7.4 Specific Debrief Scenarios

The general debrief framework lands in the three environments where instructors actually deliver post-session feedback: ground school, synthetic flight training (the MFTD and the full-flight simulator), and airborne flight duties (Line Flying Under Supervision). The same proficiency targets (set out in 7.3 General Debrief Techniques) and the same facilitation discipline (general debrief techniques and Appendix 1) apply across all three; the operational constraints differ, and so does the dominant technique mix in each environment.

#7.4.1 Ground School

Whilst instructing throughout any ground school phase, a number of topics must be covered as per the syllabus and as such some subjects are necessarily more lecture-based. Nevertheless, instructors should be aware that it is important to "target their audience" and try to avoid a 2-hour monosyllabic brief.

#Audience composition

There are regularly times when the trainees range from cadets to senior TREs. In a mixed-experience audience it is a good technique to involve all and invite relevant experiences that could enhance the whole group. The senior trainees have direct line and check-instructor experience the cadets have not yet acquired; surfacing that experience inside the classroom benefits both ends of the seniority range.

#Pose-pause-pounce

It is not easy to apply the 5.1 Introduction (RMM) directly to the ground school phase; however, it is important to involve the trainees by checking understanding using the pose-pause-pounce technique:

• Pose the question to the whole audience first.
• Pause to give every trainee time to formulate an answer.
• Pounce by directing the question to a named trainee.

The technique distributes thinking across the room (because every trainee anticipates being called) and avoids the failure mode of naming the trainee first (which lets the rest of the room disengage). The deeper treatment of pose-pause-pounce as a questioning technique sits in 3.5 Questioning and the chapters that follow it.

#Scenario-based variation

Certain groups, for example those on the Command Upgrade Course, lend themselves more readily to scenario-based teaching where it is possible to actively encourage the use of the RMM and debrief accordingly. In a Command Upgrade context the trainees are about to step into command authority, so a discussion that uses representative line scenarios as the substrate for the RMM is closer to the cognitive demand of the role they are training for than a pure information-transfer lecture would be.

#Time

Time factors do not tend to be a critical factor in ground school teaching; however, it is important to operate within the timescale set out in the subject guide. The relative absence of a hard time pressure is one reason ground school is the natural environment for the early stages of acquiring facilitation skills; the simulator and the line both compress time in ways the classroom does not.

#7.4.2 Synthetic Flight Training

The MFTD and the full-flight simulator are excellent training tools. It is most important that the instructor uses the debrief time to prioritise debriefing points as well as highlighting negative and positive elements of the session.

#Video and the briefing of expectations

In particular, during the LOFT-based scenarios in the FFS, the instructor must emphasise in the brief that video equipment will be used to help with the facilitated debrief. The trainees must be told before the session starts that the video exists, that it will be used in the debrief, and what role it will play. Surprising trainees with video at the debrief table (instead of having pre-briefed them at the session opening) is a failure mode that the 6.7 LOFT Briefing - Suggested Format and Contents explicitly guards against.

#The role of the instructor in the LOFT

During the debriefing, the trainees will be invited to develop their own agenda without interruption from the instructor (i.e., identify the things they think are interesting and want to talk about, rather than what the instructor may think is interesting). However, it is important that the instructor keeps the discussion points relevant to the scenario as time is limited.

#The C-A-L organising frame in the simulator

The C-A-L model is the structure the FSF / NASA manual recommends for organising the simulator debrief. The model has three components, each addressing a different aspect of the LOS performance:

Posting the C-A-L model on a wallboard during the debrief reminds the crew of each aspect of their performance they should address. The full reproduction lives in A1.3 The C-A-L Debriefing Model.

#The crew develops the agenda

Asking the crew to identify the topics they want to discuss is what makes the debrief crew-centred rather than instructor-centred. Have them include aspects of their performance that worked well, not just aspects that need improvement. The issues the instructor noted during the LOS are also part of the agenda; the instructor can introduce them at an appropriate point during the debriefing rather than at the start. A useful technique for improving the crew's ability to identify issues for discussion is to suggest, during the pre-LOS briefing, that they make note of issues they want to discuss in the debriefing.

#7.4.3 Airborne Debriefing Techniques

The airborne debrief operates under constraints the simulator and the classroom do not impose: the aircraft is flying, time is limited, and certain phases of flight are flight-safety critical. The framework still applies; the technique mix shifts to accommodate the constraints.

#The sandwich model

If possible, a debrief should begin on a good point, and generally follow the 'sandwich' model: start with some good points, then the bad bits, and end on a positive note.

The sandwich is an opening-and-closing structure for the debrief, not a substitute for the analytical depth in between. The good points at the open lower the trainee's defensiveness; the negative points in the middle are where the learning sits; the positive close reinforces what to repeat and sends the trainee out with confidence. A debrief that uses the sandwich format but skips the analytical middle is a vehicle for praise, not a debrief.

#Self-analysis and three main points

The ability to self-analyse is an important skill of a pilot, and the student should be encouraged to provide their impression of what they did right and wrong. The debrief is an extension of the error analysis already performed airborne, and the student should be in no doubt as to how they can improve their performance.

Ensure that the debrief details not just the errors, but also the reason for the errors and how to correct them. Give praise to the student when it is due, and avoid dwelling too long on small points and dragging the debrief out too long. Three main points is generally a good number of debrief points to make. Briefly discuss the next lesson, and guide the student's preparatory study. Finally, state if the objective was achieved, and relate the lesson back to the training outcomes.

#Line Flying Under Supervision

All of the techniques identified in the 5.1 Introduction should be employed by trainee crews whilst undergoing Line Flying Under Supervision, and instructors should observe this throughout the training. However, the opportunities for debriefing are limited by time and in particular by flight safety.

The cruise phase is the airborne equivalent of the simulator's quiet ground time before the debrief: it is the only sustained interval where two people in the cockpit can hold a structured conversation without compromising the operating task. Instructors who never debrief in cruise effectively delay every observation until the end of the sector, by which time multiple events have queued up and the trainee can recall few of them in detail.

#The post-LFUS sector debrief

As a general rule, following an LFUS sector, an effective debrief should be timely and prioritise important "big picture" points that can be easily understood and rectified at the next opportunity. Should time permit, more minor points can be discussed as required; however, they should not be omitted and should be covered after the flight. The trainee crew should complete the sector in no doubt as to the outcome and be aware of both the negative and positive elements.

The "timely" requirement and the "big picture" prioritisation go together: a sector debrief that surfaces a long list of minor points immediately after the sector competes for the trainee's attention with the cognitive load of having just flown the sector. A short list of high-leverage points debriefed promptly, with a follow-up conversation for the longer list, is more effective than a single comprehensive session held when both parties are tired.

#Connections

• 7.3 General Debrief Techniques. The general framework this section applies to the three operating environments.
• 7.5 LOFT Debriefing - Introduction. The LOFT debrief is the most heavily prescribed of the synthetic-flight scenarios introduced here.
• 3.5 Questioning. The deeper treatment of pose-pause-pounce and other questioning techniques the ground-school section references.
• 5.1 Introduction. The RMM the ground-school treatment and the LFUS treatment both reference.
• 6.7 LOFT Briefing - Suggested Format and Contents. The pre-session briefing where the video-and-facilitator expectation enforced in synthetic flight training is first set.
• A1.3 The C-A-L Debriefing Model. The full FSF / NASA reproduction of the model the simulator debrief organises around.
• A1.4 Facilitation Techniques. The depth treatment of question, silence, active-listening, and video discipline the simulator debrief depends on.
• C-A-L model. The CRM / Analysis / Line-operations frame the simulator debrief organises around.
• CRM. The set of techniques the C-A-L "C" component is built around.
• LOFT. The simulator scenario type the synthetic flight training section is built around.