Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

ASA AQP--- if you know the scenarios, please PM me

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
It seems there is a disagreement over the whole purpose of AQP events. Is it purely testing, or is it training? Flyer1015 thinks (or desires) Sims should only exist to weed out the weak, while Mickey Mouse thinks they should exist to improve the skills of the pilot group.

I once read a great book (unfortunately can't remember the name) that studied how individuals responded to life or death scenarios, when the situation was a completely new experience for them. It turns out that if the individual had ZERO experience or even similar experience, they froze up and/or failed. But those who survived the scenario had had some type of previous experience that they were able to draw from and modify to fit the situation. But the most interesting thing was, if the individual had simply read about a similar situation, their brain was able to use that info to formulate a workable solution.

While every airline has a few problem children who need to be weeded out (the supposed goal of pure testing), the reality of the situation is that they are NOT weeded out--they are almost always passed along. So it makes much more sense to try to improve the experience levels of ALL the pilots, as this will have the greatest chance of keeping the fleet out of smoking holes. So I agree with Mickey Mouse.
 
Flyer, quit being a moron. Anyone who has ever flown a sim knows that it has very little resemblance to actual line flying. It's a procedure trainer. Passing a checkride does not make you a good line pilot and vice versa. It's an evaluation.

An argumentative response loses all meaning to me when resorting to name calling. Go do what you want to your hearts content.


Flyer1015 thinks (or desires) Sims should only exist to weed out the weak
No, I think sims should be training and learning.
 
At 9E it's 6 month LOFT (non jeopardy), 6 month PC (jeopardy event). I always enjoyed going into LOFTs blindly, knowing I might learn something new but not worrying about a jeopardy event.. The PC is a known quantity and being a jeopardy event, it is very easy to evaluate if you pass or fail based on certain tolerances. LOFTs are completely subjective. I really hate the way regional airlines are adapting AQP.
 
No, I think sims should be training and learning.

Okay, so we are in agreement. Research shows that simply testing a response to a situation that has never been encountered before is not training, and the only learning that would occur is if you fail the test. But attaching the negative stigma of failure does not provide the optimum learning experience.

So we should agree that training prior to testing should yield the greatest learning. And initial training that occurred perhaps a decade ago does not count as recurrent training.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top