SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LOFT (Line Oriented Flight Training)”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2019

The Comprehensive LOFT

The training of pilots at major US air carriers has changed little over the years. These courses often begin in learning each and every sub-system of the particular airplane to be flown. The training course culminates in a series of training sessions in a full-motion, full-mission flight simulator. Most US airlines now incorporate one final simulator training session known as LOFT, Line Oriented Flight Training, where rather than going through a series of disconnected, isolated, flight maneuvers, the session is conducted as a flight from a departure airport to a destination airport. Flying for an Air Line, one is a Line Pilot, flying the "line." And so the LOFT session in the simulator is supposed to represent the reality of line operations and thus prepare the trainee to fly the line. But if the ultimate goal of the training is to produce a pilot who is ready to safely and efficiently fly the line, shouldn't all training be "line oriented"? This paper describes an approach to structuring airline flight training such that all training is "line oriented." This approach represents an opportunity to translate many of the training principles offered by Healy and her colleagues into training specifications.

Training Principles↗

NASA NTRS2002

CRM Assessment: Determining the Generalization of Rater Calibration Training. Summary of Research Report: Gold Standards Training

The extent to which pilot instructors are trained to assess crew resource management (CRM) skills accurately during Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) and Line Operational Evaluation (LOE) scenarios is critical. Pilot instructors must make accurate performance ratings to ensure that proper feedback is provided to flight crews and appropriate decisions are made regarding certification to fly the line. Furthermore, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) requires that instructors be trained explicitly to evaluate both technical and CRM performance (i.e., rater training) and also requires that proficiency and standardization of instructors be verified periodically. To address the critical need for effective pilot instructor training, the American Institutes for Research (AIR) reviewed the relevant research on rater training and, based on "best practices" from this research, developed a new strategy for training pilot instructors to assess crew performance. In addition, we explored new statistical techniques for assessing the effectiveness of pilot instructor training. The results of our research are briefly summarized below. This summary is followed by abstracts of articles and book chapters published under this grant.

Baker, David P.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Use of airplanes for loft training

The use of an aircraft for line oriented flight training (LOFT) is examined. Cockpit resource management (CRM) and LOFT training are compared. The advantages of the LOFT is a better cost effectiveness since there is no need to buy a simulator. The flight crew workload can be limited to a minimum.

Sele, M.↗

NASA NTRS1996

A Cross-Industry Analysis of LOFT Debriefings

Line Oriented Simulation (LOS) iss widely used to provide crews opportunities to practice Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) concepts in realistic, challenging simulated flight situations. LOS includes both Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT), the original "non-jeopardy" form in which the crews are not graded on their performance, and Line Oriented Evaluation (LOE). In LOE, crews are graded, which is required in those airlines that participate in the FAA's Advanced Qualification Program (ALP). How much crews learn in LOS arid take back to the line hinges on the effectiveness of the debriefing that follows the LOS. The simulation itself is a busy, intense experience, and thoughtful discussion afterwards is necessary for the crew to sort out and interpret what happened and why. Instructors are expected to lead briefings in a way that encourages crew members to analyze for themselves their performance in the LOS. Rather than lecturing the crew in the traditional manner on what they did right and wrong, the instructor is expected to facilitate self-discovery and self-critique by the crew. We have recently completed a study in which we observed 36 LOFT briefings at 5 major U.S. airlines. We audiotape recorded the briefings, transcribed the recordings, and coded for more than 70 variables. Our analysis addresses four broad questions: To what extent do instructors attempt to facilitate crew self-analysis? What techniques do instructors use to facilitate and how effective are these techniques? What is the character of crew participation? To what extent do briefings emphasize CRM and crew performance? We discuss the implications of our findings for ALP and LOE.

Dismukes, Key↗

NASA NTRS1996

Translating Research Into Airline Practice: Case Studies In Collaboration

Airline training departments are avid customers for research that will help them enhance the effectiveness of training and the safety of flight operations. However, various factors often make it difficult for training department managers to draw upon the large body of human factors research, e.g.: research may not address the specific questions facing the training departments, the research literature may not be in a form that training managers can readily interpret, researchers' recommendations may be too expensive or impractical to implement, etc. This panel will discuss ways in which researchers can work with training departments to design research and translate findings into products that airlines can use readily. This collaboration is most effective when it is an integral part of the study from its inception. To illustrate the process of collaboration we will use as a case study the recently completed LOFT (Line Oriented Flight Training) Debriefing research project. We will summarize the findings from that study and discuss how we translated those findings into two training tools: a manual on how to facilitate LOFT debriefings and a video that illustrates facilitation techniques in a realistically enacted debriefing. In some cases, instead of starting a new research project, training department needs can be addressed by reviewing the existing research literature and using expert opinion to develop products that specifically address those needs. To illustrate this approach we will discuss a recent informal working group of scientists and airline personnel that met to develop training material to enhance situation awareness. This group reviewed scientific literature and ASRS (Aviation Safety Reporting System) reports, analyzed contributing factors, and produced a model for managing situation awareness.

Dismukes, R. Key↗

NASA NTRS1981

Guidelines for Line-Oriented Flight Training, Volume 1

Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) is a developing training technology which synthesizes high-fidelity aircraft simulation and high-fidelity line-operations simulation to provide realistic, dynamic pilot training in a simulated line environment. LOFT is an augmentation of existing pilot training which concentrates upon command, leadership, and resource management skills. This report, based on an NASA/Industry workshop held in January, 1981, is designed to serve as a handbook for LOFT users. In addition to providing background information, guidelines are presented for designing LOFT scenarios, conducting real-time LOFT operations, pilot debriefing, and instructor qualification and training. The final chapter addressed other uses of LOFT and line-operations (or full-mission) simulation.

Lauber, J. K.↗

NASA NTRS1987

The development and implementation of cockpit resource management in UAL recurrent training

Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) for United Airlines started in 1976. At that time it was basically no more than a line-simulated training function conducted in a full-mission simulator with no attention or stress on its human factor content. Very soon after the implementation of the LOFT program concerns were voiced about certain crew behavioral situations they were observing in the flight crew's execution of cockpit duties. These duties involved emergency procedures as well as irregular and normal procedures and situations. It was evident that new information was surfacing concerning crew interaction, or its lack thereof, in the cockpit and its effect on satisfactory performance. These observations naturally raised the question of how this information translated into the safety of aircraft operations. A training system had to be repetitive, the crew interactive, and the training had to be conducted under the crew concept. The foundation had to have two other factors: (1) it was necessary to have adequate human factor content, and (2) an advanced state-of-the-art simulator and appropriate electronic devices were required. These concepts are further discussed.

Shroyer, David H.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Facilitation techniques as predictors of crew participation in LOFT debriefings

Based on theories of adult learning and airline industry guidelines for Crew Resource Management (CRM), the stated objective during Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) debriefings is for instructor pilots (IP's) to facilitate crew self-analysis of performance. This study reviews 19 LOFT debriefings from two major U.S. airlines to examine the relationship between IP efforts at facilitation and associated characteristics of crew participation. A subjective rating scale called the Debriefing Assessment Battery was developed and utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of IP facilitation and the quality of crew participation. The results indicate that IP content, encouragement, and questioning techniques are highly and significantly correlated with, and can therefore predict, the degree and depth of crew participation.

McDonnell, L. K.↗

NASA NTRS1997

LOFT Debriefings: An Analysis of Instructor Techniques and Crew Participation

This study analyzes techniques instructors use to facilitate crew analysis and evaluation of their Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) performance. A rating instrument called the Debriefing Assessment Battery (DAB) was developed which enables raters to reliably assess instructor facilitation techniques and characterize crew participation. Thirty-six debriefing sessions conducted at five U.S. airlines were analyzed to determine the nature of instructor facilitation and crew participation. Ratings obtained using the DAB corresponded closely with descriptive measures of instructor and crew performance. The data provide empirical evidence that facilitation can be an effective tool for increasing the depth of crew participation and self-analysis of CRM performance. Instructor facilitation skill varied dramatically, suggesting a need for more concrete hands-on training in facilitation techniques. Crews were responsive but fell short of actively leading their own debriefings. Ways to improve debriefing effectiveness are suggested.

Dismukes, R. Key↗

NASA NTRS1989

Evaluating the effectiveness of cockpit resource management training

The concept of providing flight crews with intensive training in crew coordination and interpersonal skills (cockpit resource management training - CRM) is outlined with emphasis on full mission simulator training (line-oriented flight training - LOFT). Findings from several airlines that have instituted CRM and LOFT are summarized. Four types of criteria used for evaluating CRM programs: observer ratings of crew behavior, measures of attitudes regarding cockpit management, self-reports by participants on the value of the training, and case studies of CRM-related incidents and accidents are covered. Attention is focused on ratings of the performance of crews during line flights and during simulator sessions conducted as a part of LOFT. A boomerang effect - the emergence of a subgroup that has changed the attitudes in the opposite direction from that desired is emphasized.

Helmreich, Robert L.↗

NASA NTRS1991

The impact of cockpit automation on crew coordination and communication. Volume 1: Overview, LOFT evaluations, error severity, and questionnaire data

The purpose was to examine, jointly, cockpit automation and social processes. Automation was varied by the choice of two radically different versions of the DC-9 series aircraft, the traditional DC-9-30, and the glass cockpit derivative, the MD-88. Airline pilot volunteers flew a mission in the simulator for these aircraft. Results show that the performance differences between the crews of the two aircraft were generally small, but where there were differences, they favored the DC-9. There were no criteria on which the MD-88 crews performed better than the DC-9 crews. Furthermore, DC-9 crews rated their own workload as lower than did the MD-88 pilots. There were no significant differences between the two aircraft types with respect to the severity of errors committed during the Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) flight. The attitude questionnaires provided some interesting insights, but failed to distinguish between DC-9 and MD-88 crews.

Wiener, Earl L.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Realistic training for effective crew performance

Evaluation of incident and accident statistics reveals that most problems occur not because of a lack of proficiency in pilot training, but because of the inability to coordinate skills into effective courses of action. Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) and Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) programs provide training which will develop both individual crew member skills, as well as those associated with effective group function. A study conducted by NASA at the request of the U.S. Congress supports the argument for training that enhances crew performance in addition to providing individual technical skills, and is described in detail.

Foushee, H. C.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Introduction to Trans Australia Airlines CRM training

Trans Australia believes that its excellent accident rate record is due to a number of factors. It has a good group of standard operating procedures, and its crews are pretty well self-disciplined and adhere to those procedures. But the other thing that it believes is a factor in its safety record is that perhaps it is also due to its preparedness to be innovative, to keep up with what is going on in the rest of the world and, if it looks to have value, then to be amongst the first to try it out. Trans Australia commenced a program similar to Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) fairly early in 1979--that being its first windshear program-- which leads to why they are doing a course of resource management training, which we have chosen to call Aircrew Team Management (ATM). This course is detailed in another presentation.

Davidson, Jim↗

NASA NTRS1987

Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) training in the 1550th combat crew training wing

The training program the 1550th Combat Crew Training Wing at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, implemented in September 1985 is discussed. The program is called Aircrew Coordination Training (ACT), and it is designed specifically to help aircrew members work more effectively as a team in their respective aircraft and hopefully to reduce human factors-related accidents. The scope of the 1550th CCTW's training responsibilities is described, the structure of the program, along with a brief look at the content of the academic part of the course. Then the Mission-Oriented Simulator Training (MOST) program is discussed; a program similar to the Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) programs. Finally, the future plans for the Aircrew Coordination Training Program at the 1550th is discussed.

Fiedler, Michael T.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Facilitating LOS Debriefings: A Training Manual

This manual is a practical guide to help airline instructors effectively facilitate debriefings of Line Oriented Simulations (LOS). It is based on a recently completed study of Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) debriefings at several U.S. airlines. This manual presents specific facilitation tools instructors can use to achieve debriefing objectives. The approach of the manual is to be flexible so it can be tailored to the individual needs of each airline. Part One clarifies the purpose and objectives of facilitation in the LOS setting. Part Two provides recommendations for clarifying roles and expectations and presents a model for organizing discussion. Part Tree suggests techniques for eliciting active crew participation and in-depth analysis and evaluation. Finally, in Part Four, these techniques are organized according to the facilitation model. Examples of how to effectively use the techniques are provided throughout, including strategies to try when the debriefing objectives are not being fully achieved.

McDonnell, Lori K.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Airline Crew Training

The discovery that human error has caused many more airline crashes than mechanical malfunctions led to an increased emphasis on teamwork and coordination in airline flight training programs. Human factors research at Ames Research Center has produced two crew training programs directed toward more effective operations. Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) defines areas like decision making, workload distribution, communication skills, etc. as essential in addressing human error problems. In 1979, a workshop led to the implementation of the CRM program by United Airlines, and later other airlines. In Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT), crews fly missions in realistic simulators while instructors induce emergency situations requiring crew coordination. This is followed by a self critique. Ames Research Center continues its involvement with these programs.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2017

Crew State Monitoring and Line-Oriented Flight Training for Attention Management

Loss of control - inflight (LOC-I) has historically represented the largest category of commercial aviation fatal accidents. A review of worldwide transport airplane accidents (2001-2010) indicated that loss of airplane state awareness (ASA) was responsible for the majority of the LOC-I fatality rate. The Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) ASA study identified 12 major themes that were indicated across the ASA accident and incident events. One of the themes was crew distraction or ineffective attention management, which was found to be involved in all 18 events including flight crew channelized attention, startle/surprise, diverted attention, and/or confirmation bias. Safety Enhancement (SE)-211, "Training for Attention Management" was formed to conduct research to develop and assess commercial airline training methods and realistic scenarios that can address these attention-related human performance limitations. This paper describes NASA SE-211 research for new design approaches and validation of line-oriented flight training (LOFT). Recent accident and incident data suggests that Spatial Disorientation (SD) and Loss-of-Energy State Awareness (LESA) for transport category aircraft are becoming an increasingly prevalent safety concern in all domestic and international operations (Commercial Aviation Safety Team, 2014a). SD is defined as an erroneous perception of aircraft attitude that can lead directly to a Loss-of-Control Inflight (LOC-I) event and result in an accident or incident. LESA is typically characterized by a failure to monitor or understand energy state indications (e.g., airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, commanded thrust) and a resultant failure to maintain safe flight.

Stephens, Chad↗

NASA NTRS1991

What makes a good LOFT scenario? Issues in advancing current knowledge of scenario design

An effort is made to ascertain which combinations of technical demands and crew coordination should be incorporated in training scenarios in order to maximize the effectiveness of training for crew members. Such high-fidelity simulation, which has come to be known as 'line-oriented flight training' or LOFT, involves the practice of both technical and crew coordination skills in a realistic setting, in conjunction with periodic reviews of performance via videotaped feedback. Attention is given to the integration of appropriate information, the measurement of objective task demands, the character of information from LOFT students, and the leeway allowed LOFT instructors.

Gregorich, Steven E.↗