Time to be more rigorous? In your editorial (Flight International, 5-11 April) you comment on the need for more training for crews dealing with highly automated modern aircraft. One fundamental problem is that "systems engineered" aircraft sometimes generate unpredicted failures: something for which no training systems can prepare the pilot. However, a more fundamental issue is the quality of that training now offered. Many airlines have opted for computer-based training (CBT) to deliver technical knowledge. Most CBT does little more that animate aircraft manuals. As you move from older "plumbing" systems (hydraulics, for example) to newer integrated systems such as flight management, the quality of training delivered deteriorates. Few, if any, CBT programs start with any concept of developing pilot expertise as the goal of training. Hence, what is offered is usually superficial. As a mode of training, CBT, in itself, is not "bad", simply misused. Unfortunately, CBT offers apparent flexibility of training delivery at low cost. Linked to the internet, an airline can distribute training to homes and hotel rooms, easing scheduling, travel and subsistence costs and the need for real estate. Few CBT systems are ever evaluated in terms of their training transfer. The industry may need an updated study of the human factors aspects of flightdeck automation; it certainly needs a rigorous study of current training methods. Norman MacLeod Buckden, Cambridgeshire, UK
Rethink on evacuation The emergency evacuation clearance of the Airbus A380 was always going to be a hard call between realism and the safety of the participants. It is an opportunity to rethink the way such demonstrations are carried out. There are two separate aspects of any aircraft evacuation. The first is what goes on in the cabin – which ends as the occupants pass through an exit. The second is what happens after they pass through the exit. Surely the problems and issues of both aspects can be certificated separately? The first could be done using suitable platforms and ramps outside the exits to all but eliminate any risk of injury once through the exit. If this was agreed, then a series of evacuations could be required with various mixes of occupants and the real problems inside the aircraft could be examined and the cabin thoroughly certificated. The second aspect of getting from the exit to the ground (and away from those coming behind you) is where there will always be a considerable risk of injury. In a real emergency, these risks become more acceptable because of the dire alternative of staying on board. Development of optimum slide arrangements is no mean task, but it is amenable to lab-like routine test and development techniques. These can reasonably be carried out with specially trained and selected test personnel John Farley Chichester, Sussex, UK
Remember the Titanic The debate about the A380 "rule-compliant" but otherwise unrealistic evacuation tests inevitably places one in mind of the inane but lawful rule-compliance with respect to life-boat numbers and raft capacity of the Titanic in 1912. Board of Trade requirements, drawn up in 1894, required a vessel "over 10,000 tons" to have life boat and raft floatage providing for 963 people, with 550 of those in the minimum number of 16 lifeboats. However, the ship – of 46,000 tons – was certified by this same Board of Trade to carry 3,547 persons. Although the vessel was slightly overcompliant for one "over 10,000 tons", this condemned most of those who sailed in her to certain death, after an eminently survivable scrape, in still weather Yes, the probability of things going wrong in a modern large airliner is improving all the time, and the Titanic was unsinkable. Those who fail to study history are bound to repeat it. Bless their bureaucratic souls. Hein Vandenbergh Sydney, Australia
Teach more effectively We are entering the first period of renewal for crew resource management instruction accreditation. In the UK, CAP737 defines the accreditation standards of crewresource management knowledge and facilitation skills required of all training pilots. In three years it has done something to change teaching styles – but not much. There is an appalling amount of anecdotal evidence to show that many training pilots are still deliberately using the wrong style Although the law demands that trainers move from "tell" to facilitate, only a minority actually use facilitation as a training style. It's time to teach more effectively, and the first action will surely be to enforce standards required by CAP737. Keith Godfrey Southampton, Hampshire, UK
Diverting ad I am bemused by the advert for a coach driver (Flight International, 12-18 April) who would be required to "exceed the requirements of customers" By dropping them off a little bit past the aircraft perhaps? Or maybe take them on a trip to Blackpool instead? We should be told Anthony Gales Henham, Essex, UK
Source: Flight International
