GA "AQP" movement

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,282
Location
YMM
Docs here:

Video gets you started down that series here:

Youtube doing random things got me onto blancorilio (Juan brown) / Dan ryder talking AQP in GA.

I really don't like the AQP term, but I really do see the content as probably something GA needs to address in training/currency. Never practiced Rejecting a takeoff - remember a time I should have. No didn't smarten up, still haven't practiced, just put those documents and videos to my CFI - he's now excited about this.

Have a watch, have a read - what do you guys think?
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
654
Location
Maryland, USA
As a retired military pilot who does test work on military aircraft but also does CFI/CFII stuff for fun, I like the concept.

Always a huge difference in teaching the "standard", which is the defined bare minimum, and going way too far into the weeds. Pick and choose what is practical and germane. You can always find a middle ground.

For example, in the military, we have to go through emergency egress and water survival training. Are non military GA pilots here at the local FBO, which just happens to be on the shore of the Chesapeake, where overwater flights to Ocean City and into Delaware are the norm? No, its not. So, I go above the applicable standard and talk about it with my students. I want to make sure they think about and do the right thing when they are planning and executing. And, most importantly, should they have to ditch while trying to fly across the bay, they know what to do to get out and stay alive.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with going "above and beyond", as long as its within reason.
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
654
Location
Maryland, USA
Always nice to hear someone say you know that thing you taught me, "It works!" Ditching exit, IMC spin recovery, Mag Compass IMC flight, incipient spin recovery with loss of aileron & elevator effectiveness, pre and post crash proceedures, etc.
I am in the process of developing an inexpensive but practical "E-AB Flight Test" course of instruction, following the AC 90-89A, but seasoned by some relevant lessons learned on the part of some fellow XPs and FTEs. It will culminate with on-aircraft instruction of taxi testing, stability & control and performance testing.

Not exactly military test pilot school, but a hell of alot more than what is offered at the local FBO! I have met an awful lot of great builders that are incredibly low time pilots who insist on testing their machines. Thats their right, of course, but it would be good if they were taught why certain test maneuvers are necessary, what to look for, and importantly, how to handle a misbehaving airplane!

 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,446
Location
Memphis, TN
I’m not a CFI, but where I worked it was called training to proficiency. I saw a 16 year old kid that could fly a helicopter like a 1000 hour pilot with 10 hours of instruction . I think he was dyslexic and his parents did not know because he would not even try on the pre solo test. Never got farther than that. It usually takes about 60 hrs for the average person PPL, and been a few that just couldn’t get it no matter how much money they spent.

100 yards on a football field has nothing to do with the score. 40 hours for a private has nothing to do with the score. It’s just boundaries. The players are what counts. I would definitely not want to test fly something with low hours and not rung through the ringer with an instructor before, in case something got exciting unexpectedly. That takes a forward looking student.
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,282
Location
YMM
training to proficiency
You should go back and read the document.

You can't be proficient in something that may only have been a sentence in a book during ground school; and never touched on / discussed / checked or practiced after.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,446
Location
Memphis, TN
A skill set is what is being developed. Aviation has never been a hand holding endeavor. Your job as a student is to learn enough to ask questions and learn more. A PPL is really basic language. You want to go no further than a C150 in the pattern, so be it. If you want more, you have to seek it. I have had to school new commercial pilots on what they can and can’t do. Me being the mechanic. Most people treat it like 9th grade algebra; forget it as soon as summer break starts. A sentence in a FAR you don’t understand, you are supposed to be inquisitive to find someone to explain it. You might need two or three and gel it yourself. If you want to learn inverted spins, you go find someone to teach you. You are allowed to do it on your own. Survival is what you are seeking, from understanding a FAR or some flight skill. PPL is supposed to be the wake up call. It’s just a set of basic rules to start the learning journey.
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
654
Location
Maryland, USA
Survival is what you are seeking, from understanding a FAR or some flight skill. PPL is supposed to be the wake up call. It’s just a set of basic rules to start the learning journey.
Could not have said it better.

I knew many a pilot in the military RW community who, despite being instrument "current", avoided flying IFR...even going as far as snooping along the terrain under SVFR just to avoid it. Not the right answer. This completely avoidable fatal accident still makes my blood boil:


There is a massive delta between currency and proficiency. Does shooting 6 approaches and a lap in a VOR hold on a sunny day make you current and 'legal' to fly IFR (if rated)? Sure does. Does making just that minimum effort make you proficient to safely fly an ILS to the minimums in unexpectedly crappy weather? No f-ing way.

I have found it useful to incentivize my students and fellow pilots to take the initiative to ask themselves "what if...?" & endeavor to go do their due diligence, find out and plan accordingly. In other words, "risk & resource management".

Speaking of CRM, I'm pretty sure I have some powerpoint products for the forum on that, as they relate to GA flying! I'll post them up if I can find them!!
 
Last edited:

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,732
Location
Upper midwest in a house
Have a watch, have a read - what do you guys think?
Ho hum. How many pages do we want to fill talking about this? The meat and potatoes of flight training is:
1. The FAA establishes minimum standards. There is no rule prohibiting training beyond minimum standards. It's voluntary (key concept).

2. The pilots that would most benefit from additional training are the one's least likely to seek out more training. In any "beyond minimum standards" program, you end up with a roster full of pilots eager to learn that are already above average in proficiency. They are intrinsically motivated (key concept). Can't force more training on the group that needs it the most. It's been tried and the alphabet pilot organizations put up brick walls of opposition on the premise that too many pilots would quit flying. They are correct. It's sad that the pilot is the greatest obstacle to being a safer pilot.

3. AQP is a data driven program specific to an operator. The data fields encompassing GA are vast. The end result is someone has to "narrow the field" or pick and choose what categories to focus on for proficiency training, which is essentially what we do without AQP. Having a sheet of paper with AQP on the header is not a panacea. The argument becomes one of frequency, IOW's how often are we going to practice? The minimum standard established by the FAA is 24 calendar months. Some think that's not enough but now we're back to #2 above.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,732
Location
Upper midwest in a house
I knew many a pilot in the military RW community who, despite being instrument "current", avoided flying IFR...even going as far as snooping along the terrain under SVFR just to avoid it. Not the right answer. This completely avoidable fatal accident still makes my blood boil:
Oh, the parallels to Kobe Bryant crash....
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,282
Location
YMM
Can't force more training on the group that needs it the most. It's been tried and the alphabet pilot organizations put up brick walls of opposition on the premise that too many pilots would quit flying.
Pretty sure we're on the verge of it's going to be an insurance requirement. Airport skuttlebutt has a few times mentioned the "fly barely enough hours to keep current" (<50hr/yr) pilots are seeing some pretty high insurance renewals.

The end result is someone has to "narrow the field" or pick and choose what categories to focus on for proficiency training, which is essentially what we do without AQP.
I think I said in my initial post, I don't like the AQP term. But Dan's done a fairly good job of narrowing the field based on FAA's own data on annual crashes (much like our own Ron Wanttaga does for homebuilts). Just that minimum maneuvering speed argument - 13/51 crashes - stall/spin in the pattern. Nearly a third of accidents - that makes a pretty easy target to focus on.
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
10,050
Location
CT, USA
What is AQP, can somebody summarize? I didn't want to watch some video just to find out what you're talking about.
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,282
Location
YMM
What is AQP, can somebody summarize? I didn't want to watch some video just to find out what you're talking about.
That's why I included the link to the aviation101 site with the pdf above it.


But here's the basics of where he's focused his program:
aqp.png
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,732
Location
Upper midwest in a house
I think I said in my initial post, I don't like the AQP term. But Dan's done a fairly good job of narrowing the field based on FAA's own data on annual crashes (much like our own Ron Wanttaga does for homebuilts). Just that minimum maneuvering speed argument - 13/51 crashes - stall/spin in the pattern. Nearly a third of accidents - that makes a pretty easy target to focus on.
I wish Dan the best but I don't think he can move the needle.

I say again, the ones that need training the most are the ones that avoid it.
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
10,050
Location
CT, USA
OK, "AQP" = Advanced Qualifications Program

Pretty sure we're on the verge of it's going to be an insurance requirement. Airport skuttlebutt has a few times mentioned the "fly barely enough hours to keep current" (<50hr/yr) pilots are seeing some pretty high insurance renewals.
I sure hope not. 50hrs/year can mean a lot of things. For a pilot who mostly flies cross country, that can mean 10 landings per year and the rest of the time spent on autopilot. For others, it may mean shooting several landings on every 30 or 45 minute flight just for the fun of it. For the first guy, maybe such a program has value, if he can get past the buzzwords and acronyms*, but for the latter, to whom half the things on the list above don't even apply... not so much.

*But the FAA will probably love it.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,732
Location
Upper midwest in a house
What is AQP, can somebody summarize? I didn't want to watch some video just to find out what you're talking about.
Real AQP is a program where a company collects data thru FOQA (FDR data) and ASAP (voluntary submitted reports) and they tailor recurrent training or SPOT training to address any problem areas. [For an example, we had a rash of events where flight spoilers were still extended below 1000' AGL. Training dept. created a procedural change, everyone got trained and and flt spoiler extended below 1000' dropped to ~2 events per yr. Problem solved.]

Adapting that to GA is somewhat challenging. You look at the common accidents and try to adjust the only required training (flight review) to eliminate those type accidents, cause getting people to voluntarily get additional training is like trying to get a hooker to work for free. Maybe you can cover it in a once every 24 month flight review. If an inadvertent stall / spin occurs 23 months after it was last visited, that's not going to end good.
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,282
Location
YMM
I sure hope not. 50hrs/year can mean a lot of things. For a pilot who mostly flies cross country, that can mean 10 landings per year and the rest of the time spent on autopilot. For others, it may mean shooting several landings on every 30 or 45 minute flight just for the fun of it. For the first guy, maybe such a program has value, if he can get past the buzzwords and acronyms*, but for the latter, to whom half the things on the list above don't even apply... not so much.
Depends, yes there's always a range of pilots... I'm a mostly XC guy - but that means constant radio, planning - navigation and weather. But I'm doing way over 50hrs a year... I don't personally call doing "currency" circuits at an uncontrolled field "competency" either. I think some of these guys need more pie and hamburger cravings :)

Maybe you can cover it in a once every 24 month flight review. If an inadvertent stall / spin occurs 23 months after it was last visited, that's not going to end good.
Pretty sure that's why they're preaching adding a Dmms line to your ASI; minimum maneuvering speed. And drilling that's your minimum clean speed...

I do the math on my m20, that puts it at 94mph, so those mooniacs preaching 100mph were right on.

 
Top