system

Sorry, not all that excited here. There is already far too much automation in the aviation training world. Reliance on CBT over classrooms with a live instructor gains momentum leaving fairly large holes in the gamut of training. I do not at all contest CBT and automation for many routine or repetitive tasks like, say, how to run a new FMC, or adding CPDLC, or some system changes crews need to know about. Items that can be clearly and readily taught via a computer screen. I do feel that the kind of automation addressed in this article is nothing much more than the beginning of taking the instructor out of the cockpit.

A machine cannot do anything more than evaluate and report based upon a series of statements in lines of code. It cannot evaluate the response of the actual student only the results of the students inputs to the machine. It cannot see that, for example, the student remained focused on an event that is past and was no longer following the current event(s). It will accurately report what parameters were not met or exceeded but it surely won’t have any clue as to why. In the Instruction arena, I have found that “why” can often be a far more relevant question than “what”. A machine cannot evaluate and work on adjusting a mindset. No one can write enough statements to ever cover all of the occurrences or non-occurrences in flight training. This is the same as not being able to ask a CBT device “why”, or “how”, or “what”.