Blanket statements and flying safety
When an applicant refers to an instructor as the source for a specific area of knowledge or the reason for a procedure or technique, examiners know (or should know) that because the applicant's source is but one person, the likelihood skyrockets that an issue is based on an opinion or unfounded idea rather than a reliable, certifiable source. This happens far too often. If standardization in transfer of knowledge were an accomplished fact, this would not happen at all. You may find this a bold statement, but consider an instructor's function. For every certificate or rating, the Practical Test Standards state clearly the flight instructor's responsibility. "Because of the impact of their teaching activities in developing safe, proficient pilots, flight instructors should exhibit a high level of knowledge, skill, and the ability to impart that knowledge and skill to students." That knowledge has traceable sources.
I recently overheard a flight instructor teaching a gathering of new students the fine art of preflight inspection. Arriving at the nosewheel, friend instructor pointed to a silvery oleo strut. "I don't know where he found this, but my instructor told me that if this has about three fingers of silver showing, then it is good." I could almost see the ghostly dark robe and bony hand of complacency claiming a new crop of pilots before they had even left the ground. Was that instructor imparting knowledge as required by the PTS, or was this a dissemination of opinion? Where did the instructor's instructor find that information? How does the latest in a long line of instructors know with certainty that the information is correct?
A more important question, at least from the standpoint of the nonflying public: Will the pilot examiner community ascertain that applicants demonstrate true correlative abilities when such matters arise? As you or your instructor might find that statement confusing, consider: The PTS advises pilot examiners that "Examiners shall test to the greatest extent practicable the applicant's correlative abilities rather than mere rote enumeration of facts throughout the practical test." When reliable documents such as manufacturer manuals are available, does the statement, "My instructor told me..." meet the correlation criteria? Would the instructional session above have yielded a better long-range outcome if the flight instructor had said something like, "This information is not in the pilot's information manual, but the shop's maintenance manual gives mechanics a range of allowable inflation for the nose strut. I have for you some excerpts from those manuals, or feel free to review those manuals in the shop"? With that style of teaching, new pilots receive reinforcement in the importance of grounding their knowledge in traceable and reliable sources.
Chapter 8 of The Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9) discusses the responsibilities of aviation instructors. There, instructors discover that they are to help students learn, provide adequate instruction, demand adequate standards of performance, and to emphasize the positive. A flight instructor might think that he is helping his students to learn by making learning easy through shortcuts or blanket statements. However, the handbook correctly teaches: "The idea that people must be led to learning by making it easy is a fallacy." A multitude of reliable information sources from the FAA, the manufacturer, and more exists to help your students learn. If you are a student, one of the most productive phrases you could ever adopt is "Based on what?" any time a blanket statement does not include a source. (This is not to challenge your instructor's knowledge or authority, but merely to seek a reference.)
DPEs play as vital a role in this process by asking for slightly more information than we too often do. When applicants discuss nose strut inflation during preflight inspection, they might say something like "That strut is properly inflated" and move on, or they might proudly show their perceived additional knowledge by saying something like "This strut meets the three-finger rule, so it is in order." Examiners are responsible to correlate by determining how, not just that, our applicants judge the equipment's suitability for flight. We are to, in effect, say, "Based on what?" to statements that are presented as fact.
Returning to our training session, imagine the result if one of these new learners had been dissatisfied with merely taking somebody's word for an issue that might easily affect one's life, and had asked, "Based on what?" when offered the three-finger shortcut. The flight instructor could repeat that his instructor had told him, but our new learner would be justified in querying again, "Based on what?" For that one flight instructor, the mediocre cycle of simply taking people's word would crumble. Not that their word is no good, nor that their intentions are not good. But we all know where it ends, that road paved with good intentions.
Returning to the Aviation Instructor's Handbook, pages 8-2 and 8-3 discuss a surprising amount of demand placed on an instructor to serve as a practical psychologist. Strong reliance on established aviation references, again including FAA sources such as the Aeronautical Information Manual, the Flight Training Handbook, and the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge--coupled with manufacturer publications including the pilot's operating handbook and even maintenance manuals--creates an unshakable base for the instruction you render or receive. Your flight instructor role as a practical psychologist, in the FAA definition, becomes well-focused. The handbook continues by discussing standards of performance, which is directly related to this discussion. An easily overlooked statement on page 8-3 notes: "Instructors fail to provide competent instruction when they permit their students to get by with a substandard performance, or without learning thoroughly some item of knowledge pertinent to safe piloting. More importantly, such deficiencies may in themselves allow hazardous inadequacies in student performance later on." Pilots must be familiar with source references.
Pilot examiners hold a unique position to ensure that pilots are not only detail-oriented, but source-oriented. As mentioned above, DPEs are duty-bound to examine correlative abilities, but the issue is also one of demonstrating sound judgment. Every PTS lists "demonstrate sound judgment" as a key component to satisfactory performance. Is it demonstration of sound judgment to rely on "somebody told me that..." in lieu of being able to say "The manufacturer says..."? What greater confidence can an applicant, a flight instructor sending an applicant, or the families of that instructor or applicant have than to know that reliable documents rule their coming mastery of the air? Examiners are the valves regulating this confidence.
What can you do now to send complacency packing? As a flight instructor, consider briefing your every student to feel free to ask this question any time you make a blanket statement that has no source: "Based on what?" Explain that you will not consider the question a challenge or otherwise rude, but an honest search for fact. Always crave the source. Students, realize that not every printed source is reliable, and verbal statements are as reliable as the paper on which they are printed. Ask your instructor "Based on what?" when presented with statements or shortcuts whose sources you need to know. For DPEs, well--this question is our duty.
Dave Wilkerson is a designated pilot examiner, writer/photographer, and historian. He has been a certificated flight instructor since 1981 with approximately 2,000 hours of dual instruction, and is a single- and multiengine commercial-rated pilot.
Related Articles
