Andrew Sarangan wrote:
Thanks for all the discussion on this topic. Regardless of your
personal opinion on the subject, this is a topic of high relevance due
to the rapid changes in technology taking place in the way we fly.

I agree it is a subject that is very relevent.


One additional comment I would like to add is that, we should not
equate computer usage with lack of understanding of the basics.
Automation has the potential to allow us to focus on the important
tasks and let the computer take care of the mundane tasks.

I think you would find that in order to know the student had a full grasp of
the fundamentals you would end up teaching them the "old" way. Automation is
great. Computers are great, hell they allow us to have this conversation.
But just like I still need to be able to ask a local fellow flyer a question
from time to time there will be times when computers and the internet aren't
going to be available to the pilot.


I once had
a student many years ago who computed all headings with great
precision, by hand using an E6B, only to find that he had reversed all
headings by 180 degress. He was all caught up in the details of the
computation that he forgot to see the big picture. With automation
that is less likely to happen. However, if it is not taught properly,
it can also be harmful.


The exact same thing could easily happen in a flight planning program or
even worse. He types in the wrong airport code and flys the plan without
catching it.


There was an article in a recent aviation magazine (I can't remember
the magazine title) where they compared students who learned to fly in
glass cockpitsat Embry Riddle vs the traditional instruments, and the
conclusion was that students who learned in the glass environment were
just as good as or even better than the previous generation.



I'm sure they did. I also wouldn't be surprised if those trained in glass
didn't transition easier to steam.


So obviously a discussion on modernizing training methods is something
that need to be taken seriously.


The problem is there are lots of different flight planning programs and
services out there. Which one are you going to teach. All the ones I've used
seem to be designed so that someone who understands the "old" way can figure
them out. The flip side of that is that if you teach someone via a specific
program are they going to be able to understand the operation of another
program or even the same one after a major revision?