Nowadays, with modern aircraft it isn’t really meaningful, unless one sets up failure scenarios which need a detailed knowledge of aircraft systems and interconnections, which few pilots have.
It is no longer the simple “electrics failure, use the vacuum instruments”.
A lot of anachronisms in old skool integrated training:
- around 25 hours in an MEP (borderline training for a multi engine turbofan), eventually the shortage of MEP/IR instructors will finally phase out the MEP, even in its niche as a trainer
- Limited panel using a turn coordinator
- Bashing the NDB hold with an ADF
The MPL programs have a quality feedback loop between the airline and the training provider, and hence MPL programs continue to diverge from the integrated courses, focusing on more relevant behaviours.
Peter wrote:
Nowadays, with modern aircraft it isn’t really meaningful, unless one sets up failure scenarios which need a detailed knowledge of aircraft systems and interconnections, which few pilots have.
Perhaps it would be more helpful to demonstrate ability to shoot an approach using the synthetic vision in ForeFlight, or fly headings by only referencing the GPS ground track…
It probably becomes more critical to understand the failure modes of the avionics and what will and won’t be available.
Just to inject a note of reality as far as anachronisms go… I just did a “mock” of the French PPL theory questions, thoughtfully provided by a French aeroclub.
One of the questions was about where/how to get weather information. The correct answer is “call a weather forecaster or use Minitel”.
I’d say that partial panel is still very important – but a different type of partial panel.
Many pilots have never even tried to fly 10 min in IMC on standby AI with PFD down (and in some planes the standby is at some weird position where it is not so easy to look at it while flying).
“No GPS” is another very relevant “partiality” that should be trained: What does still work and what doesn’t? How do you find your way w/o gps, etc.
Also, what Dutch proposed (flying with firelight synthetic vision) is a great thing to “train” just to figure out that it is really not an option with a yoke mounted pad that turns with the yoke…
Malibuflyer wrote:
Also, what Dutch proposed (flying with firelight synthetic vision) is a great thing to “train” just to figure out that it is really not an option with a yoke mounted pad that turns with the yoke…
I am interested to try this sometime with FF connected to my FlightStream 210, which gives it an external AHRS.
Malibuflyer wrote:
I’d say that partial panel is still very important – but a different type of partial panel.Many pilots have never even tried to fly 10 min in IMC on standby AI with PFD down (and in some planes the standby is at some weird position where it is not so easy to look at it while flying).
Aye.
I had my PFD turning black in IMC. This tought me a lesson or two. Without PFD there is no autopilot in my setup. Luckily we were two pilots on board, so we just had something to discuss but without serious work overload. Since then I did some partial panel training, so I think it really is still highly important.
Luckily my standby AI is right in the view.
And I also was trying to setup some apple device using additional AHRS source, but so far found nothing working reliably stable. It’s toys, maybe not even working in VMC. I don’t think that it could be called a serious additional level of security.
No it does not make sense. Glass PFD require AI backup. Either garmin and dynon require a self powered backup system, and the garmin backup can drive the A/P.
It is about time to revise the sylabus, take away piles of crapy materials that the only point is to confuse, waste time and focus on real useful parts that are important for safely fly an airplane.
