5-1 CHAPTER 5. PILOT MONITORING (§ 121.544)
5.1 General. Flightpath monitoring involves comparing the actual flightpath to what is expected/desired. This requires pilots to observe and interpret flightpath data, aircraft configuration status, automated system modes, and onboard systems appropriate to the phase of flight any time the aircraft is in motion, including during taxi.
5.1.1 Several studies of crew performance, incidents, and accidents have identified inadequate monitoring and cross-checking as vulnerabilities for aviation safety. Effective monitoring and cross-checking can be the last barrier or line of defense against accidents because detecting an error or unsafe situation may break the chain of events leading to an accident. Conversely, when this layer of defense is absent, errors and unsafe situations may go undetected, potentially leading to adverse safety consequences. Therefore, it is required that operators establish operational policy and procedures on PM duties, and implement effective training for flightcrews and instructors on the task of monitoring (§ 121.544). This chapter describes effective monitoring, how to define and train PM duties, and integration of the task of monitoring into SOPs. Additionally, this section discusses special considerations for monitoring autoflight operations.
5.2 Operational Policy and Procedure Considerations. Operators should have documented policies and procedures to describe the duties of both the PF and PM and to support effective flightpath monitoring. These policies and procedures should state that the primary task of the flightcrew while the aircraft is in motion is FPM and emphasize the importance of vigilance to the flightpath.
5.2.1 In a two-pilot operation, one pilot is designated as PF and one pilot is designated as PM.
Each operator should explicitly define the duties of the PF and PM to include:
1. At any point in time during the flight, one pilot is the PF and one pilot is the PM.
2. The PF is responsible for managing, and the PF and PM are responsible for monitoring, the current and projected flightpath and energy of the aircraft at all times.
3. The PF is always engaged in flying the aircraft (even when the aircraft is under AP control) and avoids tasks or activities that distract from that engagement. If the PF needs to engage in activities that would distract from aircraft control, the PF should transfer aircraft control to the other pilot, and then assume the PM role.
4. Transfer of PF and PM roles should be done positively with verbal assignment and verbal acceptance to include a short brief of aircraft state.
5. The PM supports the PF at all times, staying abreast of aircraft state and ATC instructions and clearances.
5.2.2 To effectively monitor, the pilot should know what information to attend to and when. 20 The pilot should apply strategies to perceive flight deck indications and interpret their meaning for the current context and assimilate them into a mental model of airplane state
20 For effective monitoring of the flightpath, cognitive skills of perceiving, interpreting, and assimilating are integrated with pilot knowledge into an understanding of the flightpath and the airplane’s relation to it.
5-2 relative to the flightpath. The pilot actively compares their mental model of what is expected (or normal for the context) to the indications in the environment (e.g., flight instrument, mode annunciations) that are available. Therefore, the pilot needs to have sufficient knowledge to form an accurate mental model of the aircraft systems and performance, to know what information to acquire, and how to process it to formulate an accurate understanding of the current state of the aircraft flightpath. Differences between what is expected/desired and what is observed should trigger corrective action.
5.2.3 Effective flightpath monitoring also requires effective management of attention. If pilots become distracted or workload is high, attention may be insufficient. The management of attention is an important cognitive skill that requires effort. Because the modern flight deck has many visual displays and sources of information, pilot attention may be captured by interpreting aircraft system behavior or compelling, information-rich displays. Therefore, it is important that pilots are skilled at managing attention, information, and distractions to ensure flightpath remains the primary focus of the flightcrew.
5.2.4 The operator should implement the policies into SOPs to support monitoring and cross-checking functions, and appropriate interventions. If not designed appropriately, some SOPs may actually detract from effective monitoring. For example, one operator required a passenger address (PA) announcement when climbing and descending through 10,000 feet. This requirement had the unintended effect of “splitting the flight deck” at a time when frequency changes and new altitude clearances were likely. When the operator reviewed its procedures it realized that this procedure detracted from having both pilots “in the loop” at a critical point and consequently decided to eliminate it. Operators should review existing SOPs and modify those that can detract from monitoring.
5.2.5 Autoflight mode awareness is of particular importance because effective monitoring of autoflight modes is necessary for successful FPM. Below are some recommended strategies for effective monitoring of the autoflight modes that could be included in operator policies and procedures. The pilot should:
1. Stay in the loop by mentally flying the aircraft even when the AP or other pilot is flying the aircraft.
2. Monitor the flight instruments just as when the pilot is manually flying the aircraft.
3. Be diligent in monitoring all flightpath changes including pilot actions, system modes, and aircraft responses.
4. Always make monitoring of the flightpath a priority task when changes are being made.
5. Always check the FMA after a change has been selected on the autoflight mode control panel.
6. Check the FMAs and flight instruments after being distracted to regain full awareness of the flightpath state.
5-3
7. Maintain an awareness of the autoflight systems and modes selected by the crew or automatically initiated by the FMS (mode awareness) to effectively monitor the flightpath.
8. Maintain an awareness of the capabilities available in engaged autoflight modes to avoid mode confusion.
9. Effectively monitor systems and selected modes to ensure that the aircraft is on the desired flightpath.
5.2.6 Operator policies and procedures should adequately address the potential for intervention.21 Policies and procedures for expected interventions should be established, including:
• Deviation callouts, deviation parameters, required callouts, conditions for “takeover”
(e.g., “2-challenge rule”), automation management standards (e.g., “change mode of automation under the following conditions”), etc.
• Expected responses to callouts; conditions for takeover (e.g., subtle incapacitation, and/or no correction after two challenges); callouts and actions associated with a takeover of control of the aircraft; ensuring positive change of control; and the PF’s expected actions after a takeover.
• If the PF does not correct the flightpath deviation in a timely manner, the PM should intervene based on operator policy and procedures.
5.2.7 Operators should have policy and procedures that enable the flightcrew to verify and validate both the accuracy and applicability of automated system inputs and outputs by conducting reasonableness checks.22 Reasonableness checks allow flightcrews to detect and address potentially conflicting, ambiguous, inapplicable, or erroneous automated system inputs/outputs. These procedures should also specify how and when to perform reasonableness checks. These should integrate with existing procedures and training to guide the conduct of reasonableness checks of automated system inputs and outputs during the FPM planning activity for each phase of flight.
5.3 Training Considerations. In designing training programs, operators should develop specific learning objectives with associated training methodologies that address knowledge and skills for monitoring. Training should provide pilots with the knowledge and skills needed to satisfy the duties of PM, to effectively monitor the flightpath, to communicate with the other pilot(s) when there is a flightpath deviation, and to know when and how to intervene if necessary. Training should also include an understanding of the barriers to effective monitoring and how to mitigate them. Operators should train and check flightcrews on the following topics, including:
21 AC 120-71, Chapter 6, Pilot Monitoring.
22 A reasonableness check is any check that is carried out to verify that a result looks “reasonable” given other available knowledge and information.
5-4
1. The roles and duties of the PF and PM.
2. How to achieve effective flightpath monitoring.
3. Managing attention.
4. Intervention.
5. Conducting reasonableness checks.
6. Barriers to effective monitoring.
7. Common errors and mitigations in monitoring.
Note: Each of these topics is discussed more below.
5.3.1 R oles and Duties of PF and PM. Pilots should be trained on the duties of both roles as documented in the policies and procedures. Pilots should be trained to recognize when the PF is not adequately controlling the flightpath or when the PM is not adequately monitoring the flightpath. This training should include pilot task loading and signs of diminished performance. Some examples include lack of communication, channelized attention, and failure to make required callouts.
5.3.2 Effective Flightp ath Monitoring. Pilots should be trained to recognize when the airplane is not conforming to the planned flightpath and on strategies for appropriate intervention (see paragraph 5.3.4). They should be trained that there are predictable situations during each flight when the risk of a flightpath deviation is increased, heightening the importance of proper task/workload management.
5.3.2.1 T raining should also include recognition of and signs of diminished crewmember performance on the part of the PF or PM (e.g., lack of communication, channelized attention, failure to make required callouts, etc.).
Training should include monitoring-related CRM, TEM, and human performance vulnerabilities related to monitoring, the importance of monitoring, and the operator-approved practices that achieve effective monitoring of the flightpath.
5.3.2.2 Training should ensure that pilots have a thorough understanding of the knowledge and skills to apply the combinations of flight guidance and flight control automation (e.g., given a certain set of circumstances, what will happen next?). Training should also ensure pilots are proficient and can transition seamlessly between combinations/levels of flight guidance/flight control automated systems (including manual flight) during line operations.
Training should be enhanced to teach pilots to interpret the FMA and other FPM systems relative to aircraft state and to know what to expect based on programming, configuration, and aircraft state. Training should explicitly address the management of deviations or off-path operations and include strategies for managing “automation surprises” and unknown situations.
5.3.3 M anaging A ttention. Pilots should be trained to effectively maintain vigilance of the flightpath. Training should include specific strategies for managing attention to support
5-5 flightpath monitoring and where and when to focus attention, and reinforce prioritization of flightpath. The quantity and type of information available to the flightcrew has changed substantially over the last decades. This trend is expected to continue as new technologies and products are introduced into the flight deck to enable new kinds of operations. Training should include methods to recognize the flight phases or situations when they are most vulnerable to flightpath deviations (including when little time exists to correct deviations) so flightcrews may strategically plan workload and manage distractions to maximize attention to flightpath during those phases.
5.3.3.1 Pilots should be trained how to monitor for the specific purpose of protecting the flightpath while they are engaged in concurrent tasks. They should be trained how to prioritize tasks and switch between tasks so that they do not neglect monitoring of the flightpath during potentially vulnerable states
(e.g., low altitude lateral or vertical changes). Training should include information and task management strategies that enable pilots to use charts, EFBs, the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS), etc., while also effectively monitoring the trajectory and airplane energy state.
5.3.3.2 Pilots should be trained on managing distractions to ensure the flightpath remains the primary focus of flightcrew attention. In the flight deck there are multiple competing demands for pilot attention.
5.3.4 Intervention. Pilots should be trained on progressive intervention strategies and how to apply them when they are in the role of PM, as documented in the operator’s policy and procedures. A progressive intervention strategy is initiated by communicating a flightpath deviation (alert), then suggesting a course of action (advocacy and assertion), and then directly intervening, if necessary, by taking the controls to prevent an incident or accident. If the PF does not correct the flightpath deviation in a timely manner, the PM should intervene based on operator policy and procedures. A pilot taking control should announce the transfer of control. For example:
• PM calls “One dot high;” PF calls “correcting” and returns to glidepath in a timely manner.
• PF does not respond to two successive challenges; then, per operator’s procedure, the PM announces, “I have control, going around,” and initiates a go-around as PF.
5.3.4.1 When a flightpath problem is identified, the PF should know appropriate ways of correcting it by taking action with the flightpath guidance or control equipment. For example:
1. PF notes speed increasing on a path descent and deploys the speedbrakes.
2. After a change to the FMS, the PF expected a level turn to the right at constant speed. Instead, the aircraft begins to roll into a left turn, the power begins to increase, and the aircraft starts to pitch up. The PF
5-6 immediately disengages the AP and AT and manually returns the aircraft to the desired flightpath and energy.
3. PF notes aircraft descending slightly below glidepath and speed decreasing, but the wind-shear warnings immediately annunciate and the flight guidance automation switches to wind-shear escape commands. The PF decides not to interfere with the equipment.
4. PF notes aircraft vertical navigation (VNAV) is not functioning as expected to maintain the intended flightpath. The pilot reverts to another mode, such as vertical speed, to maintain the intended flightpath using autoflight functions.
5.3.4.2 The intervention strategies may also include the PM taking control of the aircraft if the PF is not responding correctly in time to address the flightpath problem. Training should provide effective means of taking over the PF role if it is determined that the PF is not correcting a flightpath issue in a timely manner. This should include strategies for managing the communications and methods of intervention that are appropriate for the situation (e.g., PF is becoming incapacitated vs. PF missed an important flightpath cue). Training should include communication strategies for what to say, how to say it, and when to speak up, etc. Training should also include methods for judging whether intervention is needed and deciding on an appropriate course of action (e.g., the severity of the situation, acceptable time allowed before intervention, etc.).
5.3.5 C onducting Reasonableness Checks. Pilots should be trained in how and when to do reasonableness checking. This should include training on how to detect and address potentially conflicting, ambiguous, inapplicable, or erroneous automated system inputs/outputs. These should integrate with existing procedures and training to provide guidance on the conduct of reasonableness checks of information inputs and outputs during the FPM planning activity for each phase of flight (e.g., predeparture, pre-descent, pre-approach). Operators should train pilots to conduct reasonableness checks that include how and when to perform such checks. Reasonableness checks should be conducted for automated system inputs/outputs the pilot uses in the FPM planning activity for an upcoming phase of flight.
5.3.5.1 R easonableness checks of automated system inputs/outputs should be easy to perform and enable pilots to reliably detect gross errors and validate operational applicability of inputs/outputs (e.g., “Does the information make sense?”). Operators should define when to perform a reasonableness check and should ensure that reasonableness checking does not conflict with the performance of their existing operational procedures.
5.3.5.2 An appropriate reasonableness check methodology should enable pilots to: 23
23 ACT ARC Recommendation 18-1, Reasonableness Checks of Information Automation Systems.
5-7
1. Detect and address potentially inaccurate/inapplicable system inputs/outputs before using the information in a way that impacts the flightpath.
a. The appropriate means to detect inaccurate/inapplicable system inputs/outputs could include development and training of standard “rules of thumb” or “ballpark” figures so that crews have sufficient baseline knowledge of what a “reasonable” input or output should look like, permitting the crew to detect and investigate system inputs/outputs that are outside the boundaries of “reasonable.”
b. The appropriate means to address the inaccurate/inapplicable input/output and maintain the integrity of the flightpath will vary based on operational context. For example, if time is unlimited
(e.g., reviewing performance numbers at the gate), a discrepancy might be addressed by seeking additional information from multiple sources to cross-check the inputs/outputs. If time is limited
(e.g., reviewing descent calculations approaching Top of Descent (TOD)), a discrepancy might be addressed by reverting to a simpler, more conservative choice.
2. Maintain flightpath as the primary focus so that resolving inaccuracy or inapplicability of system inputs/outputs does not distract from the primary task of FPM.
5.3.5.3 Operators can identify how, how many, and when to conduct reasonableness checks based on their own equipment and operating environment, and through their operational feedback, training feedback, and SMS programs. This should include safety data programs such as LOSA, ASAP, and FOQA, as well as industry programs (e.g., manufacturer–operator meetings, accident reports, the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS), and the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) Program).
5.3.6 Barriers to Effective Flightpath Monitoring. Pilots should be trained and evaluated on recognizing barriers to effective flightpath monitoring and indications of inadequate flightpath monitoring. Conditions that may lead to inadequate flightpath monitoring may include high task loading, insufficient attention management, or distractions. For example, during times of high task loading, pilots may focus on individual tasks or channelize their attention, which may lead to diminished communication between the crewmembers. Training should include strategies to respond to these risks and identify the resources to be used during high workload on the flight deck.
5.3.6.1 Although communications and assertiveness skills have been mentioned, there are a variety of other “nontechnical” skills generally contained in the best CRM and TEM training programs, such as teamwork, time and task management, etc., that are also very valuable in support of a pilot’s ability to monitor and intervene effectively if needed.
5-8
5.3.7 Common Errors and Mitigations in Monitoring. Pilots should be trained on common errors in monitoring the flightpath, and potential mitigations for those errors. This includes training on appropriate methods of recognizing precursors to, and signs of, degraded monitoring and on resolving monitoring errors and/or lapses.
5.4 Instructor/Evaluator (I/E) Considerations. I/Es should have a thorough understanding of FPM, their associated systems, and their operational use; the roles of PF and PM; and the relevant operator policies and procedures to effectively train and evaluate pilots. I/Es should be taught how to properly teach and evaluate monitoring. I/Es should also be knowledgeable about managing attention, so they can effectively train pilots on the potential for distractions on the flight deck that lead to ineffective monitoring and improper FPM. I/Es should assess the pilot’s monitoring skills and role as PM where applicable.
6-1 CHAPTER 6. ENERGY MANAGEMENT
6.1 General. Energy management is defined as the planning and control of airspeed (or groundspeed), altitude, thrust, aerodynamic drag (speedbrakes, slats/flaps, and gear), and trajectory to achieve desired lateral and vertical flightpath targets appropriate for the operational objectives. Energy state is the combination of kinetic and potential energy of the aircraft, which means the combination of speed (kinetic energy), altitude (gravitational potential energy), and thrust (chemical potential energy) available. During maneuvering, these three types of energy can be traded, or exchanged, sometimes at the cost of additional drag.
6.1.1 Industry reports and operational data from airlines and aircraft manufacturers indicate that pilots have vulnerabilities in awareness and management of the aircraft’s energy state, across multiple phases of flight, which is potentially a significant contributing factor in flightpath deviations, incidents, and accidents. These data reveal challenges at times in complying with arrival and departure procedures, approach and landing operations, and during go-arounds. Increased precision is required on new and planned future airspace procedures (e.g., Performance-Based Navigation (PBN), area navigation (RNAV), Required Navigation Performance (RNP), Trajectory Based Operations (TBO), Radius-to-Fix (RF) legs). Therefore, pilot understanding of and proficiency for energy management during such operations are critical.
6.1.2 For example, the pilot needs to understand how to manage the vertical flightpath and aircraft energy during the arrival and approach phases; how the pilot does that will vary based on the type of approach flown (e.g., RNAV Standard Terminal Arrival (STAR) to an ILS approach or to a visual approach) and ATC interventions. Pilots need to be able to plan the tasks related to the desired aircraft energy state for the arrival and approach, in a timely manner. If the approach clearance or aircraft energy changes, the pilot needs to have the knowledge and skills to recognize actual or pending energy state changes to decide what actions need to be made to manage the flightpath and aircraft energy accurately and efficiently.
6.1.3 This chapter provides guidance on recommended operational policy, procedures, and considerations for energy management to support effective FPM. Operators should refer to their own data from SMSs and from industry reports to determine additional areas of emphasis. Section 121.423, AC 120-111, and AC 120-109 address knowledge and skill elements and training requirements for energy management as it pertains to upset prevention and recovery, including stalls, high altitude flight, and flight at minimum controllable airspeed. Thus, the material in this AC supplements but does not cover that material.
6.2 Operational Policy and Procedure Considerations for Energy Management. An operator’s policy and procedures should address the roles and responsibilities for the PF, PM, and other flightcrew members related to the integration of managing energy and flightpath, in all phases of flight. Energy management is the responsibility of the PF who should take into account the aircraft’s inertia, limitations, and crew ability in the prevailing environmental conditions and aircraft state. Pilots should continuously monitor
6-2 and evaluate the energy state of the aircraft (high/low/fast/slow) so that they are able to assess when changes to the energy state are needed, occur, or are projected to occur. The trading of energy should be accomplished, though, with a view toward capturing and maintaining the final desired energy state. Pilots should be able to maintain the flightpath and desired energy state in any combination of manual and automated flight modes.
6.2.1 Operational policy and procedures should consider the following questions related to energy management:
• Is the aircraft high or low and is the speed fast or slow in comparison to the desired vertical flightpath and speed at the moment?
• Will the aircraft be on the desired vertical flightpath and at the desired speed target at various points in the future?
• What needs to be done to adjust the vertical flightpath or speed if it’s not correct at the moment, or not on track to reach a future target?
• Is the aircraft within its operational envelopes and will the aircraft remain within operational limitations?
6.3 Training Considerations.
6.3.1 Knowledge and Skills. Energy management involves the following pilot knowledge and skills:24
1. Pilots should be able to determine where the aircraft is in time and space, in terms of both physical position and energy state, in relation to the desired vertical profile and speed targets (i.e., is the aircraft is too high or low, fast or slow).
2. Pilots should be able to predict where the aircraft will be in the future, in terms of both position and energy state, in relation to the desired future vertical profile and speed targets.
3. Pilots should be able to make the proper flight control inputs (whether through manual control or through automated systems) required to adjust the flightpath and energy state to achieve the desired current and future profile and speed targets.
6.3.1.1 Knowledge and skills can be developed through training on how to:
1. Determine the aircraft energy state,
2. Understand how all available flight controls (primary and secondary, manual and automatic) can be used to affect the aircraft energy state, and
3. Create action plans to meet the desired aircraft energy state targets specific to the operational requirements.
24 ACT ARC Recommendation 19-4, Energy Management, Attachment C, Energy Management Training Objectives and Training Scenarios.
6-3
6.3.1.2 As a foundation for energy management, pilots should reinforce their basic skills and knowledge related to flying manually (as discussed in Chapter 3) and to flying with automated systems. Operator training should address energy management during normal situations, as well as during unexpected, abnormal, or emergency situations.
6.3.2 T raining Topics. In designing training programs (initial, transition, upgrade, and recurrent), operators should develop specific learning objectives with associated training methodologies that address energy management knowledge and skills. Examples of topics to consider include:
1. Energy management considerations for each phase of flight, including energy-related threats and mitigations against those threats.
2. Methods to determine whether vertical path and speed constraints (published or ATC-directed) can be met.
3. How to use lift and drag devices to manage energy.
4. Techniques for flying high energy approaches (e.g., where pilots have to descend quickly for an approach and landing at an airport with terrain or other restrictions, such as Eagle County Regional Airport (EGE) or San Francisco International Airport (SFO)).
5. Common errors in energy management, operational traps, and potential threats that could lead to errors, such as:
• Late changes in assigned routing, clearance limit, altitude assignment, or arrival procedure.
• Loss of FMS lateral or vertical profile requiring intervention to correct path or route.
• Untimely speed assignment changes, traffic avoidance altitude constraints, and other unexpected ATC restrictions.
• Current forecast and unexpected weather conditions (winds, icing, high density altitude, etc.) that affect aircraft performance and energy state.
6.3.3 Training Scenarios. Recommended training scenarios include the following, but should address the operator’s specific circumstances (e.g., pilot demographics and operational environment) and common error trends as identified through operator/industry data and safety programs. The recommended scenarios may be incorporated as part of the MBT required by extended envelope training, in a LOFT scenario, or other SBT and integrated with the MFO training recommendations earlier in this AC.
1. Takeoffs and go-arounds at light weight with low altitude level off.
2. Departure procedures (DP) with one or more climb restrictions, where environmental conditions and/or aircraft performance may create a challenge.
6-4
3. High altitude, performance-limited situations, to include:
a. Flight at or near maximum altitude for the weight and conditions.
b. Temperature changes at high altitude. Specifically, flight from colder to warmer air that may result in a reduction of available thrust.
c. High density altitude takeoff, climb, approach, and landing.
4. Aircraft-specific deceleration and descent capabilities, to include:
a. Aircraft-specific energy management capabilities, challenges, and common errors.
Examples may include descent range at idle at best glidespeed and in contrast with other configurations, and speeds with varying wind/groundspeed.
b. Appropriate use of speedbrakes/flaps/gear.
5. Descent restrictions, which may include procedures determined to be complex or challenging, to include:
a. Off-route ATC vectors and descent restrictions that take the aircraft off the expected and engaged lateral and vertical profiles with subsequent ATC instructions to resume the previous route and profile.
b. Late ATC instructions.
6. Visual approaches, including:
a. Scenarios commenced from both “high and fast” and “low and slow” initial conditions, to include:
• Identifying general conditions where recovery to a stable approach may not be possible and a go-around is necessary.
• Identifying what combination of drag, thrust, and pitch is appropriate to your aircraft type.
b. Scenarios where ATC does not vector the aircraft to final.
c. Scenarios when groundspeed is significantly different from indicated airspeed, but when environmental conditions permit landing.
d. Approaches where ATC does not assign speed.
e. Approaches with a runway change.
f. Landing heavy weight on a short/contaminated or performance-limited runway, including planning for turnoff after landing.
g. Energy management during maximum performance escape maneuvers (e.g., wind shear, Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) or enhanced ground proximity warning system (EGPWS) responses).
6.4 Instructor/Evaluator (I/E) Considerations. In addition to understanding energy management and being able to apply it to FPM, I/E should be trained on specific techniques and maneuvers to effectively demonstrate, train, and evaluate energy management principles.