The recent discussions regarding trim and fantasy and the Rumsfeldian dialectic was a deliberate setup, a hook, not to mislead, but to draw you onto the battleground, so we can have the conversation that comes next.
The conversation?
The structure of flight training today — and maybe tomorrow.
This post wasn’t scheduled for publication for another two weeks. However, a recent development changed that timeline. The National Flight Training Alliance (NFTA) released a 472-page document titled “A Comprehensive Modernization of Pilot Training Conducted by 14 CFR Part 141 Training Organizations.”
I’ve read the entire document — every page. It’s not for the faint of heart. I also ran it through an analytical review to understand what it assumes about aviation, simulation technology, AI’s potential role, and flight training over the next 10–20 years. What emerges is a clear reliance on structured data tracking, increased use of simulation, standardized training flows, and enhanced oversight mechanisms to drive consistency and scalability — an approach that begins to resemble a more corporate, process-driven model of training. At its core, it attempts to modernize and standardize pilot training within existing frameworks — without clearly defining the end-state pilot it is meant to produce.
One of the simplest tests I ran on the document was a basic word search for “future.” What it returned were familiar phrases:
- future of aviation
- future-focused system
- future oversight
- future modifications.
But what I was really looking for wasn’t terminology — it was direction.
There is no clearly defined end-state. No explicit articulation of the type of pilot this system is intended to produce, the training environment it is optimizing toward, or the operational world those pilots are expected to enter over the next 10–20 years.
Even where AI and simulation are mentioned, they are treated narrowly as administrative oversight tools and existing training hardware, with no substantive exploration of how either reshapes instructional design, skill development, or the broader transformation of pilot training.
And that matters.
Because you cannot meaningfully redesign a training system without a shared understanding of the environment it is preparing people to operate in.
While organizations or institutions debate structure, training is already expanding beyond the traditional classroom-and-aircraft model. And the cockpit is no longer the only classroom. And the flight school is no longer the only training environment.
The horse has left the barn!
Many flight students already use home flight simulators, and like their non-pilot friends, they’re simming-away! Many ignoring their instructors cautionary “advice.”
That said, this attitude is not new. The flight training community has long treated home flight simulation as supplemental — useful for exposure, but not essential to training itself. That framing is becoming harder to maintain, because it is now part of the training ecosystem whether formally acknowledged or not.
Which leads to the first question:
If aircraft time continues to become more expensive, where does repetition actually happen?
Because repetition is where pilots are built.
And once that shifts outside the $200/hr aircraft — even partially — the structure of training changes, whether the system has adapted or not. The alternative, the flight school simulators average around $60/hr. Cheaper, but still money wasted!
Accelerated repetition is the name of the game!
Fewer cockpit hours and cheaper training options are the result.
Accelerated repetition is best served — on demand — at home, on a home flight simulator, under school supervision!
More on this next week!
Your thoughts,
Kenneth (Ken) Butterly, Founder.
No comments:
Post a Comment