Skybrary has an article about TEM.
Obviously it is yet another HP&L (JAA ATPL Human Perf & Limitations) invention, but whether anyone in GA can make use of it must depend on detailed examples, which nobody has yet given. Or maybe I am just thick and unable to think in non-engineering terms.
Threat & Error Management is a biggie here down under.
It’s also called the supercompetency, in other words the competency that overarches all we do.
Threats can be internal or external. (i.e. personal fatigue, or busy traffic)
Threats lead to Errors. (i.e. checklist item forgotten, wrong flap setting etc.)
Errors lead to an Undesired Aircraft State (i.e. incident or accident).
The whole goal of TEM is to manage the threats, so they don’t evolve into Errors, so they don’t evolve into an incident or accident.
For example you notice a lot of birds (external threat), so you turn the lights on.
Or you know on the weekend a certain field you overfly is going to be very busy (external threat), so you pay attention to lookout and the radio.
Or you feel tired (internal threat), so you take more time during your checks and do them very deliberate, or you double check your checks if you’re not certain.
That is managing the threats and errors.
Good Threat and Error Management will help keep you safe.
OK… but how much of this is what one might call knowing how to fly a plane and managing risks tactically?
We have had many threads where views were expressed like (this one is mine) avoid flying in the UK below 2000ft especially on a weekend, due to tons of traffic much of which is non-TXP so invisible to traffic warning systems.
There was a thread here years ago where a school blocked one of their FIs going flying because her mother had died. The school went about it in a very backhand way, behind the FI’s back, however, which was IMHO symptomatic of other issues at that school. But should an adult FI not be able to make that judgement?
Turning on lights upon seeing birds is a good one, but how long a list could you make like that? One could list 10 things which should make one turn lights on.
So I have a feeling that trying to formalise this would generate a very long list of specific actions. And if such a list is not generated, people won’t know what to do because it will be vague. A new pilot isn’t going to be aware of the various issues.
This is partly tongue in cheek, but if they are to cram more material into the PPL (for which there is no room already and IMHO most students aren’t really interested in doing legally mandatory ground school) why not teach people to fly from A to B?
I did learn a good one last year, on one really horrid day when I got engine oil blown all over me: if things aren’t going well, do your checklist extra carefully!
Peter wrote:
Turning on lights upon seeing birds is a good one, but how long a list could you make like that? One could list 10 things which should make one turn lights on.So I have a feeling that trying to formalise this would generate a very long list of specific actions. And if such a list is not generated, people won’t know what to do because it will be vague. A new pilot isn’t going to be aware of the various issues.
No, the list would not be long. Also it are not specific actions! You are applying “rote” thinking, which is a very basic level of learning.
Rather the aim is to keep thinking as a pilot, trying to identify threats (before and during the flight), and manage these threats in order to minimize them. This requires application/correlation of knowledge, which is the highest level of learning.
Once you master this you are a good and safe pilot, and that is why TEM is sometimes called the supercompetency.
To put it the other way around: you could make an argument that everything we do in flying comes down to risk management.
For example: you are not very current on the aircraft type (internal threat), so you don’t go flying on a windy day (external threat), or you take an instructor with you. If the threats are left unmanaged, it can lead to loss of situational awareness, missing traffic (error) or a misjudged landing flare (error), which can lead to an Undesired Aircraft State (collapsed nose gear).
Archie wrote:
It’s also called the supercompetency, in other words the competency that overarches all we do.
In essence this is airmanship IMO, especially when looking at the examples.
The grass is wet – land as close to the threshold as possible to be sure you can stop and prepare for a touch and go.
And so on.
Airmanship:
Airmanship can be defined as:2
A sound acquaintance with the principles of flight,
The ability to operate an airplane with competence and precision both on the ground and in the air, and
The exercise of sound judgment that results in optimal operational safety and efficiency.
Airborne_Again wrote:
I would guess that the “load of bull” is an attempt to teach airmanship, as opposed to achieving it by a combination of natural aptitude and experience.
How do you change the attitude of old men? It’s not the attitude that is wrong. It’s the actions or lack of actions due to wrong thinking or lack of thinking. Looking at it like that, TEM may not be that stupid. It forces you to think more correct in a structured way that makes sense airmanship-wise.
We can call it numerous things but sticking with the abbreviation of the moment, TEM is not about how to do things, it is about how to think. We were talking about DODAR the other day and that is actually a mechanism of TEM. When I fly with junior pilots they get sick of me asking them why they have done something. Ironically, it’s normally to do with landing lights. 
I’m trying to get them to think about their actions rather than just regurgitating something they were taught to do without consideration. Of course, the next step is for them to think ahead, consider potential risks and develop sensible mitigations.
I’m like others, I would call it Airmanship but times change and we feel a need to prescribe everything, sometimes missing the point that the very act of be prescriptive dilutes the message.
It would appear the CAA are quite keen on this being introduced into all aspects of flight training
Its actually been with us for the past 100 years
In 1917 Robert Smith-Barry devised a system of pilot training based upon:
Threats – exposing pilots to known threats rather than shying away from them
Errors – learning common errors and how to avoid them
Learning how to Deal with them
He could have called it T.E.D. but in those days it was simply referred to as The Gosport System and has been the basis of European pilot training for the past 100 years. It took about 87 years to reinvent the wheel!
Indeed, nothing new, just terminology. TEM (Airmanship) is sorely lacking in today’s pilots, predominately due to the way we train. they can regurgitate the phrase that pay but have little interest or capability in making practical use.
