曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

2.9  Scripts should be designed in as much detail as possible in order to simulate the real world. A lack of detail requires the LOFT co-ordinator to improvise, which takes considerable time away from observation and evaluation of the crew. Such improvisation may also fail to accomplish the specific objectives of the scenario.
2.10  Communications under the control of the LOFT co-ordinator should be specified verbatim. The pacing and timing should be built in. Problem timing and input should be specified. Whenever a problem is injected, all anticipated crew actions should also be included in the scenario. Alternatives should also be specified where appropriate to modify the timing of a scenario. For example, if the crew executes an unexpected missed approach, an alternative course of action for the next leg may be necessary in order to stay within simulator time constraints. The LOFT co-ordinator may not add to or modify a scripted situation, but if the crew is observed to be so overloaded that further learning is impossible, reasonable judgement should be exercised to prevent further compounding of the crew's situation.
2.11  In the area of scenario revision and quality control after development, the scenario must be tested. Revisions will almost always be required. Even after further testing and, when required, approval by the aviation authorities, use of a scenario may reveal details that require further revision based on input from LOFT co-ordinators and line flight crews.
2.12  All scenarios must be kept current with respect to navigation, communications, regulations, company procedures and aircraft modifications. Accuracy of the scenarios with respect to hardware and software is essential to the credibility of LOFT.
2.13  Procedures and practices in the flight operations manuals or flight crew operating manuals that are known to be frequently misunderstood should be considered for inclusion in a LOFT scenario. For this purpose, also consider accident and maintenance reports, as well as incidents taken from information exchanges and confidential reporting systems, such as the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System.
2.14  Under operational problems, include pre-flight, dispatch release, hazardous cargo, fuelling options, NOTAMs, etc.
2.15  Minimum equipment list (MEL) items, as well as cabin/passenger problems, ATC problems, and mass and balance problems are all good sources for LOFT scenarios.
2.16  Under environmental problems include weather, wind, temperature, runways that are wet, icy or closed and runway and touchdown zone lighting problems, as appropriate.
2.17  In the equipment problems category include, as appropriate, airborne equipment problems and ground equipment problems such as support equipment and ground-based radio aids.
2.18  Under crew problems include cabin crew problems, flight crew problems including incapacitation, either obvious or subtle.
2.19  Also consider other uses of full-mission simulation. It offers promise for several applications in training and other areas of interest to operators. The design of such simulations will depend on the specific objectives to be attained. Examples of the areas in which full-mission simulation can be of value are: initial training of new pilots, upgrade and transition training, some check-rides and evaluation of new procedures.
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Flight Crew Training Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) and Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT)(32)