THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PERSONAL COMPUTER AVIATION TRAINING DEVICE (PCATD), A FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICE (FTD), AND AN AIRPLANE IN CONDUCTING INSTRUMENT PROFICIENCY CHECKS

This project seeks to evaluate the effectiveness and reliability of a personal computer aviation training device (PCATD) and a flight training device (FTD) in conducting an IPC. The study will compare the performance of pilots receiving an IPC in a PCATD, in a FTD or in an airplane (IPC #1) with performance on an IPC in an airplane (IPC #2). This comparison between a PCATD and an airplane will investigate the effectiveness of the PCATD in administering an IPC. Currently, the PCATD is not approved for IPCs. The comparison between a Frasca and the airplane will determine whether the current rule to permit IPCs in a FTD is warranted. Finally, the performance of pilots receiving IPC #1 in an airplane will be compared with IPC #2 in an airplane with a second CFII. This comparison will permit the determination of the reliability of IPCs conducted in an airplane. INTRODUCTON the six-month period. After this time, the pilots in each group flew an instrument proficiency check (IPC #2). To maintain instrument currency, instrument pilots The comparison of IPC #1 and IPC #2 indicated that must meet the recency of experience requirements of both the PCATD and the Frasca FTD were more FAR 61.57(c) or (d) every six months. The recency of effective in maintaining instrument proficiency when experience requirements may be conducted in an compared to the control group and at least as effective as airplane or simulated in an approved flight training the airplane. The study also found that of 106 instrument device (FTD). If an instrument pilot fails to meet current pilots, only 45 (42.5%) were able to pass IPC #1. recency of experience requirements within a 12-month Of the group who received an IPC in a Frasca FTD to period, an instrument proficiency check (IPC) must be regain currency, only 22 of 59 were able to subsequently accomplished with a certified flight instructor, able to pass IPC #1 in an airplane. This study instrument (CFII) to regain instrument currency. established the effectiveness of PCATDs for use in Taylor, Lintern, Hulin, Talleur, Emanuel, and instrument currency training. However, the question of Phillips (1996, 1999) conducted a study to determine the whether PCATDs are effective for administering the IPC extent to which a personal computer aviation training has not been demonstrated. Based on the data above a device (PCATD) can be used to develop specific question concerning the effectiveness of the Frasca FTD instrument skills that are taught in instrument flight in administrating an IPC also arises. training and to determine the transfer of these skills to The purpose of the present study is to compare the the aircraft. This in turn led to an additional study by the performance of pilots receiving an IPC in a PCATD, a Institute of Aviation of the University of Illinois at FTD or an airplane (IPC #1) with their performance in Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) to determine the an airplane (IPC #2). The comparison of performance in effectiveness of PCATDs for maintaining instrument a PCATD to that in an airplane investigates the currency (Taylor, Talleur, Bradshaw, Emanuel, effectiveness of the PCATD as a device in which to Rantanen, Hulin and Lintern, 2001; Talleur, Taylor, administer an IPC. Currently, the PCATD is not Emanuel, Rantanen, and Bradshaw, in press). In the approved to administer IPCs. The comparison of latter study, a total of 106 instrument current pilots were performance in a FTD with performance in an airplane divided in four groups. The pilots in each group received will help determine whether the current rule to permit an instrument proficiency check (IPC #1). During a six- IPCs in a FTD is warranted. Finally, the comparison of month period following IPC #1, the pilots in three performance of pilots receiving IPC #1 in an airplane groups received recurrent training in a PCATD, a Frasca and IPC #2 in an airplane with a second CFII will permit flight training device (FTD), or an airplane, respectively. the determination of the reliability of IPCs conducted in The fourth (control) group received no training during an airplane.