>----------
>From: V. Mancuso[SMTP:vince_mancuso_at_CompuServe.COM]
>Sent: Thursday, April 10, 1997 8:29 AM
>To: Benny White; [unknown]; Lonny M. Regan; [unknown]
>Subject: RE: AQP
>
>Benny, Lonny, and the folks interested in Automation training,
>
>About a year ago I wrote a portion of Delta's Introduction to Flight Deck
>Automation curriculum to be integrated into the "Fleet Common" AQP Initial
>Qualification Curricula for all automated jets. The time constraints that
>were given to me were 20 minutes on the first day of training and an hour
>somewhere during FTDs (Fixed Based Simulators for folks not familiar with
>Delta's acronyms). There were two products that were developed. The first
>is a 20 minute video primer titled "Introduction to Flight Deck Automation"
>with featuring discussions by Dr. John Lauber and Dr. Earl Wiener, and a
>discussion of Delta's 6 CRM Skills as each relates to automation. The
>second segment is a one hour "Fleet Specific" flight instructor facilitated
>segment where 5 traps of automation are discussed. I used the ASRS CDROM
>extensively to pull out classic examples of the 5 traps. (I originally had
>7 traps but they asked me to further condense it to 5). I further
>encouraged the fleets to pull out their own examples of these traps and use
>them in place of the generic ASRS scenarios I offered. The course gives
>the instructors tools that lead students to their own understanding of
>these traps as they relate to their jet. The students read the ASRS report
>(or fleet report) that relates to the automation trap then discuss how this
>could happen in their jet and what they can do to counter it. I
>envisioned this curricula segment being placed somewhere in the latter FTDs
>because I believed it was important for the students to have a basic
>understanding of the automated functions before discussing the traps as
>they relate to their jet. I also believe it is important for the training
>designers to translate the lessons of this one hour "automation traps"
>curricula into skill in the full motion simulator sessions. The only way
>the classroom awareness on automation traps will be translated into skill
>is if there are skill-based objectives for sim scenarios that follow.
>
>To my knowledge, there has not been any emperical work done on what basic
>level of mastery is required for lessons on human factors traps to be
>effective. I think some research on where these lessons are placed in the
>curricula to elicit the most effective learning would be useful. It has
>been my experience that the science of training and training resarchers are
>underrepresented in these traditionally "human factors" domains.
>
>Anyway... The 20 minute video and the instructor/student guides for hour
>faciltated course are sitting on a shelf in the Delta AQP managers office.
>
>
>Having just completed an initial training curricula on a pseudo-automated
>jet (the 737), I identified several places throughout the curricula where
>discussions of systems traps and their antidotes could have made an
>excellent curricula an outstanding curricula without any additional
>training time. Even the traditional "systems-only" training taught by
>non-seniority list instructors could have benefited from discussions on
>where the traps lie. I couldn't help but think that a short discussion of
>Cali during the speed brake or GPWS lesson would go a long way toward
>building defenses against error. We do not normally think of systems
>training as the place to insert these human factors segments. However,
>when we think in terms of building aircrew defenses against error, this
>awareness can be built in segments throughout the curriculum.
>
>Just a few thoughts.....
>
>Vince Mancuso, Ph.D.
>
>P.S., I would like to see a tiger team formed to build human factors in
>automation curricula and/or guidlines for automation training that any
>training manager could easily translate for use in their operation. We
>could post it on the web just like we have posted the Situation Awareness
>curricula material. By the way, I believe that there is currently a
>movement afoot to write an advisory circular on automation training.
>
>______________________________________________-
>Lonny,
>I was involved in writing one of the sets of manuals for the MD-11 during
>its
>initial introduction at Delta. One of the things that amazed me about
>training at that time was that the aircraft was still being taught like the
>
>DC-6 and other aircraft were always taught.
>
>"Ladies and Gentlemen,
>Here we have and aircraft made up of generators, fuel cells, lights bells
>and
>whistles. You will learn all of the meanings of the values on the
>indicators
>and regurgitate them to me at the end of class."
>
>It seems to me that it would have much more appropriate to concentrate
>training on what I would have called a functional integration approach. I
>was
>on about my fourth simulator period at Douglas when the light finally came
>on
>and I finally realized that the GCP, the FMS, and the MCDUs were all
>integrated with each other and that there was a tremendous amount of
>information being presented on the FMA and in the GCP windows that were
>significant to understanding what the aircraft was doing.
>
>The training that I received and that I observed for several years after
>that
>still focused on mechanical procedure following by the pilots and not
>necessarily requiring any knowledge of what the aircraft and systems really
>
>did when you made that "Level Change" call at 1000 AGL. I know that there
>was
>a little shift after awhile to tell students that there was an FMA and that
>
>they should be aware of what the displays meant but it seemed to me that
>this
>was delayed until the simulator and then it was only discussed to the
>extent
>that a particular instructor wanted to emphasize it.
>
>This area of lack of awareness of what mode the aircraft was in and why the
>
>aircraft was doing what it was and not doing what you thought you told it
>to
>do cause a lot more problems in real life than not being able to describe
>the
>priorities of electrical power sources in the Non Break Power Transfer
>discussion.
>
>Just my opinion.
>Benny
>
>----------
>From: Lonny M. Regan
>Sent: Saturday, March 29, 1997 2:07 AM
>To: fmc-list_at_wilbur.pr.erau.edu
>Cc: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
>Subject: AQP
>
>Good Evening Once Again,
>
>At Delta Air Lines, our MD-11 program is about to go AQP after a few
>years of very hard work & preparation.
>
>I would be interested in hearing from anyone with suggestions concerning
>training that you wish you had included in your course or training you
>wish you had not included in the syllabus, whether CRM related, perhaps
>as related to automation, hoops the pilot must jump thru in the AQP
>process, whatever! Thanks again.
>
>Lonny M. Regan
>
>