Randy, a Certified Flight Instructor from Florida, writes: Hey, Wildman, you teach CFIs right? I’m hoping you can help me out. I’m already a CFI, but I’m at a loss for how to go about teaching my students… er… learners… aeronautical decision making (ADM). The Aviation Instructor’s Handbook tells me: “The importance of teaching learners effective ADM skills cannot be overemphasized,” but then it doesn’t tell me how to go about doing that. What guidance do you give your fledgling instructors in this regard?
For perspective, know that ADM is a somewhat new thing. Back in the Old Days when I was coming up, your first cert was considered your license to learn. I think the examiner even told me as much when he handed me my private pilot certificate. That was a shock. I thought I’d learned everything I needed to know during flight training!
Yes, in those days, it was go forth and get smart or die. And my peers did both, in about equal numbers.
The world has changed, for the better, thank goodness.
Now, instead of just teaching stick and rudder skills, a few rules and regs, and turning our learners loose, we attempt to teach our up-and-coming aviators how to think about flight — ADM — as well as how to fly.
Of course, what we are really attempting to do is to teach experience without experience, no small thing.
And making it harder, I believe that much of what we teach — well, more properly, how we teach much of what we teach — doesn’t encourage thinking, which is what ADM is all about.
So what advice do I give my instructor candidates?
I suggest that they do a half barrel roll and fly inverted.
Metaphorically, of course.
I believe that we can more effectively prime the pump of thinking by turning conventional wisdom (and conventional teaching) on its head.
Take pre-flight, for instance. Most pilots approach preflight with the thought process that they’re just double checking to make sure that nothing is wrong with the plane before flight. Instead, I propose teaching this inverted: Assume that something is wrong, and embrace the challenge of finding it. Walk up to the plane and ask it: OK, you little son of a biscuit, how are you going to try to kill me today?
Instructors can help this process along by “sabotaging” the plane with increasing complexity as the learner advances. This battles complacency.
Let’s face it, how often do you really find something deadly dangerous on a preflight? Not often, which leads to some expectation bias over time that nothing will be found. On the other hand, if your student pilot knows that you will leave something for her to find, her mindset is different. She develops a keener eye and, hopefully, a life-long approach to preflight that’s primed to find anything that’s there is to be found.
Likewise, I don’t believe in landings. Or that we should teach landings, anyway. Instead we should be teaching that every approach is a go-around until all the stars align in the heavens just right, and we are 100% satisfied that it’s safe to land.
Back in my day, we pilots took great pride in “salvaging” a bad landing. It makes me embarrassed to admit that now. What a moronic approach to approaches.
But this inverted world view is most useful with the Go/No-Go decision — the ultimate hard-to-teach element of ADM.
We typically teach new pilots that when planning a flight, there are a number of factors to consider that might cause us to change our minds and not go after all. Weather is the biggie, of course, but so, too, we try to teach new pilots to consider their own physical, mental, and emotional fitness. Are you recovering from COVID? How well did you sleep? Did your dog just die?
Again, I don’t believe that this is the right approach. Do a half barrel roll. Instead of teaching a Go/No-Go decision, consider teaching a No-Go/Go decision. Wouldn’t ADM work better if the new pilot starts with the default setting of “we are not flying today,” and then looks for factors to convince her otherwise? Okay, the weather is good. The plane is fit for the mission. I’m relaxed, I’m well hydrated, I’m healthy, I got a good night’s sleep…
So much for pre-flight. I think that ADM is currently pretty well taught in the air by creating diversion scenarios, pulling the throttle to simulate engine outs, and announcing that the left nav light just shorted out and the wing is on fire (what do you do now?).
But what about once the flight is finished? Does ADM stop when the gyros spool down and the tiedown ropes are properly secured?
I have a new idea about this, although I have to confess that it’s not mine. Rather, this one comes from one of my current crop of CFI candidates. (The best thing about being a teacher is that you get exposed to all kinds of great ideas from your learners.) While we typically quiz student pilots before a flight about what they see as the potential risks as a way of developing ADM, this gold-star candidate suggested we also do the opposite. After the flight ask: What could have happened today if things had played out a little differently?
It’s a lovely half-barrel roll. It asks the learner to consider that if planning, skill, and just “plane” dumb luck had aligned a little differently, what negative things could have happened?
It trumps even the best scenario, as it’s 100% real. Looked at through the lens of immediate hindsight, we may be able to identify risks we’d otherwise ignore (as nothing bad happened), and create plans and thought processes to mitigate them in the future.
Call it post flight ADM. After all, a good flight lesson ends with a good debrief, right? So why not add a dose of post flight ADM while you’re at it?
William E. Dubois is a Master Ground Instructor accredited by both NAFI and Master Instructors, who teaches CFIs how to teach for the largest flight school in the nation. He likes to make his learners fly upside down, at least metaphorically.
Lot of well meaning effort to license people that probably shouldn’t be flying. And the insurance rates show it.
The author’s thoughts may work with some “students”, but not all.
If you want to teach aviation, or any other process “you” must learn how the student learns.
Everyone learns differently. If the student doesn’t connect with the instructor, it’s time to look for another instructor.
Two years ago when checking out at a flight school for renting the instructor I had was very aggressive in his teaching. I am older, senior and not easily intimidated. I learned and we had fun.
He does or teach younger students. I asked him why. His answer was, “they already know everything “.
That’s the 15 hour solo student. If as a student you fly often, at least once a week and you have average thought and coordination they should be able to solo around 10 hours.
Much longer and you will discourage the students.
As I recall, my first private pilot’s certificate in 1971 came with a clear legend-statement printed across the top of the card, roughly like this…
“The holder of this certificate is authorized to exercise the PRIVILAGE of airmanship”
My flight instructor… Dad, a high time ex military pilot… explained that this wording unambiguously meant that I had been granted a legal/revocable PRIVILAGE… NEVER A GOD-GIVEN RIGHT… to operate an aircraft in the USA… and had to do so under the governing USA rules and regulations as a private pilot.
IF I had to deviate from any governing rule, law or principle while flying, I HAD TO HAVE A DAMMMM GOOD REASON to do so. In the air good order and discipline is essential… otherwise people die and good airplanes and property are damaged needlessly and senselessly.
Dad/instructor did recognize that I had to learn on my own… and make mistakes in the process to ‘temper my metal’… but He emphasized [2] absolute rules, thus…
#1 Plan Ahead and fly ahead of the aircraft at EVERY moment! Dad had attended too many funerals for good people who took un-planned/unwise actions… at the last moment or due to a self-inflicted sense of urgency [like gethomeitis].
#2 WHEN [not IF] I do something that is on the raw-edge to test my self [skills and courage need to be developed/tested]… and IF I could get hurt or killed if I fail the ‘test’… then make DAM SURE THAT NO ONE ELSE could get hurt by my actions. Hmmm… funny how that reinforced rule #1.
“Experience is a hard teacher, because she gives the test first, the lesson afterward.” –Vern Law, baseball player
Outstanding comment. On a long XC I pass the time by “finding” a risk, mitigating it, and repeat. Every landing IS a go around…let an actual roll out be a happy surprise. We had a mentoring group that was very safety oriented. It became the CULTURE of Lee airport to respect operational safety. I am not God’s gift to aviation, but I fly like I practiced ICU nursing – Find a risk and mitigate it. I am sure you and my long suffering CFII, Bill Outten, would respect one another’s influence on your students. Oh! And damn RIGHT it’s a privilege!
I’d be very careful “sabotaging” the preflight. That is just setting both the student and instructor up for failure. I used to set up “Easter Eggs” in a flight simulator to see if students were doing a thorough cockpit preflight, but would not even consider doing it in an airplane I’m planning to fly. Safety first.
I put a sticky note in a place that needs to be inspected. Be sure you note where you put them, they are not always found.
And only cause discussions when not found, not safety problems.
I dunno about this … Back when I started teaching in the ‘90s, we typically soloed students inside of 15 hours. Now how long is it taking too solo? Fifty-some go-arounds? I believe in scenario-based training, but as an “old-school:” freelance CFI, I’m finding the younger set of students don’t want to hear my stories, or the mistakes I’ve made as a pilot. Maybe I should “sabotage:” their preflight to get their attention.
Sorry for my criticism here to what I see as negative training. The best flight training I received was enabling, not defeating. My best CFI some 30 years ago even started out each flight with prayer — and I needed that!
Has more emphasis on ADM led to fewer student starts? It apparently hasn’t succeeded in fewer VFR into IMC or CFIT situations.
I agree, if we want to increase the number of private pilots we need to make it easier not harder. The local flight school considers 60 hours of instruction to be about average. With plane rental and instructor a new student is looking at $15k
Needless to say the dropout rate is quite high. Add in a bunch of bs stuff about preflight and students are quickly turned off.
Now if you are wanting to shrink GA, you are on the right path.
I understand how you feel on this, but doesn’t fewer pilots translate into safer pilots? I love how GA is expanding, but rushing them into the air does not seem wise. If students are “turned off” by the training they need, that is a level of safety I can deal with.
Nice article that promotes critical thinking. I hope many other CFI’s read this. Consider ADM as an extension or mix of judgement and risk management along with basic stick and rudder skills plus knowledge that makes the pilot more competent.