Instructor Report: Making Lemonade

A great deal of a pilot’s training is dealing with emergencies, but sometimes accidents happen to experienced and skilled pilots. Investigations into the cause allow us to train to prevent similar incidents—and if you have a simulator at your disposal, you have the means to do it.

This came home for me on June 4, 2014, when the crash of a North American AT–6C near a private airport in Washington state killed two airline transport pilots. One of the pilots had sold the airplane to the other pilot.

According to witnesses, the new owner was in the front seat when the airplane lifted off from the grass runway. The airplane was just past the departure end of the runway when the engine began to sputter and appeared to lose power. The airplane entered a turn to the right and appeared to be heading toward the runway. As the airplane continued the turn the engine lost all power, and then descended into trees.

Speculation about the cause of the crash started immediately—fuel exhaustion? Fuel line problem? Fuel selector valve? Pilot incapacitation? Several pilots noted that based on the eyewitness reports, it appeared the pilot had attempted to turn back to the airport after losing power. The debate sprang up as to whether this turn could be done with success.

At the time I was working at Safety in Motion Flight Center. The Puyallup, Washington, school was founded in 2010 around a Redbird FMX flight simulator. The Redbird FMX allows the user to adjust time of year, temperature, dew point, visibility, turbulence, wind, rain, icing, center of gravity, and fuel load. You can introduce equipment failures slowly, intermittently, or suddenly with the stroke of a key on a laptop or pad. The owner of Safety in Motion knew the two pilots in the crash and immediately offered up the use of the Redbird for local pilots to practice emergency procedures, including the loss of thrust on takeoff. He wanted to have a day where pilots could come in and practice emergency training to prevent further fatalities.

Pay attention to the ease of use for both the CFI and client. You want the clients to learn something, not to go home dejected.This is where I picked up the ball. I was well-versed in the use of the Redbird. In 2012 I was part of the Pilot Proficiency Program (PPP) put on by the Society of Aviation and Flight Educators and National Association of Flight Instructors, first launched at EAA AirVenture. The PPP uses a Redbird FMX to put pilots through a series of training scenarios based on the top 10 causal factors identified in aviation accidents. The scenarios included density altitude, crosswinds, icing encounters, VFR into IMC, intermittent loss of engine power, and loss of thrust on takeoff. By 2014 I had in excess of 1,000 hours teaching in a Redbird FMX and had participated in several PPP events.

I sent an email to the boss, telling him I could draw on that experience, combined with 15 years of writing accident reports for General Aviation News, to create emergency scenarios. Writing those reports, I often could see the chain of mistakes that led to accidents. I decided to focus on accidents that had happened in the Pacific Northwest over the past 25 years, and used the Redbird FMX in its Cessna 172 configuration because it is the most common aircraft.

I went through NTSB records looking for accidents where the causal factors were clearly identified. VFR into IMC was a big one, as was fuel exhaustion. There were also too much crosswind/not enough pilot skill, density altitude at a mountain airstrip, flight into icing, hazy approach into sunset, overloaded airplane, shifting center of gravity, wake turbulence on takeoff, total instrument failure, nighttime thunderstorm, GPS failure in MVFR—and the worst of the worst, loss of thrust on takeoff. Using those factors, I set up scenarios for a local event.

The SAFE/NAFI Pilot Proficiency Project uses 30-minute sessions to allow for prebriefing, simulator time, and debrief. In Puyallup, the boss wanted as many people as possible to go through the training in an eight-hour period. I was able to trim the sessions down to 12 minutes.

The training was brought to the public at an August 2014 FAASTeam event. We posted each scenario on a large whiteboard outside the simulator to allow the pilots to pick the one they wanted, and included a sign-up sheet.

During SAFE/NAFI Pilot Proficiency Project events, one CFI briefs while another “flies” with a client and a third debriefs. Only two CFIs were available for our event, so the chief instructor handled client prebriefing in the classroom, and then we flew and I took care of the debrief in the simulator.

After each scenario, I signed the client’s logbook or filled out a sticker that the pilot could put in a logbook later.

Creating such a program begins with research. Once you find the accidents to re-create, plan to spend about one hour building each scenario. Be sure to include the reason for the flight, such as, “You have to deliver the sound system to a friend’s retirement party; you are running late, and the weather is deteriorating. You have a GPS onboard your aircraft, although you have never used it to do an instrument approach.” Risk factors for each scenario should be included, with an emphasis on decision-making skills and identifying hazardous attitudes.

Make sure to have the performance diagrams for the airplane, along with any approach plates or sectionals that factor into the accident, for reference during scenario creation. You will also need them to create the lesson plans for each scenario.

Each scenario has to be saved on the simulator computer. Take care to program the precise temperature and dew point; visibility, including time of day; winds; cloud clearances; weight and balance of the aircraft; and runway conditions.

Some scenarios are so graphic-intensive that they may overtax the computer, causing it to crash. I learned this at EAA AirVenture. The more a scenario demanded of the computer (a nighttime thunderstorm comes to mind), the more likely the computer was to crash mid-performance. If the scenario results in frequent computer crashes, you may eliminate it, or cut it back considerably. During AirVenture we had also pointed box fans at the computer to keep the unit cool, and did periodic shutdowns to reduce crashes from overheating. I made arrangements to have two large box fans pointed at the computer on the day of the local event.

The scenarios need to be flyable by a wide audience of pilots. Three of my students—a commercial pilot, an instrument candidate, and a presolo student pilot—agreed to be test subjects in the Redbird. When test-flying the scenarios, pay attention to the time it takes to fly each scenario, and the ease of use for both the CFI and client. You want the clients to learn something, not to go home dejected.

It took about three hours to polish the scenarios and make hard copies of each lesson plan and the required reference materials. Provide notes for the CFIs as to how to administer each scenario in the simulator. For example, the wake-turbulence scenario required the CFI to manually drag the winds on the finger pad to create wake. All this can be kept in a binder in the simulator for easy reference.

With the right scenarios, your students will learn from the mistakes of others and develop valuable risk assessment and decision-making skills.

Meg Godlewski is an aviation journalist and Gold Seal flight instructor.