Train-the-Trainer by DataHomeLab

6.7 LOFT Briefing - Suggested Format and Contents

A properly conducted briefing must be conducted prior to every LOFT session, in order to ensure that the trainees are prepared mentally to gain the most training benefit from the session. This is especially important for trainees with limited or no previous experience of LOFT.

The LOFT briefing is a special case of the general pre instructional briefing template. It carries all the standard content (the 6.2 Briefing Aids, the 6.6 The A-W-A-R-E Model, and the 6.5 Introduction (General Information)) but layers on top of it a set of LOFT-specific reassurances and ground rules that the trainee needs in order to engage with the session as designed. LOFT differs operationally from a checking session and from a scripted-manoeuvres training session; the briefing exists, in part, to make those differences explicit.

Aim of the LOFT briefing

The three trainee-facing questions (Why am I here? What is different about LOFT? What can I expect?) are the operational target of the briefing. The trainees walk into the simulator with all three answered; the rest of the briefing's content is what produces those answers.

The following is a suggested format for the LOFT Briefing. With experience the instructor will no doubt want to supplement this basic format with additional points of their own.

INTRODUCTION

EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR CONDUCTING LOFT

  • Ultimate aim is to improve flight safety.
  • Accident record indicates that the majority of accidents and incidents are caused by NON-TECHNICAL factors (i.e. CREW).
  • LOFT provides the best environment for practical training of CRM attitudes and procedures.
  • CRM courses provide awareness of CRM issues, but LOFT is designed to provide situations where crew must apply these principles in a "line" environment (i.e. put theory into practice).
  • Provide a "real-life" learning experience, so that what you learn in the simulator can be applied during line operations.

The five-bullet rationale is reproduced verbatim from the source. The argument runs from the macro (ultimate aim is to improve flight safety) through the empirical claim (the majority of accidents and incidents are caused by non-technical factors) to the operational role of LOFT (best environment for practical training of CRM) to the placement of LOFT in the broader CRM curriculum (CRM courses provide awareness; LOFT puts theory into practice) to the transferable benefit (real-life learning experience that applies during line operations). The argument is short and the bullets are deliberately compact: the briefing is establishing context, not lecturing.

RELATE TO CRM THEME

Worksheets, e.g. common theme with Recurrent CRM and Recurrent LOFT. Take the opportunity to briefly discuss this theme with the trainees, e.g. Decision making and FORDEC.

The CRM-theme step ties the LOFT to the broader recurrent training curriculum: a recurrent LOFT is rarely an isolated event; it pairs with a recurrent CRM module on a related theme, and the briefing is where the trainees are reminded of that pairing. The example (Decision making + FORDEC) is the kind of theme that recurs across both modules.

CONDUCT OF SESSION

Treat the simulator as the real aircraft

Urge the trainees to treat the simulator as the real aircraft, and to conduct themselves during the session just as they would during a normal line operation. Assure them that everything has been and will be done (within obvious limits) to create as real an experience as possible, and that they should also approach the session with the same positive attitude. This will help to ensure they derive the most benefit from the experience.

Non-jeopardy training; no pass or fail

The "continue to emphasise (as necessary)" wording is operational. The pass-fail mental model is the default mental model for any simulator session; it has to be displaced and stay displaced through the session, or the trainee defaults back to image-management and the diagnostic value of LOFT collapses. The instructor restates the rule whenever the trainee shows signs of reverting (apologising for an error in real time, declining to attempt something out of fear of failure, requesting feedback on whether they "passed").

Mistakes are normal; what matters is detection and coping

Re-assure the trainees that they must not worry about making mistakes; this is a normal experience on the line, after all. What is more important, both on the line and in the LOFT, is how we detect and cope with those mistakes. It is through mistakes we make in the simulator that we will be better prepared to prevent or detect mistakes on the line.

The reframing of error from failure to training data is the load-bearing pivot of the LOFT philosophy. A trainee who optimises for not making errors in the simulator will not produce the kinds of decisions and crew-coordination patterns the simulator was built to surface; a trainee who treats errors as the substance of the training will. The briefing is where this reframe is installed.

Real time; no position-freeze, slewing or speed-up

Emphasise that the session will be conducted in REAL TIME. There should be no position-freeze, slewing, speed-up used. Assure them that there is sufficient time for them to take their own time, and they will not be rushed into any decisions, unless they do this themselves.

The real-time discipline removes a category of artefact that contaminates many simulator sessions: under speed-up or position-freeze, the workload pattern the crew experiences is not the workload pattern they will face on the line, and the decisions they make under that artificial workload do not generalise. LOFT preserves real time to keep the data clean.

No single right or wrong outcome

It is vital that the instructor assures the trainees that there is no single RIGHT or WRONG outcome involved in the scenario they will experience. The session is open-ended, and is designed to present them with situations where there is more than one decision possible. It is up to them to decide, with the resources available, what is the "RIGHT" decision. The instructor must discourage them from thinking that they must do what they think the instructor wants.

INSTRUCTOR's ROLE

Ensure that the trainees fully understand the instructor's role during the session:

  • To operate the simulator and the related equipment.
  • To observe the session, and that the instructor will not be making any instructional input at all (so don't ask).
  • To act the role of any other personnel with which the crew would normally interact during a normal line operation (i.e. refueller, engineer, ground staff, cabin crew and FS, ATC, etc.).

The three-role description (operate / observe / act) is reproduced from the source. The "(so don't ask)" parenthesis on the observe role is operationally important: it tells the trainee, in advance, that the standard mid-session question ("are we doing this right?") will not be answered, and that the trainee should not waste cognitive cycles trying to elicit instructor feedback in real time. The role-play element (acting refueller, ATC, cabin crew, etc.) is what gives the simulator its line-operational realism: a LOFT crew that has to make a decision while talking to an unhelpful Despatcher, an irritable engineer, and a delayed flight attendant produces decision data that a sterile-radio scenario does not.

VIDEO-TAPED with re-assurances

Advise the trainees that the session will be VIDEO-TAPED, but re-assure them of the following:

  • That the purpose of the tape is to assist in the de-briefing process after the session, and that it will enhance the value of the training experience and allow them to learn more.
  • That the tape will be ERASED after the debriefing has been completed. The instructor can invite them to conduct the erasure themselves as added re-assurance.

De-identified records

Re-assure the crew that any records taken during the session will be DE-IDENTIFIED. The LOFT Worksheets that the instructor will be completing are designed for the following purposes:

  • To assist the instructor in conducting and observing the session.
  • To collect data to be used for STATISTICAL PURPOSES only; the data is to be used to enhance the overall training programme, and trainee names are not entered on the worksheets.

The de-identification of the worksheet records is what makes the LOFT a programme-development instrument as well as a training instrument. Anonymised aggregate data on where LOFT crews struggle (which scenarios, which decision points, which CRM dimensions) feeds the programme refinement loop without exposing any individual trainee.

DE-BRIEFING

The briefing also explains what the LOFT debrief will look like, so the trainees walk into the simulator knowing what to expect afterward.

Not a traditional instructor-led exercise

The pre-emptive framing is operationally necessary because the LOFT debrief is structurally different from the kind of debrief most trainees have experienced (an instructor reviews the session and points out what was right or wrong). A trainee who arrives at the LOFT debrief expecting that pattern will be silent and waiting; a trainee who has been told in advance that they will lead the debrief has a chance to prepare for it.

Self de-brief: trainees take responsibility

Ensure that the trainees understand that they will be expected to take the responsibility for conducting a SELF DE-BRIEF:

  • They will all be invited to develop their own agenda for the debrief (i.e. identify the things they think are interesting and want to talk about, rather than what the instructor may think is interesting).
  • They will all be invited to discuss and analyse what happened.
  • They will all be expected to evaluate their performance during the session.

The agenda-ownership clause is the operational core. In a traditional debrief, the instructor sets the agenda. In a LOFT debrief, the trainees set the agenda, with the instructor adding necessary items. The pre-emptive transfer of agenda ownership is what makes the trainees' subsequent participation real rather than performative.

ROLE OF THE INSTRUCTOR during the debrief

Ensure that the trainees understand the role of the instructor during the debrief:

  • To act as a FACILITATOR (rather than a "lecturer"), to assist and guide them, where necessary, to learn the most they can from the session. The aim of the instructor is to create an environment where each trainee learns by SELF-DISCOVERY, rather than by being TOLD.
  • To act as a RESOURCE to assist the crew in conducting their own analysis of what happened and why (the instructor is in an ideal position during the session to know what happened and why, and can use the video tape to help the crew "see" what they may have missed; this can then open up new learning possibilities).

The two roles (facilitator + resource) are the operational framing the 7.3 General Debrief Techniques elaborate. The briefing introduces the framing here, before the session, so the trainees know what role to expect from the instructor afterward; 7.3 General Debrief Techniques then teaches the instructor how to deliver against that framing.

How the LOFT briefing maps onto the rest of the cluster

The LOFT briefing is the most operationally specific section in pre instructional briefing. The content is the LOFT briefing, reproduced as a usable format on the line. The connections it carries:

  • To the rest of pre instructional briefing: the LOFT briefing is a special-case application of the 6.6 The A-W-A-R-E Model (the Aim is the cordial-but-relaxed atmosphere plus the three trainee questions; the Why is improving flight safety; the Administration is the conduct-of-session ground rules; the Revision is the trainee's prior LOFT and CRM experience; the Elements are the scenario items the trainees will encounter).
  • To post instructional debrief: the LOFT briefing sets up the contract that 7.5 LOFT Debriefing - Introduction then delivers on. The instructor-as-facilitator framing introduced here is the operational stance treated in depth in 7.3 General Debrief Techniques and reproduced in the FSF / NASA discipline of A1.1 Foreword and Introduction.
  • To the EBT-specific operational pattern: a recurrent EBT module follows the briefing pattern in A4.2.3 Conduct of Briefing, which is the EBT operationalisation of the same discipline (seated, conversational, six-element). The LOFT briefing format here supplies the content; an EBT instructor uses that content with the operational pattern of Appendix 4 Conduct of Briefing.
  • To ICAO Doc 9995: the default-erase video discipline (ICAO Doc 9995 Conduct of EBT) and the just-culture protection it preserves are inherited here.

Cross-references

  • 6.6 The A-W-A-R-E Model. The content scaffold the LOFT briefing applies.
  • 7.1 Introduction. The post-session debrief that the LOFT briefing's "what to expect afterward" content sets up.
  • 7.5 LOFT Debriefing - Introduction. The detailed treatment of the LOFT debrief that this briefing previews.
  • 7.3 General Debrief Techniques. The toolkit (questions, silence, active listening, video discipline) the LOFT debrief uses; the briefing introduces the framing, 7.3 General Debrief Techniques teaches the technique.
  • A1.1 Foreword and Introduction. The Flight Safety Foundation / NASA upstream that supplies the depth on facilitator-as-resource and self-discovery-not-told.
  • A4.2.3 Conduct of Briefing. The EBT-specific operational briefing pattern (seated, conversational, six-element) that runs in parallel for recurrent EBT modules.
  • ICAO Doc 9995 Conduct of EBT. The default-erase playback discipline this section inherits.
  • LOFT. The session type whose briefing this section reproduces.
  • CRM. The framework the LOFT brief explicitly threads through (the CRM theme step; the principles LOFT puts into practice).
  • Facilitation. The instructor stance the LOFT briefing introduces and that the debrief delivers against.