compliance

1. A statement of compliance (SOC) is required that defines the source data used to construct the flight test and wind tunnel/analytical envelope.

2. The SOC must verify that each upset

pr evention and recovery feature programmed at the instructor station, and the associated training maneuver has been evaluated by a suitably qualified pilot using methods described in this section. The statement should confirm that the

recovery maneuver can be performed such that the simulation does not exceed the flight test and wind tunnel envelope described above, or when it is exceeded then it is within the realm of confidence in the simulation accuracy.

3. The SOC should confirm the source of data used for the operating limits which are used to provide the instructor indications or warnings on approaching or exceeding these limits.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### APPENDIX C

— S AFETY 

### R ECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of safety recommendations arising from accident investigations relating to training for stalls and LOC

Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

Accident on November 27, 2008

off the coast of Canet

- Plage

to the Airbus A320

– 232

registered D

– AXLA

operated by XL Airways

, Germany The Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile ( BEA )

recomme nds the European Aviation Safety Agency ( EASA ) , in cooperation with manufacturers, improve training exercises and techniques relating to approach

- to

- stall to ensure control of the aeroplane in the pitch axis.

Interim Report No. 3

On the accident on
June 1

, 2009

to the Airbus A330

– 203

registered F

– GZCP

operated by Air France
Flight AF 447 Rio de Janeiro

– Paris The BEA recommends EASA review the content of check and training programs and make mandatory, in particular, the setting up of specific and regular ex ercises dedicated to manual aircraft handling of approach to stall and stall recovery, including at high altitude.

Crashed during approach, Boeing 737

– 800,

near Amsterdam Schiphol Airport,
February 25, 2009 The Directorate General of Civil Aviation ( DGCA ) , ICAO, FAA and EASA should change their regulations in such a way that airlines and flight training organizations include in their recurrent training programs practicing recovery from stall situations on approach.

REPORT ON THE SERIOUS INCIDENT OVER GLAC IER FOLGEFONNA, NORWAY ON 14. SEPTEMBER 2005 WITH ATR 42

– 320, LN

– FAO, OPERATED BY COAST AIR AS It is important that flightcrews on the ATR 42 know by heart the manual actions to take if uncommanded roll movements occur during icing conditions. This is to avoid losing control of the aircraft, and/or to regain control more quickly. Experience has shown that crews forget to extend flaps to 15°. The Accident Investigation Board Norway ( AIBN ) recommends the Civil Aviation Authority Norway ( CAA

– N ) request EASA reconsider the layout of the procedure in question in airplane flight manual in consultation with ATR. The item on setting flaps to 15° after losing control in icing conditions ought to be an item that should be known by heart, and this should be reflect ed in the manufacturer’s training program

.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 2 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

Boeing B747

– 400

G

– BYGA

Group ‘A’ L/E Flaps retracted on Takeoff

from O.R

. Tambo Airport,

SOUTH AFRICA.

May 11, 2009 It is recommended that the Regulatory and Certificating Authorities of all states of design and states of manufacture should introduce requirements to operators that they should provide flightcrews with more basic hand flying and simulator flight training on new generation aircraft to address the technological developments in aviation, inclusive of e ffective stall training.

Date and time Monday, February 28

, 2005, 06: 16 UTC

Site Barcelona Airport

AIRCRAFT
Registration EC

– IHD
Type and model Cessna 208B Grand Caravan It is recommended that the Spanish Civil Aviation Authority (DGAC) ask commercial aeri al transport companies to carry out specific periodic training courses on flight in adverse meteorological conditions that would , at least, cover aspects such

as the following :

• Conditions of ice formation and how to recognize them.

• Types of ice.

• Form ation of ice on the aircraft.

• Recovery procedures.

• Procedures in icing conditions on the ground.

• Capability and limits of deicing and anti

- icing equipment and systems.

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that the Int ernational Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the United States and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) jointly promote the holding of an international conference, to be attended by every civil aviation repr esentative organization, such as authorities, industry, academic and research institutions, professional associations and the like, for the purpose of drafting directives on good industry practices in the area of aviation operations as they apply to checkl ist design, personnel training and improved procedures and cockpit work methods so as to ensure that crews properly configure aircraft for takeoffs and landings.

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that the FAA and EASA re quire takeoff stall recovery as part of initial and recurring training programs for airline transport pilots.

. ( REC 18/11)

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that EASA establish requirements for flight simulators to allow simulator training to cover sustained takeoff stalls that reproduce situations that could exceed the flight envelope limits. ( REC 20/11)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 3 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that EASA and national civil aviation authoriti es, when evaluating operator training programs, expressly ensure that

—

• The concept of sterile cockpit is stressed, along with the consequences of even minor distractions

• Examples of accidents are included in which noncompliance with regulations involvi ng the sterile cockpit was a relevant factor. ( REC 22/11)

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that EASA standardize the CRM training that must be provided to the operations inspectors of national authorities, and define th e criteria that must be met by said inspectors in order to exercise their duties as inspectors in the area of CRM. ( REC 27/11)

MD82 EC

– HFP
Spanair

Madrid

- Barajas

August 20, 2008 It is recommended that the FAA and EASA study and assess the stall recovery procedure in the flight manuals of large transport airplanes to include a check of the flap/slat lever and its adjustment, if required. ( REC 19/11)

Colgan Air 3407

Buffalo, February 12

, 2009

Dash

– 8 Q400 Develop a process for verifying, validating, auditi ng, and amending pilot training records at 14 CFR, parts 121

, 135, and 91K operators to guarantee the accuracy and completeness of the records. (A

– 10

– 20) Direct p art s 121

, 135, and 91K operators of airplanes equipped with a reference speeds switch or simi lar device to (1 ) develop procedures to establish that, during approach and landing, airspeed reference bugs are always matched to the position of the switch and (2 ) implement specific training to ensure that pilots demonstrate proficiency in this area. (A

- 10

- 21)

Colgan Air 3407

Buffalo, February 12

, 2009

Dash

– 8 Q400 Require p art s 121

, 135, and 91K operators and 14 CFR, part 142 training centers to develop and conduct training that incorporates stalls that are fully developed; are unexpected; involve autop ilot disengagement; and include airplane

- specific features, such as a reference speeds switch. (A

- 10

- 22)

Colgan Air 3407

Buffalo, February 12

, 2009

Dash

– 8 Q400 Require all 14 CFR, parts 121

, 135, and 91K operators of stick pusher

- equipped aircraft to pro vide their pilots with pusher familiarization simulator training. (A

- 10

- 23) (Supersedes Safety Recommendation A

- 07

- 4)

Colgan Air 3407

Buffalo, February 12

, 2009

Dash

– 8 Q400 Define and codify minimum simulator model fidelity requirements to support an

ex panded set of stall recovery training requirements, including recovery from stalls that are fully developed. These simulator fidelity requirements should address areas such as required angle

- of

- attack and sideslip angle ranges, motion cuing

, proof

- of

- matc h with post

- stall flight test data, and warnings to indicate when the simulator flight envelope has been exceeded. (A

- 10

- 24) Formatted: English (U.K.)

Formatted: English (U.K.)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 4 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

Colgan Air 3407

Buffalo, February 12

, 2009

Dash

– 8 Q400 Identify which airplanes operated under p art s 121

, 135, and 91K are suscep tible to tailplane stalls and then (1 ) require operators of those airplanes to provide an appropriate airplane

- specific tailplane stall recovery procedure in their training manuals and company procedures and (2 ) direct operators of those airplanes that are not susceptible to tailplane stalls to ensure that training and company guidance for the airplanes explicitly states this lack of susceptibility and contains no references to tailplane stall recovery procedures. (A

- 10

- 25)

Adam Air 574

January 1, 2007

B7 37

– 400 The National Transportation Safety Committee of Indonesia recommends that the Directorate General Civil Aviation (DGCA) ensure that all Indonesian airlines include the following in their syllabus of initial and recurrency training:

1. Aircraft ups et prevention and recovery training; both ground school and simulator; and

2. The spatial disorientation and its effects

.

USAir 427

September 8

, 1994

B737

– 300 The NTSB determines the probable cause of the USAir flight 427 accident was a loss of control of the airplane resulting from the movement of the rudder surface to its blowdown limit. The rudder surface most likely deflected in a direction opposite to that commanded by the pilots because of a jam of the main rudder power control unit servo valve se condary slide to the servo valve housing offset from its neutral position and overtravel of the primary slide.

American Eagle 4184

October 31

, 1994

ATR72 The NTSB determines the probable causes of this accident were the loss of control, attributed to a su dden and unexpected aileron hinge moment reversal that occurred after a ridge of ice accreted beyond the deice boots because: 1 ) ATR failed to completely disclose to operators, and incorporate in the ATR 72 airplane flight manual, flightcrew operating manu al and flightcrew training programs, adequate information concerning previously known effects of freezing precipitation on the stability and control characteristics, autopilot and related operational procedures when the ATR 72 was operated in such conditio ns; 2 ) the French Directorate General for Civil Aviation’s (DGAC’s) inadequate oversight of the ATR 42 and 72, and its failure to take the necessary corrective action to ensure continued airworthiness in icing conditions; and 3 ) the DGAC’s failure to provi de the FAA with timely airworthiness information developed from previous ATR incidents and accidents in icing conditions, as specified under the Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement and Annex 8 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

Contributing t o the accident were:

1 ) The FAA’s failure to ensure that aircraft icing certification requirements, operational requirements for flight into icing conditions, and FAA published aircraft icing information adequately accounted for the hazards that can resul t from flight in freezing rain and other icing conditions not specified in 14 CFR)

, part 25, appendix C; and 2 ) the FAA’s inadequate oversight of the ATR 42 and 72 to ensure continued airworthiness in icing conditions.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 5 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

China Air 006

February 19

, 1985

B747 SP The NTSB determines the probable cause of this accident was the captain’s preoccupation with an in

- flight malfunction and his failure to monitor properly the airplane’s flight instruments which resulted in his losing control of the airplane.

Contributin g to the accident was the captain’s over

- reliance on the autopilot after the loss of thrust on the No

. 4 engine.

Pan Am Clipper Washington

December 8

, 1963

B707

– 120 Pan American Boeing 707

– 120 Reg: N712PA named ”Clipper Washington” Dive over North Atlanti c near New f oundland on a flight from Paris via London at 22. 05 GMT (16.05 EDT). The jet experienced an emergency descent of 29,000 ft from 35,000 ft while cruising at M ac h 0

. 82 ( 975 km/h), but the crew managed to recover at app. 6,000 ft

. The crew made a n emergency lan d ing at Gander with damaged flaps. Flight PA115 departed London at 18. 45 GMT

. Occupants: 10 crew. Passengers : 119. Scheduled passenger flight. Phase : Cruise. Destination:
New York, Idlewild via Gander, Newfoundland. Cause: Unintention al disconnection of autopilot while captain had left the cockpit and entered the passenger cabin. The copilot did not pay sufficient attention to the instruments and the plane went into a dive in a clock w ise spiraling turn. This plane was written off on June 23

, 1990.

American 587

November 12

, 2001

A300 Develop and disseminate guidance to transport

- category pilots that emphasizes that multiple full deflection, alternating flight control inputs should not be necessary to control a transport

- category airpl ane and that such inputs might be indicative of an adverse aircraft

- pilot coupling event and thus should be avoided. (A

- 04

- 59)

American 587

November 12

, 2001

A300 Amend all relevant regulatory and advisory materials to clarify that operating at or below maneuvering speed does not provide structural protection against multiple full control inputs in one axis or full control inputs in more than one axis at the same time. (A

- 04

- 60)

American 587

November 12

, 2001

A300 Adopt and disseminate written guidance for use in developing and accepting upset prevention and recovery programs; such guidance could take the form of an advisory circular and should reflect the industry’s best practices and be designed to avoid inaccurate or negative training. (A

- 04

- 61) Alon g with developing the guidance recommended in Safety Recommendation A

- 04

- 61, evaluate issues concerning the level of automation appropriate to teaching upset training, and develop and disseminate guidance that will promote standardization and minimize the danger of inappropriate simulator training. (A

- 04

- 62)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 6 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

American 587

November 12

, 2001

A300 Require the manufacturers and operators of transport

- category airplanes to establish and implement pilot training programs that: (1 ) explain the structural certifi cation requirements for the rudder and vertical stabilizer on transport

- category airplanes; (2 ) explain that a full or nearly full rudder deflection in one direction followed by a full or nearly full rudder deflection in the opposite direction, or certain combinations of sideslip angle and opposite rudder deflection can result in potentially dangerous loads on the vertical stabilizer, even at speeds below the design maneuvering speed; and (3 ) explain that, on some aircraft, as speed increases, the maximum a vailable rudder deflection can be obtained with comparatively light pedal forces and small pedal deflections. The FAA should also require revisions to airplane and pilot operating manuals that reflect and reinforce this information. In addition, the FAA should ensure that this training does not compromise the substance or effectiveness of existing training regarding proper rudder use, such as during engine failure shortly after takeoff or during strong or gusty crosswind takeoffs or landings. (A

- 02

- 01)

American 587

November 12

, 2001

A300 Carefully review all existing and proposed guidance and training provided to pilots of transport

- category airplanes concerning special maneuvers intended to address unusual or emergency situations and, if necessary, requ ire modifications to ensure that flightcrews are not trained to use the rudder in a way that could result in dangerous combinations of sideslip angle and rudder position or other flight parameters. (A

- 02

- 02)

Northwest Orient Airlines 705 02/12/1963

B720 The NTSB ’ s final report on the crash determined the cause of the accident to be the unfavorable interaction of severe vertical air drafts and large longitudinal control displacements, resulting in a longitudinal upset from which a successful recovery

was n ot made.

Alaska Air 261 01/31/2000

MD83 The NTSB determines that the probable cause of this accident was a loss of airplane pitch control resulting from the in

- flight failure of the horizontal stabilizer trim system jackscrew assembly ’ s acme nut threads. The thread failure was caused by excessive wear resulting from Alaska Airlines’ insufficient lubrication of the jackscrew assembly.

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ200 Work with members of the aviation industry to enhance the training syl labuses for pilots conducting high altitude operations in regional jet airplanes. The syllabuses should include methods to ensure that these pilots possess a thorough understanding of the airplanes’ performance capabilities, limitations, and high

- altitude aerodynamics. (A

- 07

- 1)

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ200 Determine whether the changes to be made to the high

- altitude training syllabuses for regional jet airplanes, as requested in Safety Recommendation
A

– 07

– 1, would also enhance th e high

- altitude training syllabuses for all other transport

- category jet airplanes and, if so, require that these changes be incorporated into the syllabuses for those airplanes. (A

- 07

- 2)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 7 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ200 Require that a ir carriers provide their pilots with opportunities to practice high

- altitude stall recovery techniques in the simulator during which time the pilots demonstrate their ability to identify and execute the appropriate recovery technique. (A

- 07

- 3)

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ200 Convene a multidisciplinary panel of operational, training, and human factors specialists to study and submit a report on methods to improve flightcrew familiarity with and response to stick pusher systems and, if warranted, establish training requirements for stick pusher

- equipped airplanes based on the findings of this panel. (A

- 07

- 4)

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ200 Verify that all Canadair regional jet operators incorporate guidance in thei r double engine failure checklist that clearly states the airspeeds required during the procedure and require the operators to provide pilots with simulator training on executing this checklist. (A

- 07

- 5)

Pinnacle Airlines 3701

October 14

, 2004 NTSB

CRJ20 0 Work with pilot associations to develop a specific program of education for air carrier pilots that addresses professional standards and their role in ensuring safety of flight. The program should include associated guidance information and references t o recent accidents involving pilots acting unprofessionally or not following standard operating procedures. (A

- 07

- 8)

Flash Air;

Jan uary 3, 2004,

B

– 737 Emphasis should be made in pilot training on the following:

• Early detection and recognition of cond itions that could lead to upset condition

.

• Timely and appropriate recovery action from upset conditions to counteract sudden unknown abnormal conditions

.

American Airlines

Nov ember 12, 2001

A

– 300 Carefully review all existing and proposed guidance and t raining provided to pilots of transport

- category airplanes concerning special maneuvers intended to address unusual or emergency situations and, if necessary, require modifications to ensure that flightcrews are not trained to use the rudder in a way that could result in dangerous combinations of sideslip angle and rudder position or other flight parameters.
Adopt and disseminate written guidance for use in developing and accepting upset prevention and recovery programs; such guidance could take the form of an advisory circular and should reflect the industry ’ s best practices and be designed to avoid inaccurate or negative training.

Along with developing the guidance recommended in Safety Recommendation
A

- 04

- 61, evaluate issues concerning the level of aut omation appropriate to teaching upset training and develop and disseminate guidance that will promote standardization and minimize the danger of inappropriate simulator training.

Ethiopian Airlines

Jan uary 25, 2010

B

– 737 The operator should revise its CRM program in order to stress on the first officer assertiveness and leadership requirements especially in periods of abnormal performance.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | C

– 8 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Accid ent Accident Report Recommendation

Korean Airlines

Dec ember 22, 1999

B

– 747 Korean Air continue to update their training and FOQA programs to accommodate CRM evolution and industry developments to address issues specific to their operational environment and assure adaption of imported training material to accommodate the Korean culture.

Alliance Air

July 17, 1999

B

– 737 Alliance Air should review their pil ot training and following aspects should be emphasized

.

• Discipline in the air

• Cockpit Resource Management (CRM)

• Adherence to Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)

• Training curricula should include procedures such as recovery from “Approach to Stall” and “Clean Stall”.

Armavia

May 3, 2006

A

– 320 To review the necessity of enhancing crew simulator training in the section on flying in Flight Director mode, especially during approach and go

- around

. To organize and conduct research into the conditions unde r which a crew may lose spatial orientation and/or upset aircraft attitude may develop, and to issue practical recommendations to enhance flight safety. In particular, to evaluate the effect of in

- flight acceleration illusions. Based on the research, to develop and introduce a specialized course for recurrent training of crews that should contain both classroom and flying training.

Air Algerie

March 6, 2003

B

– 737 Air Algérie, ainsi que les autres exploitants, s’assurent que leur programme de formation co mplémentaire de type CRM sensibilise effectivement les équipages au strict respect des procédures de transfert et de répartition des tâches. (It looked important)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | D

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### APPENDIX D

— A BBREVIATIONS AND 

### D EFINITIONS
For the purpose of this document, the following d efinitions and terms are provided: These definitions were obtained from AC 120

– 109, the recommendations of the SPAW ARC report and the AURTA.

A BBREVIATIONS

ATC air traffic control

AOM Aircraft Operating Manual

AURTA Airplane Upset Recovery Training Ai d Revision 2

AOA Angle of Attack

ADI Attitude Direction Indicator

ADI attitude direction indicator

ARC Aviation Rulemaking
Committee

CG center of gravity

CFI Certified Fight Instructors

CRM Crew Resource Management

FAA Federal Aviation
Administra tion

FCOM Flight Crew Operating Manual

FSTD Flight Simulation Training
Device

FTD flight training device

FFS full flight simulator

IAS indicated airspeed

IOS Instructor Operating System

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization LOS Line Operat ional Simulation

LOFT Line

- Oriented Flight Training

LOCART Loss of Control Avoidance and Recovery Training

LOC

– I Loss of Control

– Inflight 1`

MSL mean sea level

MPL Multi crew Pilots License

NTSB National Transportation Safety
Board

OEM original equi pment manufacturers

PF pilot flying

PIO pilot induced oscillation

PM pilot monitoring

QTG Qualification Test Guide

SOP standard operating procedures

SME subject matter experts

TOGA Takeoff/Go

- around

TEM Threat and Error Management

UPRT Upset Preve ntion and Recovery Training

VS Vertical SpeedFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | D

– 2 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 D EFINITIONS

Airplane Upset An airplane in flight unintentionally exceeding the parameters normally experienced in line operations or training:

• Pitch attitude greater than 25 deg, nose up.

• Pitch attitude gre ater than 10 deg, nose down.

• Bank angle greater than 45 deg.

• Within the above parameters, but flying at airspeeds inappropriate for the conditions

Aerodynamic Stall An aerodynamic loss of lift caused by exceeding the airplane’s critical angle of attack.

Aerodynamic Stall An aerodynamic loss of lift caused by exceeding the airplane’s critical angle of attack.

Angle of Attack (AOA) The angle between the oncoming air, or relative wind, and some reference line on the airplane or wing.

Approach

- to

- Stall F light conditions bordered by stall warning and aerodynamic
stall.

Autoflight Systems The autopilot, autothrottle, and all related systems that perform flight management and guidance.

Avoidance Prevent an aircraft upset from happening.

Awareness Know ledge or perception of the situation.

Commercial Pilot Certificate Training Training conducted at the commercial pilot or MPL certificate
level.

Crew Resource Management (CRM) Effective use of all available resources: human resources, hardware, and inf ormation.

First Indication of a Stall The initial aural, tactile, or visual sign of an impending stall, which can be either naturally or synthetically induced.

Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD) A full flight simulator (FFS) or a flight training device (FTD).

Instructor Operating Station (IOS) The interface panel between the FSTD instructor and the FSTD.

Landing Configuration Starts when the landing gear is down and a landing flap setting has been selected during an approach until executing a landing,

go

- around, or missed approach.

Maneuver

- Based Training Training that focuses on a single event or maneuver in isolation.

Prevention Actions to avoid any divergence from a desired airplane state.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | D

– 3 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Scenario

- Based Training (SBT) Training that inc orporates maneuvers into real

- world experiences to cultivate practical flying skills in an operational environment.

Secondary Stall A premature increase in AOA that results in another stall event during stall recovery, before a stable flight condition be ing established.

Stall Event Anytime the airplane develops indications of an approach

- to

- stall or aerodynamic stall.

Stall Recovery Procedure The manufacturer

- approved airplane

- specific stall recovery procedure.

. If a manufacturer

- approved recovery pro cedure does not exist, the airplane

- specific stall recovery procedure developed by the operator based on the stall recovery template
in AC 120

– 109.

Stall Warning A natural or synthetic indication provided when approaching a stall that may include one or more of the following indications:

• Aerodynamic buffeting (some airplanes will buffet more than others),

• Reduced roll stability and aileron effectiveness,

• Visual or aural cues and warnings,

• Reduced elevator (pitch) authority,

• Inability to maintain alti tude or arrest rate of descent,

• Stick shaker activation (if installed).

Stick Pusher A safety system that applies downward elevator pressure to prevent an airplane from exceeding a predetermined AOA in order to avoid, identify, or assist in the recovery of an aerodynamic stall.

Startle An unexpected event that causes an emotion such as when a pilot engages autopilot in VS mode at high altitude, gets distracted while airplane runs out of thrust, loses speed and
stalls.

Surprise An event that causes a r eflex, such as a pilot wincing and blinking after windshield cracks.

Takeoff or Maneuvering Configuration The airplane’s normal configuration for takeoff, approach,

go

- around, or missed approach until all flaps/slats are retracted. Retractable landing ge ar may be extended or retracted.FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | D

– 4 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 Threat and Error Management (TEM) An overarching safety concept regarding aviation operations and human performance.

. There are three basic components in the TEM framework: threats, errors and undesired (aircraft) states. The framework proposes that threats and errors are part of everyday aviation operations that must be managed by the aviation professionals, because both threats and errors carry the potential to generate undesired aircraft states.

Type Rating Training Training that is conducted as type specific to a given aircraft.

Uncoordinated Flight Flight with lateral acceleration, such as slipping or skidding in

a turn.

Undesired Aircraft State A position, condition, or attitude of an aircraft that reduces or eliminates safety margins, including low energy states.

Unusual Attitude Synonymous with Airplane UpsetFAA 208 ARC Report

Page | E

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### APPENDIX E

— P RESENTERS 

### /SME L IST BY 

### O RGANIZATION

1 st meeting: Flight Safety Foundation (Jim Burin)
EASA (Jean Marc Cluzeau) ICAO (Henry Defalque)

2 n d meeting: International Committee for Aviation Training in Extended Envelopes (ICATEE) Upset Prevention and Recovery Training Association (UPRTA) IATA Training and Qualification Initiative/MPL Perspective Mr. Andrew Skow (Tiger Century Aircraft)

IATA Trai ning and Qualification Initiative

- MPL Civil Aviation Safety Authority

– Australia (CASA) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA)

CAE Oxford Aviation Academy (OAA)
IFALPA presentation (Capt. Dave McKenney)
UPRTA/ICA TEE Training matrix (Mr. Randy Brooks) Boeing Survey results (Dr. Barbara Holder)

3 rd meeting : IATA’S ITQI/Evidenced Based Training (EBT) Operational Suitability Data Implementation

- EASA FAA Aircraft Evaluation Group, Seattle

- Tele

- presentation

Aero plane Loss of Control Avoidance

– TCCA Perspective Managing Risk Exposure for a High

- g Environment Original Equipment Manufacturers

– OEM Training Approaches (Boeing, ATR, Embraer, Airbus)

4 th meeting: Airline Training and Upset Avoidance (Delta Air Lin es) U.S. Aviation Degree Training (University of North Dakota) Aviation College Degree

– Upset Recovery Training (Seneca College) U.S. Aviation Degree Training (University of Western Michigan)

5 th meeting : Loss of Control in the Go

- around Phase & the A F447 Report (BEA

- Fr) Pilot Core Competencies and the LOCART Initiative (IATA) IATA’s Loss of Control Industry Toolkit Concept (IATA) Simulation Training

– Loss of Control (SUPRA Project) Spatial Disorientation (DRDC)

6 th meeting: Loss of Control Prevention (CAA

- UK) Risk Mitigating Strategies (NATS) Upset Prevention and Recovery Training

– Intervention Levels (APS) Abnormal/Emergency Event Recognition (NASA)FAA 208 ARC Report

Page | F

– 1 Rev 5.0 12 Dec 2012 

### APPENDIX F

— M EMBER 

### I NFORMATION

Philip Adrian Philip.Adrian@boeing.com

Lou Nemeth lou.nemeth@ca e.com

Dave McKenney dave.mckenney@alpa.org

Chad Balentine chad.balentine@alpa.org

Paul Kolisch paul.kolisch@mesaba.com

Jim Burin jim_burin@msn.com

Rudy Canto rudy.canto@airbus.com

Paul Railsback PRailsback@airlines.org

Larry Rockliff la rry.rockliff@airbus.com

Susan McHaffie susan.mchaffie@flightsafety.com

Noam Morgenstern noam.morgenstern@gmail.com

Itash Samani itash.samani@cae.com

Karsten Liljegren karsten.liljegren@boeing.com

Gilson Russo gilson.russo@embraer.com.br

La rry Rooney flattlander1@msn.com

Mark Elliot mark.elliott@aero.bombardier.com

Jerome Bonetto Jerome.Bonetto@atr.fr