[flybymike]

In a thread about TLAs and simplifying jargon, we’ve so far been offered clarifications of “comparing, contrasting and understanding,” “mapping things to the cockpit” and a “syllabus which demands that you drill it.”

[As I CFIT]

If I'm confronting the threats and continually asking myself how to make it safer - well the only true answer is "don't go". I don't NEED to go, and that is clearly the only guaranteed way of overcoming the threats. And, sadly, increasingly that is the path that I take.

It's unfortunate that you feel this way but perhaps you've slightly misunderstood the concept. Whilst striving to increase safety by reducing risk is a part of it, I believe that the broader spirit of TEM is to attempt to anticipate foreseeable problems and take some sort of action to prevent what you've identified as being a possible undesirable outcome from happening.

It can be as simple as thinking to yourself 'I'm taking off from an airfield which is underneath a CTA. The threat is that I could inadvertently climb into it. To prevent this, I'm going to double check that I've got the correct QNH set and level off 200 feet below the base of the CTA, which will be an altitude of XXXX feet. I might also climb at a slightly higher speed in order to reduce my rate of climb.'

This would be effective TEM - it doesn't have to be complicated and take the joy out of flying. You probably do these things anyway and call it something else.

[As I CFIT]

I believe I summed it up at the time as :

that does seem to be a rather over-complicated way to say :

Plan the flight properly.
What might go wrong?
What will you do if it does?

Rather than jump from 'what might go wrong?' to 'what will you do if it does?', insert 'what can I do to stop it from going wrong?' between the two!

[leiafee]

“syllabus which demands that you drill it.”

For the record I was pointing out a workaround for such syllabi not encouraging it.

[Rob P]

Plan the flight properly.
What might go wrong?
What can I do to stop it from going wrong'
What will I do if it does?

I think this is excellent.

But what we now need to do is give it a TLA, such as SDP (for SkyDriller Protocol) and then write lengthy articles about the necessity for, and desirability of the protocol being observed for every flight.

Ideally "SDP" should appear at least once a paragraph and the actual explanation is currently far too succinct, so let's put together a 100 screen Powerpoint to clarify it.

Rob P

[Ibra]

TEM applies mostly in planning flight and it's static concept, airmanship seems to be in planning & flying and it has to be adjusted as flight & risk evolve?

Surely, TEM will not allow one to predict that they are going to die in the next two minutes while flying, it's mostly about listing various risks for a given mission during planning and propose mitigants (or accept them), most of these risks won't even materialise but for risks that materlize in the air they will need adequate "limits" or "stop loss" from the pilot

Take one example biggest risk for flying is stalling while in circuit on sunny days (it's the first killer in my list, but it will rarely go in my TEM list), however, good airmanship of being current on type, doing something about stall warner, max bank angle and min manoeuvring speed limits does certainly help

I think having simple rules or frameworks like "don't crash" or "don't hit anyone" or "don't exceed max AoA" will not work for regulators they need to conceptual and introduce complex risk management tools, in the other hand, for an operational pilot the message is rather simple: TEM for planing and for flying as long as you have lot of fuel & runway & height, you watch for trafic, you keep wing level, fly adequate airspeed, altitude and heading for the situation, and know when to call the flight off, what can go wrong?

[patowalker]

What's a stall warner?

[Ibra]

What's a stall warner?

This thing on the wing edge ?


https://www.aircraftspruce.eu/instrumen ... arner.html

[Shoestring Flyer]

The problem as I see it is that if you work on a daily basis in the Consultancy/Corporate world you become embroiled into speaking and projecting this jargon yourself just because everyone else in your surroundings speaks in this illogical and self projecting manner.
This jargonistic way of speaking becomes so much part of your daily language that it is only when you permanently step out of that world, in my case retirement, you realise that the stuff you have been spouting and projecting to the outside world for years was in actual fact, by and large, incomprehensible to the joe public masses in the jargon format that you previously used in the corporate consultancy world.
When you do eventually become completely removed from that type of environment it soon quickly dawns that the subject matter, whatever that may be you are trying to get over, does not need to be in incomprehensible jargon and could be far better and easily explained in much more plain, straightforward and simpler terms and language.

[skydriller]

SDP (for SkyDriller Protocol)

Brilliant!!! TEM? Thats old hat....From this point onward I will be referring to this whole thing as the SDP (SkyDriller Protocol)

Regards, SD..

[JAFO]

In a thread about TLAs and simplifying jargon, we’ve so far been offered clarifications of “comparing, contrasting and understanding,” “mapping things to the cockpit” and a “syllabus which demands that you drill it.”

Mike, I've got no idea what mapping things to the cockpit or a syllabus which demands that you drill it might mean but surely comparing, contrasting and understanding is just three English words which are quite straightforward.

[Rob L]

What's a stall warner?

This thing on the wing edge ?
https://www.aircraftspruce.eu/instrumen ... arner.html

Not all aircraft (especially older ones like the various Wright Flyer models; WW1 & many WW2 aircraft [and my Classic taildragger] and a lot of "older" homebuilts) have them.
Mine has no pre-stall buffet either! It just stalls.

[Edit: Stall warners are required on certificated aerobatic aircraft like an Aviat Husky or Pitts S2; that stall warner going off during half the flight must be a big distraction!]

Rob

[AndyR]

What's a stall warner?

The best one is the stick or yoke. Learn the position of critical angle of attack for a particular aircraft and it’s a very good guide.

[Rob P]

Well worth re-reading viewtopic.php?p=1847263#p1847263 ...

The problem as I see it is ...

I would refer the all readers back to Post #1 of this thread.

@Shoestring Flyer has neatly put my entire point.

@leiafee also summed it up succinctly and accurately in her post.

People unused to communicating who are then tasked with writing documents/articles for regulatory bodies lapse into jargon and management speak because they feel it adds necessary gravitas to their commissioned role, rather than thinking, "What are the simplest and fewest words with which I can comprehensibly deliver this idea".

It was a truism of my writing life. "I am sorry this (thing) is so long. I don't have the time to write anything shorter."

Rob P

[PeteM]

Rob P wrote:
SDP (for SkyDriller Protocol)




Brilliant!!! TEM? Thats old hat....From this point onward I will be referring to this whole thing as the SDP (SkyDriller Protocol)

Which pretty much sums up the whole thing. TEM is just another set of consultants trying to push a 'new way' of addressing the same old problem. In consultancy ( and I'll fess up to being there!) dressing things up in this year's version of the emperor's clothes is considered necessary to sell stuff.

If you look at maintenance management about every 3 years there is a new and of course so much better way of addressing the same old stuff.

Look at human factors - most of the things HF 'experts' come out with have 5 letter TLAs or even longer. That cannot be sold to managers as it makes them look ignorant - hence 3 letter TLAs!

There is nothing wrong with the basic premise of a structured review of what is intended, what might go wrong and what might be done to minimise that situation, and if that does not work what the backstops might be. I do it all the time for paying clients. They get very hung up on the titles, the terms of reference and a bunch of other things, The key is to have a disparate and widely experienced team - and that is where TEM tends to fail - I've seen articles suggesting TEM for single pilot operations - nonsense - just people talking to themselves!

The key to safe flying is to remember that you do not want to be the first person at the scene of the accident - inspite of having a ringside seat! So think about what you doing and to quote an aerobatics instructor I had in Florida - "Dear Load please bless this aircraft and the unworthy folks in it and keep us safe, and Lord please stop us from doing anything dumb!"