FREE E-Newsletter
Wings Magazine
Subscribe
  ABOUT US   |   CONTACT US   |   SUBSCRIPTION CENTRE   |   ADVERTISE   |   SITEMAP
MAGAZINE
Current Issue
Past Issues
News Archives
Web Exclusives
Video
Photo Gallery
 
MARKETPLACE
Aviation Books
Job Board
Classifieds
New Products
COMMUNITY
Events
AME Hall of Fame
100th Anniversary
Aviation Quiz
Association News
 
RESOURCES
A-List
E-Newsletter
Links
Sitemap
Careers in Aviation
Publications
Helicopters Magazine Careers in Aviation
Ken Pole Business Aviation Has Lessons For All

Continuous training, continuous improvement

Written by Ken Pole   
395-business











Pilots and other aircrew members, as well as their flight operations managers and other aviation professionals, can take justifiable pride in their expertise. It has come often at huge personal expense and always after hundreds, even thousands, of hours of training in classrooms and on the job.

However, the Canadian Business Aviation Association (CBAA), as it has worked with others in the industry on the Private Operator’s Certificate (POC), began to realize a while ago that there was a “knowledge shortfall” in the industry. This awareness came from what CBAA president Rich Gage describes as “overview feedback” from independent auditors over the past four years or so.

The shortfall apparently was most evident at the management end, “the operation of safety management systems, soft skills, anything you could capture under that umbrella,” Gage explained in an interview. “The industry itself does a very good job on the technical side with courses and simulator work and I don’t think we had any intent to move into those areas.” However, the “fairly significant knowledge gaps” in a number of areas not typically covered by the CBAA and its counterparts elsewhere, or by Flight Safety International and its like, presented an opportunity.

It happened to coincide with a shift within the industry to a more performancebased regulatory approach and away from the hitherto prescriptive model. “That gave operators more latitude to scope out the way they want to do things,” Gage said. “But it came with added accountability and responsibility. That was one of the driving elements behind what we’re doing. It’s part of our responsibility to manage the POC and now that we’re getting feedback, we have a responsibility to address training limitations.”

In realizing it was an issue within business aviation, the CBAA felt it “highly likely” that it would be much the same elsewhere in the industry. “So if we’re going to go into training, we’re going go into training with a broader brush than just our own 604 grouping,” Gage said. “Once we thought that through and realized there was a demand, a need, and that we believed there was a business plan, we realized that there was a possible mechanism to generate revenue for the association.”

Generating revenues from fees, Gage and his crew at CBAA headquarters in Ottawa began building the wherewithal to continue delivering and expanding their training. “It’s to meet the demands and needs of the community ... and to try to develop a consistent revenue stream for the association. It not only pays for the infrastructure and salaries and so on but also allows us to add some moneys to the association coffers to look at other initiatives.... The whole POC program has had a lot more impact than just the fact that we’re issuing certificates.”

Enter Glenn Priestley, who left the Air Transport Association of Canada last year to become the CBAA’s director of training. “Glenn’s program allows me to show Transport Canada that we recognize there’s a knowledge gap,” Gage said. “We have a plan in place to help close that gap, so we’re meeting our commitment as far as the POC’s concerned. We believe that there’s a larger community out there that needs training and from that we think we can generate revenue for the association.”

For the time being, at least, the plan is to use those revenues to cover identifiable training costs until the CBAA is able to quantify a range of complex elements. Since introducing its POC program, the CBAA has been able to hold fees at their January 2003 introductory levels, thanks to growth in the business aviation community that has offset the cost of added resources.

It has yet to be determined exactly what the business outcome from training will be and Gage expects it could be another year or so before the CBAA is better able to say whether the revenues from training should be simply tossed into the association’s general pot. While he has “some ideas,” the board of directors’ view of the balance sheet remains one of overall revenues and expenses. “We’ve not spent huge amounts of time trying to segregate them. We may wish to do that down the road if we were thinking about reorganizing the association in some other context. We could restructure and maybe have different independent business models.”

He stressed that he was essentially thinking out loud, that it was far from a planned process for now. “We’ve developed a program and are demonstrating its viability. Once we’ve got that going, we can start to refine what the next steps might be – whether we go into some kind of Webbased training or move into other areas.”

Gage also was careful to explain that the CBAA is “quite sensitive” about treading on other industry toes. “There’s always a danger of doing a little of that and perhaps we’ve done it already, but it’s certainly not intended. We want to connect the supply with the demand, but in due course, when our industry at large and our members in particular become clearer as to what they like or don’t like, it’s still a little bit of ‘try this, test that, and see what might work and what might not work’.”

Having said that, the CBAA has cemented ties with organizations such as the RCMP, which has clearly defined requirements and for which the CBAA is customizing some of its training syllabus. But the RCMP is a large organization with a diverse structure across Canada, so its interests, predictably, can be different from mainstream CBAA membership.

A couple of RCMP pilots, along with a group from Execaire as well as Wal-Mart’s aviation department and others participated recently in an IFR seminar given by Dave Holland, president of Ottawabased Aerosolutions, a consultancy he founded in 1995. Holland, an Airbus A320 training captain for Air Canada whose more than 14,000 flying hours include years of C-130 Hercules transport operations for Canadian Forces as well as extensive time on single- and twin-engine aircraft and business jets.

Holland spent eight years at Transport Canada as an inspector with varied check pilot responsibilities. He also wrote the department’s Instrument Procedures Manual and has chaired the International Civil Aviation Organization’s study group on automatic air reporting of meteorological conditions.

Working with associates who bring their own particular expertise to training, Holland has consulted to Nav Canada and various airlines as well as to the Canadian Forces and the RCMP. At this particular IFR seminar in Ottawa, Holland took more than a dozen pilots, some with thousands of hours logged, through various exercises. The presentation and ensuing freeflowing exchanges underscored his students’ desire to maintain and preferably improve their cockpit skills.

“That is, of course, the whole premise and philosophy of continuous training: continuous improvement,” Priestley explained. “We had representatives from the Ministry of Natural Resources who have an instrument rating but don’t use it very much. It’s part of the job requirement. Sometimes weather is a bit dicey and they need that extra skill. So they recognize the need to do brush-ups.

“In the same room, you had a large service provider (Execaire) which put 10 of its pilots there because they recognize the diversity of their experience.” At one end of the spectrum was a 30-year Air France veteran with 30,000 hours while the other end was represented by a younger pilot who evidently had flown the Pilatus PC-12. “They wanted them all to be refreshed to the same understanding and level. As for the RCMP’s participants, “even though one used to teach IFR, he needed a refresher because he’s just been put in charge here in Ottawa,” Priestley said. “He’s been VFR for three years.”

Curiously, Gage considered the IFR seminar something of an anomaly within the CBAA’s training syllabus. “That was really a little bit of a departure from what we typically envision.” Less atypical would be an early May seminar on flight departments’ roles and responsibilities, organized by the CBAA in response to feedback from several operators’ chief pilots or operations managers. They know the Aeronautics Act inside out but they evidently wanted to focus on regulatory elements such as occupational health and safety, labour ministry requirements, and dangerous goods handling — more managerial than operational.

Gage said that if he had been presented with a list of course material a year ago and it had included the flight operations and IFR options, he would have agreed to the former but not necessarily the latter. But, as he’s finding out, and the RCMP is a good example, members indentify what they need and Priestley and the various consultants customize a program.

There is increased emphasis on “soft skills” and the overall concept of safety management. The CBAA and others have talked for years about cockpit resource management and the like and are now delving deeper into human factors. “That’s where I envision it,” Gage said. “Where it sort of parks itself over time is, I think, yet to be fully determined.” If a course is poorly attended, say three times, it will be scrapped. On the other hand, a “try one and see” attitude sometimes bears fruit; when the notion of an emergency response planning seminar was floated earlier this year, it expected maybe 15 registrants and got three times that number.

While Transport Canada concentrates increasingly on regulation, there could be pressure to offload its remaining training initiatives which, it could be argued, could be done more effectively and efficiently by the private sector. Would the CBAA want some, or all, of that? “We will not continue doing this unless it makes sense from a dollarsand- cents perspective,” Gage said, demurring at the concept of outright privatization of whatever training the federal department still does. “It’s premature to consider it right now because we really haven’t developed our own infrastructure,” but he wouldn’t rule out the possibility entirely.

As for the potential for increased training opportunities, Gage cited the Calgary market, which has a number of relatively small flight operations departments with four or five staff. “For them to do training on their own is costprohibitive,” he agreed. “But if we can get one or two people from several operators, then we’ve got eight, 10, 12 people in a classroom and it becomes cost-effective for them. Many of the courses Glenn is organizing involve fewer than 20. Hopefully we’re capturing those people who couldn’t do training before because they simply didn’t have a large enough flight department.”

In fact, 10 minutes before joining Gage for the interview, Priestley had been fielding a call from a company seeking his advice on how to set up a flight department, right down to the floorspace the company might need.

Also in response to members’ requests, the CBAA scheduled a safety and security professional development day in conjunction with its 2007 convention. “It’s for anybody, but particularly schedulers, dispatchers and ramp personnel,” Priestley said. “These groups have not had the profile and certainly not the training opportunities pilots get, but they’re all vitally important to safety and security issues around an airport.”

And they’re too often minimally trained. “That’s right,” Priestley agreed. “The trainers we’ve lined up are well-recognized. It never stops. The membership’s appreciating what we’re doing.”

He said there also is demand for an aircraft command course because a substantial number of pilots need to upgrade to the left seat from the right. CBAA has begun developing this course and also is considering requests for a high-altitude course which could include the use of consulting companies’ simulators to induce drowsiness and even hypoxia.

Priestley added that to be fair to Transport Canada, it should be noted that it had developed various training models in past years simply to fill a void in the market. “Nobody else was doing it,” he said. “We’re the first aviation association that has not only just mused about it but also made a definite corporate decision to do it.”

It helps that there’s a growing corporate presence to exploit. Gage said the roster of business aircraft operators in Canada has doubled in the past four years, an annual growth rate of 15-18%. “When we started out on this program, we thought we would be issuing 135-150 POCs. We’re at 280 today.” Instead of three or four a year, it has been three or four a month.

“We know there’s a lot of aircraft in the pipeline which have been sold but are yet to be delivered,” he continued. “So you have a changing dynamic, new flight departments. The guys that I’ve known in the past 10-15 years, some of them are still around, but there’s a whole lot of new faces.” He chuckled at the recollection of a recent CBAA chapter meeting in Edmonton. “Two or three years ago, I would have known 85% of those people. Today? I’m lucky if I know 10-15%. I see that as good news.”

He attributed it to a strong economy, and a “significant uptick” in new aircraft orders as the exchange rate with the US dollar improved. There also was the increased demand for more convenient point-to-point service and operational flexibility, from the entry-level operators to those whose companies are trying to operate more globally.

“All of these things are driving growth, and there are new entrants who are not necessarily skilled or even trained to manage these types of aircraft, so we’re getting their questions. That’s happening on a daily basis.... We’re starting to recognize globally that there’s this massive need for training and if we want to drive down the accident rate and we want to have a community that’s as good as we can make it from a risk-management perspective, we need to introduce new ideas.”

The bottom line for everyone, of course, is safety and while the CBAA believes that its members’ record is similar to that of the airline community, data to demonstrate that is either non-existent or of poor quality. That’s why the CBAA is collaborating with AON Explorer, an arm of the AON Insurance group, on quantifying business aviation’s economic footprint in Canada.

Gage said Merlin Preuss, Director General of Aviation at Transport Canada, has staff trying to find an appropriate way to determine and validate, among other things, the Canadian business aviation community’s accident rate, which clearly could present training opportunities for the CBAA and others.

“We have very good data on the airline world, the commercial element, but we don’t have very good data on general aviation as a whole and business aviation in particular,” Gage said.

In the final analysis, the CBAA’s new direction is emerging as a classic winwin scenario, buoyed by an underlying optimism throughout the industry.

“I don’t think we would have been able to get to this point without the bulk of people winning,” Gage said, admitting that while he continues to hear gripes from “probably a handful” of owner-operators about higher costs for keeping current, it’s a fading phenomenon.

“The operator community eventually accepted what we wanted to do because, over time, more and more started to recognize that it was going to be beneficial to them on a cost basis, which is easy to justify to their bosses. And it’s beneficial to them because they were going to have more hands-on responsibility.”