Today’s automobiles are equipped with myriad safety features. Some have autonomous emergency brakes (AEB) that will stop the car without driver input if it senses a rapidly approaching obstacle. They have air bags that can turn themselves on or off depending on the weight of the person in the seat. They even have something called adaptive cruise control, which varies its speed based on the speed of other cars.
While these features are designed to keep drivers safe, they do not come without risk. For example, most cars with AEB only self-brake at lower speeds. If a driver doesn’t fully understand the system, he or she may expect it to work on the highway—with disastrous consequences. Even if drivers do understand the limitations, they may rely on the system too much, causing them to focus less than they normally would on obstacles in front of them. The very mechanisms intended to increase safety can reduce that safety margin when used improperly.
Aviation is facing a similar situation. Modern airplanes have everything from parachutes to terrain and traffic avoidance displays. They have autopilots, moving maps, and satellite weather. And although these features absolutely have the ability to make flying safer than ever before, they also have pitfalls.
When instructing today’s student pilots, it’s no longer enough to teach the basic stick-and-rudder skills necessary to operate your simple training aircraft. Once a student gets a certificate, the whole world of aviation is open. They may be operating an aircraft with a ballistic parachute system or perhaps a glass cockpit equipped with a ground proximity warning system and traffic collision avoidance system. On the private pilot checkride, it is very likely that your student pilot applicant won’t have to do much more than demonstrate a working knowledge of those systems currently installed. But is that enough? As instructors, our first priority is developing safe pilots. That means we have a responsibility to teach not only basic operating knowledge of the standard safety systems, but also to point out their downsides and caution against complacency.
Aircraft parachute systems. While flying a Cirrus with its owner, an instructor friend lost an engine shortly after climbing into instrument meteorological conditions. The owner wanted to pull the parachute; my instructor friend wanted to make an emergency landing at the airport he knew was still behind him. They landed safely without having to pull the chute, but its presence was a distraction. Something that was meant to increase safety ended up being one more thing the pilot had to consider in a high-stress emergency situation. With that in mind, aircraft manufacturers have developed excellent training programs that outline exactly which situations warrant pulling the chute and which do not. Just as engine-out scenarios should be briefed before every takeoff, so too should any action on the parachute.
Satellite weather. Many pilots fly with some sort of tablet or portable navigation device to increase situational awareness. When used for that purpose, safety margins can be drastically improved. However, when the tablet also is uplinked to satellite weather, it can get pilots into trouble because the information inevitably has delays—as much as 10 minutes—even when the system is working properly. Because of this, it should never be used to shoot the gap between thunderstorm cells. Staying 20 miles away from any mature thunderstorm is still the safest practice.
Traffic and terrain avoidance systems. Again, these systems can vastly improve the chance to avoid a midair collision or a controlled flight into terrain accident, but only when used by a well-trained pilot who understands the limitations. Remember, a head-down environment is not a safe one. There is no substitute for that original collision avoidance system: looking outside. Know the basics of these systems, such as what the various shades of terrain indicate, and exactly what traffic is being shown.
GPS and moving map displays. I am embarrassed to say that moving maps have become such an integral part of everyday flying life that I feel a twinge of discomfort when embarking on a new cross-country without the aid of a GPS. But why should I? People have been navigating using good old-fashioned pilotage and dead reckoning for years. While the GPS certainly can make cross-country flying easier, we always need to maintain situational awareness using other navigational aids, such as a sectional chart or VOR, just in case that little screen goes black. Magenta line dependency is dangerous.
Autopilot. For long cross-countries and single-pilot operations, an autopilot is an extremely helpful resource—so helpful, in fact, that it can create an automation-dependent pilot with rapidly degrading flying skills if used too frequently. Autopilots have been known to malfunction and take unsuspecting pilots on wild rides. So, teach your students that autopilot operation and multiple methods of disconnection must be tested as part of every preflight.
As aircraft become more technically advanced, so too will the systems designed to increase our safety. We have a responsibility to teach our students more than just a basic knowledge of the systems they will inevitably encounter. We also have to impart the perspective that those things can only help protect us when used by a proficient and properly trained pilot.
Related Articles
