摘要

論文題目(中文)：多組員飛機駕駛員執照訓練效益分析
論文題目(英文)：Analysis of Effectiveness of MPL Training
研 究 生：王子綸
指導教授：袁曉峰

多組員飛機駕駛員執照(MPL)是2006年由國際民航組織所提出的新型飛行員訓練模式，採取大量的模擬機訓練時數取代飛行訓練時數。MPL為依據ICAO Annex 1 (Personnel Licensing)與Doc.9868 (Procedures for Air Navigation Services - Training)設計課程，其主要核心為勝任性基礎訓練(CBT)，並在所有訓練階段中導入威脅與差錯管理，以降低人為因素所產生的飛安事件。MPL推行目的不是節省時間也不是為了經濟考量，其目的是為了更有效率的訓練出民航運輸駕駛員。
本研究以Doc. 9868作為基礎；分析MPL與傳統飛行員執照的差異，得知與傳統完成型別檢定駕駛員相比，MPL實際飛行訓練時數減少約82.5%，但其在多組員機型(on-type）模擬飛行時數卻大幅領先(205小時)。本研究參考國際間執行MPL的航空公司的訓練現況，對MPL執行單位提出的建議如下：
1. 航空公司應與具備完整訓練經驗（ab-initio至ATPL）的訓練機構合作；
2. 航空公司之作業程序與CRM訓練內容應與訓練單位充分溝通；
3. MPL課程應以航空公司為主導；
4. MPL每梯次訓練的人數不宜太多，以免CBT的執行無法落實；
5. MPL模擬機訓練可考慮增加機場環境的ATC模擬，以增強飛行員與管制員的互動能力；
6. MPL執行成功要素為CBT，監理單位應確認CBT是否落實。

Analysis of Effectiveness of MPL Training

Author: Tzu-Lun, Wang
Advisor: Tony Yuan
Institute of Civil Aviation
National Cheng Kung University

SUMMARY

Multi-Crew Pilot License (MPL) was established in 2006 by ICAO in responding to the growing demand in the civil aviation pilot training. In MPL, a large amount of simulator flight hours is designed to replace the actual flight hours required in traditional pilot training.
MPL is based on ICAO Annex1 (Personnel Licensing) and Doc.9868 (Procedures for Air Navigation Services – Training) and it uses Competency-Based Training (CBT) as its main core philosophy. MPL embeds Threat and Error Management (TEM) in all training phases to reduce risk of human factors of aviation incident. Comparing to traditional pilot training, after type rating, the actual flight hours of MPL reduced about 82.5%, but the flight hours of simulator is significantly increased by 205 hours. After detailed study of the effectiveness of several MPL implementations in organizations around the world, the following recommendations are given:
i. Airlines should cooperate with Approved Training Organizations (ATOs) who have complete training experience (ab-initio training to ATPL training);
ii. Airline should fully communicate with ATOs on their Standard Operational Procedures (SOPs) and Crew Resource Management (CRM) program;
iii. MPL course content and its implementation should be airline-driven;
iv. The number of trainees in each class of MPL training should be constrained;
v. Including or enhancing of simulator training with pilot/Air Traffic Controller (ATC) interactions and at airport environment should be considered;
vi. Licensing authorities should strictly review and monitor the implementation of the CBT program.
Key word: MPL, TEM, CBT

INTRODUCTION

According to ICAO, it is predicted that the annual number of flight will increase to 50 million worldwide in 2030, and the quantity of civil airplane will be over 150,000. Therefore, at the time, the vacancy of pilot for civil aviation will rise to 980,000, which means the total number of pilots in the world will be doubled to the present.
Multi-Crew License (MPL) was established in 2006 by ICAO responding to the growing demand of pilot in civil aviation. In MPL training program, a large amount of flight hours in simulator replaces the actual flight hours in traditional light aircraft pilot training because that solo flying hours on light aircraft is not considered to be essential to the co-pilot duties on multi-crew jet transport aircraft. The first MPL course in the world is implemented by Sterling airline in 2006, and there are 27 MPL programs admitted by IATA in the world in May, 2015. In Taiwan, the first MPL program was started by Eva airline in November, 2014.
Since replacing real flight hours in training program by simulator may endanger the safety of aerial transportation, and since the effectiveness of the implementation of MPL program varied for different approaches, the goal of this study is to find the reasons of success among some internationally executed MPL programs. Furthermore, suggestions are concluded in these analyses for the execution of MPL program in the future.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Interview and data collection are the main methodologies in this study. Doc.9868 [5] published by ICAO is used as a basis when analyzing MPL system and comparing MPL to traditional pilot training system.
We collected several cases of MPL implementation from IATA and some of them were specified in this study. First, we choose Asia airline and Dragon airline which cooperate with CAE. Second, we choose the first MPL implementation in the world by Sterling airline which is referred by following airlines. Third, we choose the Lufthansa airline which has flight academy and flight simulator center in the same group. Fourth, we choose Swiss airline which is subsidiary of Lufthansa. Finally, we choose Alteon which is subsidiary of aircraft manufacturer (Boeing). Recommendations are brought about upon the effectiveness of several MPL implementations in organizations around the world.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Analyzing the implementation of MPL program around the world, it usually uses small airplane to real flight training at core phase and basis phase. As Doc.9868 Trainee will have competence of solo flight after training; competence of night flight and basis IFR in real airplane at core phase. Upset Prevent Recovery Training (UPRT) will be conducted in basis phase of MPL course to enhance competence of crisis management of trainee. Some airlines use turbojet airplane to enhance operation capabilities of trainee in high speed at basis phase. Some airlines take on-type of simulator training and use Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) to assist training at intermediate phase.
Based on Doc.9868, the difference between MPL and traditional pilot training has been studied. Comparing with traditional pilot training, the actual flight hours of MPL reduced about 82.5% after type rating, but the flight hours of simulator of MPL is significantly increased to 205 hours. The concept of CBT has been introduced into MPL to compensate the gap between the actual flight hours and flight hours of simulators. CBT can confirm trainee competence of pilot jobs.
Based on the effectiveness of several MPL implementations in organizations around the world Recommendations are brought up as follows:
(1) Airline should cooperate with ATOs who have completed training experience (ab-initio integrated ATPL);
(2) Airline should sufficiently communicate with ATOs about their SOPs and CRM;
(3) MPL course should be airline-driven;
(4) There should not be too many members in each batch of MPL;
(5) Pilot Attitude Test (PAT) should be conducted before MPL course to reduce cost
(6) Use multi-crew airplane for training so that there is actual flight experience on multi-crew airplane other than simulator;
(7) ATOs should consider adding simulator training of ATC in the airport environment to enhance the ability of interaction between pilots and ATC;
(8) Licensing Authorities should confirm the implementation of CBT.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of this new pilot training license system is facing many challenges. Careful evaluation of training content and method of actions are the key point.
Base on ICAO Doc.9868 PANS TRG, Annex 1, data from IATA, interview and discussion, the difference between MPL and traditional pilot training has been analyzed. It shows that there are advantages of MPL, such as (1) course of new pilot license is designed by ISD and its main philosophy is in the usage of CBT in determining the pilot's competency; (2) the training is fully compliance with Crew Resource Management (CRM) and Threat and Error Management (TEM) in multi-crew environment which reduces the risk of aviation incident caused by human factor; (3) MPL has better training efficiency than traditional pilot training, but saving time is not its main consideration; (4) though flight hours in light aircraft are reduced, it has substantial augmentation of flight hours of the multi-crew transport aircraft.

參考文獻
1. IATA “Evidence-Based Training Implementation Guide”, First Edition, 2013
2. IATA “Data Report for Evidence-Based Training”, First Edition, 2014
3. IATA “ITQI Brochure”
4. IATA “Guidance Material and Best Practices for MPL Implementation”, First Edition, 2011
5. ICAO “ICAO DOC.9868, Procedures for Air Navigation Services Training, PANS TRG”, First Edition, 2006
6. ICAO “DOC 9625, Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulation Training Devices, Volume I - Aeroplane”, Third Edition, 2009
7. ICAO “DOC 9841, Manual on the Approval of Training Organizations”, Second Edition, 2012
8. ICAO “DOC 9683, Human Factors Training Manual”, First Edition, 1998
9. ICAO “DOC 10011, Manual on Aeroplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training”, First Edition, 2014
10. ICAO Training Report “Aviation Training Going Forward, New Approach To Training And Capacity-Building In Aviation”, News and Features On Civil Aviation-Related Training Developments, Vol.4, NO.2, 2014
11. ICAO Training Report “MPL Momentum, Reviewing the Airline, Regulator and Training Organization Perspectives”, News and Features On Civil Aviation-Related Training Developments, Vol.4, NO.1, 2014
12. ICAO “Annex 1”
13. ICAO “Annex 6”
14. Melanie A. Todd and Matthew J. W. Thomas “Experience, Competence, or Syllabus? Influences on Flight Hours at Licensing of Commercial Pilots”, The International Journal Of Aviation Psychology, 23(2), PP169–180, 2013
15. Rickard Wikander and Dr. Nicklas Dahlström “The Multi Crew Pilot License- Revolution, Evolution or not even a Solution? - A Review and Analysis of the Emergence, Current Situation and Future of the Multi-Crew Pilot Licence (MPL)” Lund University School of Aviation
16. Transport Canada “Multi-crew Pilot License Training Program Manual, Flight Training”, Version5, 2012
17. Transport Canada “Multi-crew Pilot License Flight Test Manual”, Version3, 2012