Editorial: Something Has Changed
By Ed Downs
Another birthday, another reason to reflect. This writer and his twin brother have made it through another year with an evening spent with family, giving “the twins” a chance to reflect on careers in aviation that span 60 years. Yes, twins often have much in common and our choice of careers certainly points that out. While considerably beyond a traditional retirement age, this writer and his brother, Earl, continue to fly as active CFIs, work in the aviation industry, and deal heavily in subjects relating to flight safety, training, the promotion of recreational flying, and the future of general aviation through a direct interface with the FAA and government. As the evening’s musings of past adventures turned to reflecting upon “the good old days,” we realized that both of us were concluding that, “something has changed.”
Recreational flying is certainly not what it was 50 or 60 years ago. Expense has gone up dramatically, and the technological sophistication of GA airplanes, even old planes that have been retrofitted with modern avionics, is absolutely amazing. Having started flight training in the mid 1950s, we concluded that much has improved since we first flew in an Aeronca Champ with a wind driven generator and a two channel, low frequency radio. Mind you, that was considered to be a well-equipped trainer, being flown from busy Van Nuys Airport in Southern California. The training was rigorous, with maneuvers like 720 steep turns, spins, accelerated (and aggravated) stalls, and steep spiral descents all included in the CAA approved curriculum. No training flight was conducted without a simulated engine failure, frequently followed with a landing to a full stop. Of course, almost all private training done in this timeframe used planes like Champs, Cubs, T-crafts and other tail draggers, so both full stall and wheel landings were the order of the day.
Most students showed some degree of proficiency in all of these maneuvers (plus many others) mentioned about and frequently soloed in under 10 hours. The emphasis was on stick and ruder skills, as there were no electronic devices to master. Ground training emphasized strong pilotage and dead reckoning skills, with the early version of the sectional chart revered as if it was a Bible. The E-6B was king, but one was also expected to plot out wind correction problems on a piece of paper, using a plotter and basic geometry skills learned in the public school system. Weather charts were crude, and anyone who did not know where states and cities were located was in big trouble. It was simply assumed that math skills were good, with the times tables memorized and an ability to resolve math problems in your head. Electronic calculators were still 20+ years in the future.
The biggest safety concern was flight into bad weather, followed by what we now call “CFIT,” Controlled Flight into Terrain. Planes (especially trainers) of the 1950s had no chance in bad weather, as radio navigation and instrument flying were skillsets of airline pilots, not the typical GA pilot. It was a “manual world,” with the pilot expected to be out in front of his/her plane, using a chart and E-6B to navigate with heads up and mind aware of what was going on and what was about to happen. Today we call that “situational awareness.” Yep, those were the “good old days,” enjoyed at 80 mph, with every fiber of your body involved in the safe operation of the plane.
Moving rapidly into our present time, we talked about the major safety issues facing us today. CFIT is still a major concern, but such accidents frequently take place in a remarkably well-equipped airplane, often having a technologically advanced, integrated flight system. But a new safety “bad guy” has entered the scene as the top dog in GA fatalities, called Loss of Control (LOC). The FAA has formalized LOC by dividing it into two parts, LOC-1 (loss of control in flight) and LOC-2 (loss of control on the ground). The great minds of the FAA have gotten together with university shrinks and concluded that one of the primary causes of LOC is a loss of situational awareness.
Translated to pilot speak, this means the pilot is so overwhelmed by the circumstance of flight and/or the operation of electronic flight management systems, that he/she simply loses stick and rudder command of their plane, and it falls from the sky. Really, that is what is happening. Typically, a steep angle of bank is involved, followed by a stall and some variation of a spin or uncontrolled spiral. All too often, investigations reveal that an incorrect mode of autopilot operation was a factor in a LOC accident. Neither of us old guys could remember LOC being a major issue when our flying started in the mid ‘50s, or for that matter, for the next 40 years of flying. But the last 20 years or so have seen a change in aviation accidents, involving very capable airplanes being flown by pilots with far more advanced training in the use of electronic devices and complex airspace involving ATC interface. Could it be that advanced technology is not all that it is cracked up to be?
Listening to two old guys talking about modern planes can be tiresome. After all, everything was better in the “good old days.” But in this case, the FAA, NTSB, and NASA are aligning behind the intuitive truth being sensed by a couple of good olé boys flying out of the rolling hills of eastern Oklahoma. Flight Instructor Refresher Clinics (FIRCs) must now include a discussion about LOC and the high pilot workload imposed by modern technology. But still, there is something else going on, something that is hard to put one’s finger on. This writer is involved with a national tutoring program and works with hundreds of students and CFIs each year as a ground school, flight, and FIRC instructor. My older brother (by 10 minutes, considered to be my prototype) also works in aviation on a national basis, so we began to think, what else has changed?
To be sure, the FAA Practical Test Standard does not require any of the flight skills (Aeronca style) previously mentioned in the training we received. E-6B skills, and even VOR capabilities, have given way to the wonders of GPS. One no longer has to carry a paper chart, as the electronic tablet, and flight bag allows a pilot to simply drag a finger across the display and see where he or she is going. No need to look up airport information in advance, as a simple touch to a primary navigation display will call up everything you need, including the location of the nearest pizza joint. A simple “direct to” will take you anywhere, with the course plotted for you on a moving map display. To be sure, tablet-based weigh, balance, and navigation computers take the work out of flight planning and do the job with accuracy and speed. Availability of online weather, now accessible in flight, and ADS-B upload information negates the need to stay in touch with Flight Service. Yet, with all of these advances, pilots still become overwhelmed and lose control of perfectly good airplanes. Is the answer to go back in time and train everyone in a Cub or a Champ? Maybe toss in the old flight maneuvers that require actual piloting skills? Or has something else changed?
What about the modern student pilot, or even pilots trained in the last 20 years? Are they the same as us old guys coming out of the ‘50s? This writer has noticed a difference with the incoming skill sets of students, based on well over 30 years of teaching weekend ground school classes. To be sure, this is anecdotal, but here goes. First, while FAA test questions are often poorly written and hard to cypher, basic reading skills are down. So much so that this writer no longer asks students to read questions in the classroom so as to avoid embarrassment. Math skills are poor, with many not knowing that a circle has 360 degrees or what the words “parallel” or “perpendicular” mean. Few students can figure out a standard temperature at a given altitude in their head, using the standard laps rate of two degrees per thousand feet. Geography skills are weak, unable to locate a state or major city on a weather chart. Virtually all students now show up with a tablet running a nav program of some kind. Entering data into defined blank spaces solves old E-6B type problems. By the way, a tablet may not be taken into a testing center. In general, the ability to simply think through a navigation or wind situation with logic seems to have vanished. What has changed?
An attendee at a recent FIRC, a person with years of experience as a high school teacher, shared an interesting perspective with the class. She summarized her observations of modern education in the statement, “We no longer teach students how to solve data to get an answer to a question; we teach them to look up the answer.” In other words, the advent of the PC, web, smart phone, and tablet technology means we no longer have to depend upon our own personal knowledge to figure out the solution to a problem or question. We can simply enter a search word and let a device do the work for us. All that geographic memorizing my fifth grade teacher made me do is no longer required. There is no need to have a mental picture of math, history, geography, or complex scientific principles or formulas. We can just enter “search” and use battery power instead of brainpower. The big question might be, “has switching from using the brain to solve for answers versus looking up an answer measurably changed our ability to function in a rapidly changing environment (flying) involving a high degree of multitasking?” If the evidence to be studied in order to answer this rhetorical question is loss of control due to loss of situational awareness, one might well conclude “yes,” digital convenience may not be our best friend.
Assuming our friend, “digital technology,” may be doing as much harm as good, what do we pilots do to curve the dark side of some pretty good stuff. Perhaps it is just a change of attitude. Consider that your digital devices are just tools to back up what you already have down pat in your head. Go back to the kitchen table, with a chart, E-6B, and plotter and draw those lines, look up airport date, and fill out a flight plan. Double check your work with the computer device. Get your head involved in “resolving” the questions each flight brings up. Transfer important weather data to your flight plan form by hand, involving your mind with this tactile action.
Do not depend on being able to read a tablet or electronic display in the highly disruptive lighting often found in the cockpit of an airplane. Calculate a real weight and balance for each flight, using the POH and latest weight data on the Form 337. Finally, see if you can find a CFI who knows how to teach the maneuvers previously mentioned and get some dual. Some of us are still alive! Remember, your electronic device does not give a hoot if it is smashed in a crash. There is another one heading into town from China to replace it. But your body does care if it gets broken, so get your hands, feet, and mind involved in each and every flight, so you will have them to use again the next time you fly.
