Aviation is primarily a mental pursuit. Although the training process largely ignores this in favor of rote memorization and physical motor skills (stalls ad nauseam anyone?), the fact is that learning to fly is all about being a safe pilot, yet little if any attention is paid to how to actually do that.
Take those stalls. If you are in training, chances are that you have practiced approximately 9,462 stalls. But I would bet my pilot certificate that you’ve talked about avoiding stalls fewer than three times. In most cases, it’s probably zero. The reason why is perfectly clear and logical. The FAA tests pilots almost exclusively on physical skills, not decision making. Your instructor would actually be doing you a disservice if the opposite were true.
To its credit, the FAA, in connection with industry partners, has tried to get away from the old model by pushing the FITS program (FAA-Industry Training Standards). Key to the standard is the concept of scenario-based training, or the incorporation of real-life applications into the training process. The thinking is that if a pilot learns the maneuvers in the larger context of the flying environment, and not just in the controlled world of the training environment, that he or she will develop better skills and better judgment. That’s wonderful—assuming it works. But one of the major problems is that the FAA’s own testing procedures, while in some cases trying mightily to incorporate scenarios, will never get to the level at which they test judgment more than skill.
The practical test standard for diversions is a good example. If there were ever a strictly decision-based maneuver, this is it. We can’t—or shouldn’t try to—make it safely to our destination, so we must first decide to divert, then chose an airport, and then fly to it. But the test standard includes maintaining altitude and course, and only a standard line about, “exhibits knowledge related to diversion.” In other words, we don’t care whether or not you make a proper decision, but we want to make sure you don’t gain a little altitude.
At Flight Training we fall into this trap this month with our story on how to properly execute a diversion (“Technique: Diversion”). The story is useful, if for no other reason than it teaches what you will be tested on. But it doesn’t get to the decision-making portion of the maneuver, which is critically important. All one has to do to verify this is look through the accident database. Too often, a simple diversion would have avoided the accident. That could be said for everything from thunderstorm encounters to crosswind-landing accidents. I think our downfall as pilots here comes primarily from one of our best skills—the ability to plan.
On a road trip, stopping to make a pit stop or because you need to stretch your legs is no big deal. But with flying, we plan the flight so meticulously, especially early in our flying careers, that doing something off the plan can be daunting. Associate Editor Jill Tallman has a good solution for this. She simply plans the alternate, too. Thus the commitment to a new destination is made easier because you’re following an equally well-developed plan.
As you continue to build experience, use diversions for fun. Decide midway along your trip to stop somewhere else. Each time the process will get easier until one day, not making your planned destination won't be a concern.
Related Articles
