ICATEE Master Plan – Draft 25 July 2009

On 3 and 4 June 2009, the Flight Simulation Group (FSG) of the Royal Aeronautical Society organized and ran a conference entitled Flight Simulation – Towards the Edge of the Envelope. The conference subject was related to a growing need to address aviation safety issues through better training and simulation beyond what is currently covered in flight and in ground-based flight simulators.

The conference identified the need to improve aircraft upset training, the shortcomings in basic education and readiness of commercial pilots in reacting to upsets, and the technical challenges of upset training. As a result of the conference, the RAeS FSG was requested to form a Committee to explore the formation of an International Working Group (IWG) to identify follow-on steps and to invite participation from other interested parties. This Working group has been named as the International Committee for Aviation Training in Extended Envelopes (ICATEE). This Download: ICATEE Master Plan – Draft 25 July 2009 document outlines the objectives of the Committee and the resulting Working Group.

In Section 1, the industry needs are defined and the scope of the Committee is also explained. The ICATEE Working Group objectives are defined in Section 2, and the participants expected are described in Section 3. The Working Group’s Activities, Deliverables, Organization and Execution are given in Sections 4, 5 and 6, respectively, and Conculsions and Action Items are listed in Section 7.

Industry Needs and the ICATEE

The contribution of upset-related incidents to aviation safety is significant. Of all the hull losses during 2009, approximately 33 percent of these can be attributed to upsets or related causes. There is no single root cause to this problem – it can be attributed to human error, systemic error, or atmospheric conditions. Regardless of the cause, the last stop is always the flight crew who are confronted with a situation for which critical decisions must be made very quickly. This decision may also include no intervention, allowing the automated systems to maintain control.Concepts have been proposed for better training of crews to firstly identify upsets and, secondly, to deal with them well after they have been encountered. The former is well supported within the current training framework as training systems and processes are able to provide reasonable information to the candidate on the entry approaching the upset. Beyond the initial stages of an upset, the results can be hugely varied due to non-linear aircraft dynamics, the dynamic forces that could be encountered by the pilot, and the non- linear response of the aircraft itself. It is this lack of determinism that makes it challenging to define, develop and to qualify adequate training solutions for upsets.

There are arguments supporting current training methods even though they may be a rough approximation of some upset situations. These arguments are based on evidence that the human pilot is able to adapt to a situation if a basic level of training is provided in representative situations. Clearly, the subject has a wide scope. There is no single solution or symptom, and there can not be one approach to addressing the problem as there are cost and opportunity implications of providing a minimum level of upset recovery training for the numbers of aircrew likely to require it. Utilising the right expertise, developing a consensus on priorities, and establishing a mechanism of implementation is therefore essential. This is the chief purpose of the ICATEE …

… for more information Download: ICATEE Master Plan – Draft 25 July 2009

This entry was posted in Key Messages, Regulatory, UPRT Resources. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>