Effect of Integrated Method of Flight Instruction on Student Pilot Performance

Main Article Content

Timothy Sweeney
Jacob Welch
Bill Deng Pan
Dahai Liu

Abstract

With the prevailing use of integrated cockpit displays in flight training, flight students have shown to have difficulty controlling the aircraft and maintaining situational awareness. The integrated method of flight instruction is a proven tool to help transfer the skills necessary from visual to instrument flying, but it may also distract the student and lead to the formation of dangerous habits. This research study looked at whether the integrated method of flight instruction helps or hinders a student at the beginning of flight training. A quantitative experimental research design was used to measure situational awareness, reaction time to a traffic conflict, and ability to maintain the altitude and heading of participants instructed with visual and instrumental cues. Participant scores were analyzed using independent samples t-tests to measure the expected results that students exposed to visual and instrumental cues have significantly different scores. The results showed that participants instructed with visual cues had a significantly higher level of situational awareness in the subcategory of orientation, an overall higher level of situational awareness, and a quicker reaction time to a potential mid-air collision. The results showed that the very onset of training may not be the appropriate time to introduce instrumental cues.

Article Details

Section
Peer-Reviewed Articles

References

Adams, C. A., Hwoschinsky, P. V., & Adams, R. A. (2001). Analysis of adverse events in identifying GPS human factors issues. NASA Langley Research Center. https://doi.org/10.20040085994

Childs, J. M. (1986). Integrated flight training. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 28(5), 559–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088602800506

Childs, J. M., Prophet, W. W., & Spears, W. D. (1981). The effects of pilot experience on acquiring instrument flight skills, phase I (FAA-CT-81-38). Federal Aviation Administration.

Endsley, M. R. (1987). SAGAT: A methodology for the measurement of situational awareness (NOR DOC 87-83). Northrop Corp.

Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049543

Endsley, M. R., & Garland, D. J. (2000). Direct measurement of situational awareness: Validity and use of SAGAT. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245934995_Direct_Measurement_of_Situation_Awareness_Validity_and_Use_of_SAGAT

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). (2020). Aviation Instructor’s Handbook. https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/media/aviation_instructors_handbook.pdf

Holmes, C. W., & Childs, J. M. (1982). The effects of pilot experience on acquiring instrument flight skills, phase II (FAA-CT-82-35). Federal Aviation Administration.

Lane, S. (2009). 21st century flight training: General aviation manual for primary flight training in the new millennium. Aviation Supplies & Academics.

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). (2010). Introduction of glass avionics into light aircraft. http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/SS1001.pdf

Ritchie, M. L., & Hanes, L. F. (1964). An experimental analysis of transfer effects between contact and instrument flight training (FAA Contract FA-WA-4691). Ritchie Inc.

Ritchie, M. L., & Michael, A. L. (1955). Transfer between instrument and contact flight training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 39(3), 145–149.

Wright, S., & O'Hare, D. (2015). Can a glass cockpit display help (or hinder) performance of novices in simulated flight training? Applied Ergonomics, 47, 292–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.10.017