By SCOTT FIRSING
Both the US Senate and House of Representatives officially passed FAA extension bills before the end of 2023. Crisis averted. The FAA can keep operating through the new deadline, March 8, 2024.
That extra time gives the Senate an opportunity to discuss some of the finer terms laid out in the five-year FAA Reauthorization Bill.
A full draft of the bill initially passed the House of Representatives in the summer of 2023.
And there’s a lot of meat on this bone. As U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) explains, the “bill addresses airport infrastructure, workforce challenges, ATC staffing, protections for passengers, the safety framework, manufacturing. I could go on. It is an important bill that makes progress towards solving some of the challenges facing aviation.”
Cruz’s job, along with his fellow committee members, is to unjam a jam over certain aviation topics, some of which deal specifically with pilot training.
One hotly debated topic is increasing the number of simulator hours a pilot can log as part of the 1,500 hours the FAA requires to become an Airline Transport Pilot.
Members of the National Flight Training Alliance (NFTA), which includes flight school owners and others heavily involved in flight training, know how important training in an advanced flight simulator is.
NFTA officials spent a lot of time in Washington, D.C., at the end of 2023, going up and down the halls of Congress, explaining to elected officials and their staff what we see every day while training new pilots.
And what we see is that the latest simulator technology creates a very realistic environment for pilots to practice a whole host of skills, ranging from stick and rudder skills to communication with the tower or with fellow pilots.
There’s also science behind the use of a simulator. Part of the training is about creating “neurological” muscle memory that pilots develop through repeated practice of specific skills.
It’s similar to how you haven’t ridden a bicycle in several years, but then you jump on and just go without thinking about it.
It’s all related to motor learning that occurs in the central nervous system. When you repeat something, like an abnormal situation in an aircraft cockpit in a high fidelity flight simulator, your brain and spinal cord work both in tandem and independently to create strong and efficient neural pathways that transmit the appropriate signals to the body part that needs to be activated.
Simulators help create this kind of muscle memory, which means your brain no longer has to think as much about the movement.
Moreover, we need simulators to recreate and practice emergency procedures and scenarios.
Scientific studies, including high-level peer-reviewed journal articles on human factors, have shown that adding in unpredictability and variability into a simulator training session, such as a surprise test, improves pilot responses, requiring a pilot to apply the practiced skills, which reinforces learning.
Another important overlooked element of flight simulators is the benefit you receive by teaching in one.
Albert Einstein famously said, if you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.
Pilots are truly professionally developed by exercising their Certified Flight Instructor (CFI) privileges and teaching others. CFIs have both a high proficiency and skill level due to the preparation needed to deliver flight instruction.
The flight time while teaching, especially in a simulator, is far superior to other methods allowed for logging flight experience, like flying around by yourself in single-engine piston aircraft in perfect weather conditions in quiet airspace.
Scientific research studies have proven teaching a topic to someone else helps you, as the teacher, learn. It’s known as the Protégé Effect.
New regulations should acknowledge this.
Additionaly, the flight training industry, as well as the rest of the general aviation community, needs to remind Congress that most U.S. pilot regulations have not been genuinely modernized in decades.
FAA regulations do not allow for innovation in aircraft simulation and current educational techniques. Additionally, the process used by the FAA to update regulations is overly cumbersome and lengthy and, frankly, is unable to address this critical infrastructure necessity.
Because it is general aviation that trains private pilots who eventually become commercial pilots who work at the airlines and other institutions, flight training advocates strongly suggest the FAA create a new committee composed of leaders in the pilot certification process.
They are the ones who can provide accurate input into the current state of America’s flight training industry. Collectively these flight schools own hundreds of airplanes and train thousands of pilots a year. They have a depth of knowledge and experience second to none.
Congress does have a plethora of issues to discuss after the holiday season, but they need to remember aviation is a critical part of our national infrastructure.
The pilot shortage and “updating” flight training in America via finalizing the Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act will guide this vital industry over the next five years and beyond.
Scott Firsing PhD is the owner of Scott Sky Advisors, an aviation consultancy in Austin, Texas, that assists aircraft OEMs and simulator companies. He is also on the board of the University Aviation Association (UAA) and the National Flight Training Alliance (NFTA).
I was fortunate to have a 33 year career as a major airline pilot. NAFTA science of neurological muscle memory does not have any value in training for future airline pilots. Fixed based simulators have training value in large complex turbojet aircraft, they are utilized in teaching flight management system programming, system failures and proper check list usage, various flows for proper flight deck set up and not least proper command and response for normal operation check list usage. Dealing with weather issues and fast paced ATC needs can only be learned with flying the line, pilots need experience and the regional airlines are the perfect environment to gain this experience. There is no viable reason for major airlines to be hiring low time inexperienced pilots. There is more than sufficient regional airline pilots to fill the major airline pilot hiring requirements.
The level of training needed is not just a U.S. consideration. These requirements need to be a discussion and settlement by ICAO or other international agreement. Otherwise there will be a country by country situation of who can fly where. I experienced this long ago with my commercial certificate, whereby the flight school i went to had special requirements under Part 145 and the amount of hours I had as pilot-in-command where not up to ICAO standard time, so I had an endorsement until that was reached. Flight requirements should be the same globally. Every airline flies the same aircraft manufacturers as the others, and the passengers and safety aspects deserve the same consideration no matter what’s painted on the side.
Very much leaving out the worst part of this bill of which is to increase retirment age which will clog up every seniority list again and further excaserbate the backup in the pipeline of 1500hr applicants who are having a tough time getting hired now . Our training pipeline has put out a record number of atp certificates these past few years and we still have a big pool fof qualified 1500 hour canidates from the backside of covid. There is no pilot shortage. There was a pay shortage that was recrified on the backside of covid and this industry has never seen more interest because the lower rungs are now a viable career vs having to grind it out for years until a mainline job. Agree with many parts of your article and there are alot of good things in this bill but a retirement age increase is three steps back for every other position gained within it.
No pilot shortage? Then explain why regionals have had to park jets because of no pilots. Explain how my (top three major) airline is awarding brand new hire pilots Captain positions. You are advocating putting new pilots with little experience in positions that endangers public safety. Experienced pilots are needed more than ever due to the rise in near misses and other recent near-catastrophic events, paired with the record numbers of people traveling by air.
The pilot shortage, that you say doesn’t exist, and defies reality, has lead to increased cancellations, loss of routes at regional airports, limited flight options, and higher ticket prices. This has put an unnecessary burden on the aviation industry and the lives of people who rely on air travel. I also suspect you are advocating for a pilots union in your comments. It is outrageous for pilot unions, whose primary responsibility is to safeguard their members, to actively oppose efforts to extend retirement for some of their members. This opposition stems from a focus on immediate financial gains through dues from younger pilots. Experience and safety are being dismissed in favor of dues income.
In 2007, Congress voted unanimously to raise the airlines’ pilot retirement age from 60 to 65. The largest pilots’ union praised the passage of the law increasing the retirement age and had abandoned their previous false claims about the “chaos” to air travel that this rule change would allegedly cause. Simply put: the traveling public benefits from raising the pilot retirement age. It was true 16 years ago and it is true today. The public deserves a bipartisan effort to pass legislation to raise the retirement age now. Older pilots do not suffer more illness or incapacitation or become less safe in their roles because of a birthday. Scientific evidence supports the fact that experience enhances safety. There is no increase in adverse incidents or compromised skills for pilots flying beyond the age of 65, as demonstrated in other countries. In the more than 10 countries where pilots can fly for airlines after age 65 there exists plenty of data – all proving that you are not suddenly compromised because you have a birthday. At my airline I am flying with new hire pilots all the time. I can tell you that experience directly affects the safety of our operations. Experience saves lives. Raise the age and let experienced pilots continue to fly.
Of course there’s a shortage. To state otherwise is to ignore facts in favor of union drivel.
The union dues won’t change. If anything, more young guys means less dues until they move up the pay chain.
The opposition is due to, I believe, the relative youth of union leaders versus the age of the same office holders when it was raised last time.
Their time will come and they too will be forced out by legalized age discrimination… but they are too short sighted to see it.
At the other end of the spectrum – flight training for Part 103 aircraft needs to be clarified. Part 103 presents an excellent, affordable means to get more people into aviation and aircraft ownership, and at a younger age. Many will of course progress to larger aircraft and other ratings. The current situation however allows only one person in the aircraft, a real Catch-22. Part 103 needs to be expanded to allow two people to fly together at any time, training or otherwise. This may require a higher gross weight of the aircraft, or a small aircraft parachute recovery system as is the case in Europe, I believe. Above all, the category must remain simple, low-cost, and devoid of government meddling. The industry will police itself just fine when left alone.
What’s the number of this bill so that I can write my senators?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/3935
1500 (or 1000) hrs of flying around the practice area doesnt do much for the experience development needed to be a real airline pilot. Crosswind landings on contaminated runways, hard IFR, icing, flying around areas of severe weather, high altitude aerodynamics, and the aeronautical decision making honed by years of doing it on your own cannot be accurately replicated in a box. What these CFI’s are getting in the right seat is On The Job Training and that does not belong in the front of 150 trusting passengers. These so called airline pilots are really more akin to Pilot Techs……they have a very limited reservoir to draw from to do a airline pilot job.
Its all replicated very accurately in “the box” and it is legal and quality training for a reason. As someone who has trained and provided the so called “on the job training” to 1500 cfi applicants in a jet with real passengers ! (Oh the horror!) i can tell you i would take a 141 cfi applicant over most other new hires backgrounds any day of the week. The hierarchy in easiness to train was:1) had type from other airline,2) jet time or turbine time in 91 ops preferably under 5 years experience. 3) 141 cfi, 4) 61 cfi, most other ga jobs. Your typical applicant pool is usually mostly comprised of low time cfi or straight and level vfr ga jobs. Id take any of those with a good attitude and willingness to learn then a season guy especially one who has an inflated ego who uses terms like flying around in “hard” ifr and has years of experience of “doing it on their own”. If you think us pilot techs are unworthy then you should never step foot on a regional flight or any airline outside of the US. Wait until you learn they let them fly at 250 hours in Europe. This whole system is so unsafe, i guess thats what explains planes falling out of the sky every day. /s
One of the most satisfying things in aviation is seeing young pilots join the ranks of professional aviation.
Young pilots can do this by training in sims with scenario based training and testing.
What I’m seeing is young pilots riding right seat on many aircraft. Even though they’re logging hours they still aren’t making decisions.
I feel with intense sim training these new pilots will be able to get a PIC job faster
than trying to beg, borrow and steal right seat jobs.
There is nothing wrong with a right seat gig, but sitting left seat, single pilot and calling the shots is really cool.