Steve Gossett

1
MTSUs Success in FITS

• Steve Gossett
• Paul Craig
• Wayne Dornan
• Wendy Beckman
• Middle Tennessee State University
• Murfreesboro, Tennessee
• June 4, 2008
• CGAR Annual Meeting
• Anchorage, Alaska

2
Phase I

• SAFER Project (2004-2005)
• NASA / MTSU Cooperative Agreement

3

• The FITS curriculum used was originally developed
  by ERAU and UND through the FAA Air
  Transportation Center of Excellence for General
  Aviation Research (CGAR)

4

• FITS Group 16 MTSU students began their primary
  flight training in glass DA-40 aircraft using
  the FITS curriculum
• Traditional Round 19 students who had recently
  completed their Private and Instrument flight
  training at MTSU

5
How to Compare?

• Since the FITS curriculum was so different,
  traditional measures such as time to solo and
  time to Private, were not useful for comparison
  purposes
• Instead, the number of Setbacks or repeated
  lessons, was evaluated

6
Average Number of Setbacks Comparison
7
Research Findings Phase I

• Our data indicated that MTSUs FITS trained
  pilots have fewer setbacks over the entire
  VFR/IFR training curriculum
• But what was the determining factor?
• TAA, or FITS?

8
Second Phase Fall 2005 TAA with traditional
syllabus
9
Research Subjects

• Traditional Glass 11 students who did their
  Instrument flight training at MTSU using a
  traditional syllabus in a TAA (glass cockpit)
• Traditional Round 19 students who had taken
  their Private and Instrument flight training at
  MTSU

10
Average Number of SetbacksDuring Instrument
Training
MEAN NUMBER OF SETBACKS
11
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH

• PHASE II Showed that it is the FITS syllabus and
  not the TAA that makes the difference in training
  pilots at MTSU.

12
Proficiency Based

• One of our FITS students passed her combined
  Private / Instrument check ride with less than 60
  airplane hours !

13
IF WE ARE GOING TO BE CERTIFICATING PILOTS WITH
FEWER HOURS WHAT KIND OF PILOTS WILL THEY BE ?
14
What is FITS ?

• A training program that places a major emphasis
  on
• ADM
• Situational Awareness/Situational Assessment
• SRM
• Using real-time flight scenarios

15
Analysis of Decision Making Skills

• WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF THE FITS TRAINING PROGRAM
  ON PILOT DECISION MAKING SKILLS?

16
Research Methodology

• To evaluate the judgment and decision-making
  skills of all three groups, a survey was
  administered to the FITS group, the Traditional
  Glass group, and a group of Traditional Round
  students
• A variety of questions were asked

17
Survey Questions

• How comfortable are you to fly alone in the IFR
  environment?
• How comfortable are you to fly alone in IMC ?
• How comfortable are you to shoot an ILS approach
  to minimums ?
• What are your personal minimums ?

18
SUMMARY OF PHASE IIIFINDINGS

• That a TAA does make a MTSU pilot feel more
  comfortable with the automation regardless of how
  they are trained. But FITS trained students at
  MTSU are more conservative with their personal
  minimums compared to traditionally trained MTSU
  students

19
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH

• Our results indicate that pilots have fewer
  setbacks over their entire VFR/IFR training using
  the FITS syllabus
• Our results suggest that the FITS training, and
  not the aircraft, makes the difference
• FITS trained pilots are more conservative with
  IFR decision making

20
THESE RESULTS ARE GREAT BUT THEY WERE OBTAINED IN
A RESEARCH PROJECT THAT WAS A VERY CONTROLLED
ENVIRONMENT CAN YOUR RESULTS BE DUPLICATED IN
THE REAL WORLD?
21
Phase IV

• In the Spring 2007 semester, MTSU adopted the
  FITS Private/Instrument curriculum as the
  Professional Pilot concentration standard
  curriculum

22
Implementation Issues
23
Preparation for Implementation

• Flight School Preparation
• Adapting the Syllabus for a Mixed Fleet (TAA
  Conventional)
• Adjusting Course Completion Deadlines
• Revising Original Syllabus

24
Flight School Preparation

• Flight Instructor Training
• Develop Ground School Curriculum
• Scenario-based ground school
• Revise Aircraft Scheduling (Blocks)

25
Adapting the Syllabus for a Mixed Fleet

• Current fleet mix is only 20 TAA
• Reviewed the syllabus to determine which lessons
  would be designated TAA Lessons.
• Most lessons can be completed in a conventional
  or TAA aircraft. (DA20,DA40).

26
Adjusting Course Completion Deadlines

• Private/Instrument reduced training time.
• Course was very front-end loaded.
• Private/Instrument course completion deadline was
  extended to 2 semesters.

27
Improvements to Original Syllabus

• Increased landing practice.
• Increased frequency of unplanned instrument
  approaches.
• Takeoff alternate diversions
• Revised lessons to allow flexibility in
  aircraft/FTD requirements.

28

• What was the result of full-scale implementation?

29
Mean hours to complete Private \ Instrument
30
Comparison of Research vs. Full-scale
Implementation
31
Why is there a difference in the Research vs.
Full-scale implementation data?

• Full-scale implementation training was conducted
  in a mixed fleet (TAA/Conventional)
• Research group used a smaller number of
  instructors
• Syllabus revisions

32
Observations

• Despite the experience that we have gained at
  MTSU with FITS, the successful implementation of
  a FITS training syllabus across the curriculum
  does not happen over night. The lessons learned
  to this point have improved the program, but we
  are still in the learning mode, and the faculty
  and staff at MTSU are discovering better ways to
  deliver this innovative approach every day.

33
Conclusions

• FITS is a better training methodology for the
  collegiate environment at MTSU.
• Developing piloting skills must be combined with
  the development of decision making skills.
• FITS/TAA has helped MTSU narrow the gap between
  our graduates skill level and the desired entry
  skill level of the airlines.

34
QUESTIONS?
35
(No Transcript)
36
Research Methodology

• To evaluate the judgment and decision-making
  skills of all three groups, a survey was
  administered to the FITS group, the Traditional
  Glass group, and a group of Traditional Round
  students
• A variety of questions were asked

37
Survey Questions

• How comfortable are you to fly alone in the IFR
  environment?
• How comfortable are you to fly alone in IMC ?
• How comfortable are you to shoot an ILS approach
  to minimums ?
• What are your personal minimums ?

38
Responses

• 1 Not comfortable
• 2 Somewhat comfortable
• 3 Comfortable
• 4 Very comfortable
• 5 Absolutely comfortable, no problem!

39
Results

• Not Comfortable Flying Alone in the IFR
  Environment
• Traditional Round 18
• Traditional Glass 0
• FITS 0

40
Results

• Not Comfortable Flying Alone in IMC
• Traditional Round 38
• Traditional Glass 0
• FITS 14

41
Results

• Not Comfortable Shooting an ILS to minimums
• Traditional Round 16
• Traditional Glass 0
• FITS 0

42
Results

• Would You Feel Comfortable Using a GPS When
  Flying IMC?
• Traditional Round Yes (48 )
• Traditional Glass Yes (100 )
• FITS Yes (100 )

43
Mean Self-Reported Visibility
44
Mean Self-ReportedCeiling
3000
Ceiling

2500
2000
1500
ALTITUDE IN FEET

1000
500
significantly different from all other
groups
0
FITS
TRADITIONAL ROUND
TRADITIONAL GLASS
45
Results

• What are your personal minimums ?
• Visibility Never thought about it !
• Traditional Round 68
• Traditional Glass 60
• FITS 18

46
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH

• Our results indicate that pilots have fewer
  setbacks over their entire VFR/IFR training using
  the FITS syllabus
• Our results suggest that the FITS training, and
  not the aircraft, makes the difference
• FITS trained pilots are more conservative with
  IFR decision making