Skip to main content

Full text of "Evaluation of school Link and special methods of instruction in a ten-hour private pilot flight-training program"

See other formats


Ill 




L I E> R:-ARiY: 

OF THE 

UNIVERSITY 

Of ILLINOIS 

62913 
no.HO 



Return this book on or before the 
Latest Date stamped below. 

'.^"^7 

University of Illinois Library 



I 
-7 !9S9 



t -*J 13a 



•••MM 



I -4 I9B8 



2"< !953 






14 



t l 






OCT 2 



Is 1964 



DEC I 



:'^. :. 

*^?. 



964 






1975 
raw 

91980 



APR 
HAR 



WR1 9 
08 1982 



2 8 1985 



L161— H41 



029.13 
I-t6cL 

^■8 

AERONAUTICS BULLETIN : NUMBER EIGHT 



UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 

THE INSTITUTE OF AVIATION 

URBANA, ILLINOIS 



Evaluation of the School Link 

and 

Special Methods of Instruction 

in a 
Ten-Hour Private Pilot Flight-Training Program 



By 

Ralph E. Flexman, William G. Matheny, and Edward L. Brown 



UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BULLETIN 

VOLUME 47, NUMBER 80; JULY, 1950. Published seven times each month by the University of Illinois. Entered 
as second-class matter December 11, 1912, at the post office at Urbana, Illinois, under the Act of August 24, 
1912. Office of Publication, 358 Administration Building, Urbana, Illinois. 



THE INSTITUTE OF AVIATION, established in 1945 as the Institute of 
Aeronautics, is operated as the administrative agency responsible for the 
fostering and correlation of the educational and research activities related 
to aviation in all parts of the University. Other functions include academic 
instruction, flight training, management of the University of Illinois Airport, 
and aeronautical research. 

In connection with the latter function, the Institute issues two types of 
publications . . . first, a group of reports on research results, and sec- 
ond, a series of bulletins on aviation subjects of an extension service 
nature to the citizens of the State. 

The following publications have been issued: 

Bulletin One: Municipal Airport Management, Leslie A. Bryan, 1947. 
(Out of print) 

Bulletin Two: Landscape Planting for Airports, 
Florence B. Robinson, 1948. 

Bulletin Three: Labor Relations in the Air Transport Industry Under the 
Amended Railway Labor Act, E. B. McNatt, 1948. 

Bulletin Four: Airport Zoning, J. Nelson Young, 1948. (Out of print) 

Bulletin Five: Evaluation of the School Link as an Aid in Primary 
Flight Instruction, A. C. Williams, Jr., and 
Ralph E. Flexman, 1949. 

Bulletin Six: Lightplane Tires on Turf and Concrete, 
Leslie A. Bryan, 1949. 

Bulletin Seven: Light Aircraft Operating Costs, Leslie A. Bryan, 1949. 

Bulletin Eight: Evaluation of the School Link and Special Methods of 
Instruction in a Ten-Hour Private Pilot Flight-Training 
Program, Ralph E. Flexman, William G. Matheny, and 
Edward L. Brown, 1950. 

Publications of the Institute of Aviation will be sent free of charge 
upon request. 



1500—6-50—44258 



UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 
THE INSTITUTE OF AVIATION 

Leslie A. Bryan, Ph.D., LL.B., Director 
Bernice Schrader, A.M., Editor 



Evaluation of the School Link 

and 

Special Methods of Instruction 

in a 
Ten-Hour Private Pilot Flight-Training Program 



By 

Ralph E. Flexman, William G. Matheny, and 
Edward L. Brown 



Published by the University of Illinois, Urbana 

1950 



FOREWORD 

This monograph is the eighth in a series of bulletins on aviation 
subjects which are being issued from time to time by our Institute 
of Aviation. It reports the significant results of another research ex- 
periment in the use of a synthetic training aid, the School Link, in the 
training of pilots. 

The authors are trained in psychology and are also certified pilots. 
Mr. Ralph E. Flexman has been a flight instructor in the Institute of 
Aviation since 1945 and previously served in World War II as an 
Air Force flight instructor. Mr. Edward L. Brown, likewise, has had 
long experience in both civil and military flight instruction. Dr. William 
G. Matheny is a member of the instructional staff of the University of 
Illinois Department of Psychology 

Mr. Flexman, Mr. Brown, and Dr. Matheny wish to express their 
appreciation to Link Aviation, Inc., of Binghampton, New York, for 
furnishing and maintaining the two specially modified School Links 
and for sharing the expense of the experiment; to the personnel of the 
Institute of Aviation and the Aviation Psychology Laboratory, De- 
partment of Psychology, for their assistance with the experiment and 
in the writing of this report; to Mr. William Plunkett and Mr. David 
Kress, Civil Aeronautics Administration Air Safety Agents, and to 
Mr. Earl Taynor and Hr. Harold Hayes, Private Pilot Flight Ex- 
aminers. 

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance given by the 
following instructors who had the greatest load in carrying out the ex- 
periment: Misses Dora Dougherty and Elizabeth Seely, and Messrs. 
Donald Pardue, Scott Hasler, Howard Burnett, John Howarth, and 
Robert Siegfried. 

The Institute of Aviation is glad to make available the informa- 
tion contained in this monograph. The Institute is using these and 
other experimental results to continue to improve and modify its own 
curriculum for the instruction of beginning pilots. It is hoped that 
others may derive help of a similar nature from this study. 

In this monograph, as in all publications of the Institute, the 
authors have had complete freedom to express their opinions, with the 
understanding that they assume sole responsibility therefor. 

., , rt _ Leslie A. Bryan 

April, 1950 n . 4 

1 Director 






INTRODUCTION 

The private pilot is a "maneuver doer." His rating testifies that he 
has performed certain maneuvers proficiently and, therefore, may enjoy 
all of the privileges of the private pilot. The tacit assumption is that 
performance of these maneuvers to a standard level of proficiency 
makes him competent to operate an aircraft under the full range of 
conditions allowed by his ratings. Unfortunately, these maneuvers de- 
mand only a small part of the over-all knowledge and ability necessary 
for the private pilot to realize efficient utilization of his aircraft. 

Many groups who are concerned with pilot training are aware that 
the proficiency of the new private pilot is limited and attribute this 
condition to the present training program and instructional techniques. 
Attempts have been made to resolve this situation by revising the 
Private Pilot Flight Test, eliminating certain time-consuming and, per- 
haps, unnecessary maneuvers from the flight syllabus, assigning a 
greater portion of the flight-training to cross-country flying, and using 
four-place aircraft. 

Each method has certain advantages and may add to the number of 
skills required by the truly proficient pilot, but it is unlikely that any 
one method would enable the private pilot to acquire the diversity of 
skills that he needs. The desirable solution would be a flight-training 
program that encompassed the best of all of these methods. Even with 
such a program, if present training methods and techniques were used, 
it is not probable that increased proficiency could be attained in the mini- 
mum of thirty-five hours required by the CAA for the training of a 
private pilot. Also, it would not be desirable to increase the required 
amount of flight-training time. The most logical solution seems to lie 
in the development of new training methods that would permit the 
elementary skills to be taught in a fraction of the time now necessary. 
The remaining hours then would be free for instruction in the addi- 
tional skills the private pilot needs for the normal use of his airplane. 

The present experiment was conducted by the Aviation Psychology 
Laboratory of the Department of Psychology and the Institute of 
Aviation, both of the University of Illinois. The aim of the experi- 
ment was to train students to pass the Private Pilot Flight Test after 
only ten hours of flight time. Previous experience with the Link trainer 
and new methods of instruction suggested that the ten-hour program 
was a reasonable goal. The study was designed also to assess the relative 
contribution of each of these two new techniques, that is, the use of 
a synthetic trainer and the use of revised instructional methods. 



4 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

EARLY EXPERIMENTS 

In view of the interest and research in the general area of syn- 
thetic flight trainers and to place the present experiment in its proper 
perspective, it seems advisable to present a brief summary of the more 
important experiments in this area. 

A recent report by Mahler and Bennett 1 includes a review of several 
studies in the area of synthetic flight training. This review presents 
the following findings: In 1939 E. W. Conlon, under the auspices of 
the National Research Council, conducted a study of the use of the 
Link Instrument Trainer in contact flight instruction in conjunction 
with the Civilian Pilot Training Program. Conlon offered the tentative 
conclusion that five to seven hours of contact instruction in the Link 
"teaches a correlation of controls, and so forth, equivalent, roughly, to 
three hours of flight instruction." 2 

E. B. Greene's study, reported in 1941, involving the use of the 
Link Instrument Trainer in contact flight instruction, indicated that 
"Link training seemed to have given the men unusually good coordi- 
nation and calmness in the air." 3 It is estimated that there was a saving 
of about 2Yi hours in air time prior to solo as a result of the six hours 
of Link training. 

C. W. Crannell, Greene, and H. F. Chamberlain did another study 
in 1941 similar in nature to the other two cited. These authors con- 
cluded that "the consistency with which the groups with more Link 
time are found to be superior throughout the battery of ratings and 
other tests of flight competency suggests that some real differences in 
ability may be present." 4 

The war years lent urgency to the need for further knowledge in 
this field. In 1942, a synthetic contact flight-training study was initiated 
at the Naval Reserve Aviation Base, Long Beach, California. During 
this six-month study, 146 students received synthetic training. The 
final report of this project concluded that the synthetic preflight train- 
ing speeded up pilot training by reducing the number of dual instruction 
hours required to solo and also decreased the number of students re- 
ceiving down checks (failure) on the "safe-for-solo" check flight. 

A more elaborate project was begun in 1943 at the Naval Flight 



1 W. R. Mahler, and G. K. Bennett, Special Devices in Primary Flight Train- 
ing: Their Training and Selection Value. Port Washington, New York: Special 
Devices Center, Office of Naval Research, Technical Report — SDC 151-1-18, 
August 31, 1949. 

2 As cited by Mahler and Bennett, p. 8. 
* Ibid., p. 9. 

4 Ibid. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 5 

Preparatory School, William Jewell College, Liberty, Missouri. The 
project ran for eighteen months. The subjects in the experimental 
group received synthetic training in a Link Instrument Trainer which 
was converted to contact use by removing the cockpit cover and placing 
a cyclorama around the trainer. The control group did not receive any 
synthetic flight instruction. The study was divided into two phases: 
the first dealt with the preparatory school program and the second 
with flight training in light airplanes in War Training Service schools. 
In both phases the experimental students held a slight advantage over 
the control students in their readiness for solo (that is, a student 
capable of soloing before the end of the required number of flights), 
actual solo time, and flight grades. Although the differences were not 
statistically significant, the students themselves felt that the synthetic 
training was a definite asset, and the flight instructors preferred to 
teach students who had received such training. 

Data taken from an unpublished Navy report shows that early in 
1945 another experimental synthetic flight-training (primary) program 
was undertaken at the Naval Air Station, Memphis, Tennessee. This 
program made use of such synthetic devices as a rudder trainer and a 
taxi trainer, as well as a contact adaptation of the Link Instrument 
Trainer equipped with cyclorama. In the experiment 306 cadets were 
paired, and one of each of the pairs was placed in the experimental 
group. The remaining 153 students made up the control group. The 
subjects were followed through flight stage "A" for data compilation. 
An analysis of the tabulated flight grades revealed that the experimental 
group which participated in the synthetic flight program received more 
G (good) grades on practically all items than did the nonparticipating 
control group. 

These studies are only a few of the total number conducted during 
the years from 1929 to 1945. Both the Royal Air Force of England and 
the Royal Canadian Air Force investigated the role of synthetic flight- 
training devices in their flight-training programs. In addition, a limited 
number of colleges having flight-training programs, such as Stephens 
College at Columbia, Missouri, experimented with converted Link In- 
strument Trainers in order to utilize them in their primary flight- 
training courses. 

It is important to note that the synthetic flight trainers used in the 
experiments described thus far were designed for the teaching of in- 
strument flight procedures. They were adapted for contact flight train- 
ing by removing the cockpit cover so the students were able to fly the 
trainer by some reference other than the flight instruments. 



6 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

The use of converted instrument flight trainers as contact flight 
trainers in these experiments imposed certain limitations. The in- 
structor was unable to measure student performance on many contact 
flight maneuvers. Control of the trainers by reference to other than 
the flight instruments was difficult due to the configuration of the 
trainers; the flight characteristics as portrayed by the flight instruments 
were not accurately simulated in the actual movements of the trainers; 
and the cockpit design was not comparable to that of the aircraft used 
for flight instruction. These limitations probably influenced the amount 
of transfer of training that could occur, for only a small portion of 
the primary flight syllabus could be taught in the ground trainer. 

Link Aviation, Inc., later designed a classroom demonstration de- 
vice known as the School Link. This device seemed to approximate 
more closely the characteristics thought to be desirable in a synthetic 
primary (contact) flight trainer than had the trainers used previously. 
To evaluate this device in the role of a contact flight trainer, a series of 
experiments was undertaken at the University of Illinois Airport. 

The initial experiment 

The initial experiment was conducted during the fall semester, 
1947-1948, and involved forty-eight subjects. 5 The criterion used to 
measure the transfer of training from the School Link to the flight 
situation was the flight time required to solo. The design of the ex- 
periment included two experimental groups and a control group. The 
experimental groups first learned a number of maneuvers in the Link. 
Proficiency in these maneuvers was assumed to be necessary before 
solo in the aircraft was possible. However, the subjects were not re- 
quired to perform the maneuvers to any set level of proficiency, but to 
learn them as well as possible in the time allotted. After either two or 
four hours in the trainer, they were assigned to one of four flight 
instructors. 

Each flight instructor received twelve students; six from the con- 
trol group and six from the experimental groups. His experimental 
students were further divided into two groups; three students had had 
two hours, and three had had four hours of Link-training experience. 
The flight instructor was unaware of the experience in the trainer that 
had been given any of his students. His task was to solo all of his 
Students as quickly as possible while maintaining the conventional 
standards of proficiency in the maneuvers required before solo. The 

"'A. C. Williams, Jr. and Ralph E. Flexman, Evaluation of the School Link 
as an Aid in Primary Flight Instruction. Urbana: University of Illinois, 1949. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 7 

hypothesis was that, if the required pre-solo maneuvers could be 
learned in the trainer, the four-hour group would solo with the least 
amount of flight time, the two-hour group next, while the control group 
would require the greatest length of time. 

The results of this experiment showed that there was no real dif- 
ference between the groups in respect to the number of hours of dual 
instruction necessary before solo. The results were considered incon- 
clusive as to the value of the trainer in this situation because the cri- 
terion used was heavily weighted in the performance of landings and 
take-offs which was not taught in the Link. They did indicate, however, 
that the time required to solo was chiefly dependent upon the instruc- 
tors' standards and the student's ability to make take-offs and landings, 
and not upon performance of the pre-solo maneuvers. Since time to 
solo was the only criterion considered, there was no satisfactory meas- 
ure of the transfer of training involved on the maneuvers that were 
practiced in the trainer. 

The second experiment 

A second evaluation of the device was conducted during the spring 
semester, 1948. The procedure in this experiment was to compare an 
experimental group to a control group on the amount of practice re- 
quired to achieve proficiency in a series of maneuvers performed in 
the aircraft. The criterion of learning for any given maneuver was the 
performance of three consecutive errorless trials. Each group was 
comprised of twenty-four students, none of whom had had previous 
flight training. In the trainer the experimental group first learned to 
proficiency an exercise composed of several related maneuvers. After 
learning the exercise in the trainer, the student practiced it in the 
airplane until he again reached the criterion. The control group prac- 
ticed the maneuvers in the airplane only and were required to achieve 
the same level of proficiency as the experimental group. The students 
were assigned in groups of twelve to each of four instructors. Six of 
each instructor's students were from the control group, and six were 
from the experimental group. 

This second experiment was different from the first in several other 
ways. The flight instructor served also as the Link instructor. The in- 
structional methods used in the airplane and the trainer were not those 
ordinarily used in flight training. Each maneuver was demonstrated to 
the student once; then he attempted to perform it. The student was 
told, at the end of a trial, what error or errors he had made and what 
he must do on the next trial to correct the error or errors. If no errors 



8 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

were made, the student was instructed to repeat the trial. However, if 
the student persisted in his errors for three trials, the maneuver was 
again demonstrated, and each demonstration after the initial one was 
recorded as a trial. This procedure was continued until the criterion 
was met. 

The results of this experiment showed that the Link-trained group 
had learned the maneuvers to criterion with 28 per cent fewer trials 
and 22 per cent fewer errors than had the control group. An over-all 
transfer of training of approximately 25 per cent occurred, and one 
trial in the Link was estimated to be the equivalent of .29 of a trial 
in the air. 

Further analysis of the data revealed that the transfer of training 
was not the same on all exercises. An examination of these differences 
indicated that on certain exercises the amount of transfer probably 
could be increased by increasing the accuracy with which the School 
Link simulated the flight characteristics of the aircraft used. In ad- 
dition, it seemed likely that, if the flight syllabus and instructional 
techniques were modified to take advantage of the training received in 
the School Link, an even greater saving in flight time might be accom- 
plished, and, if the restrictions imposed by experimental control were 
relieved, the effectiveness of Link training would be enhanced. This 
would permit flexibility in using the trainer to meet the needs of indi- 
vidual students. 

The third experiment 

To investigate part of the preceding hypothesis, a third experiment 
was conducted during June and July, 1949. This experiment was con- 
cerned primarily with ways of using the trainer and with improving 
instructional techniques. Its purpose was to train students to private 
pilot proficiency in as few hours as possible by using any method 
deemed effective by the experimenter. The School Link used in this 
exploratory project was modified in accordance with the findings of 
the second experiment. 

The design of this study involved six students who had had no 
previous flight training. The group was under the control of one in- 
structor at all times. 6 The criterion used was the time required to 
achieve proficiency on basic maneuvers as indicated by passing a CAA 
Private Pilot Flight Test. 

The results of this project showed that the average time in the air 
before solo was two hours and fifty-two minutes, while the average 

'The instructor was Mr. Ralph E. Flexman, Institute of Aviation, University 

of Illinois. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 

Table 1. Distribution of Students 





Number of Students 
Originally Enrolled 


Number of Students 
Completing Course 




Link Control Total 


Link Control Total 


Students recruited from 
Institute of Aviation. . 


9 8 17 


8 7 15 






Students recruited from 
other sources . 


14 16 30 


13 14 27 






Total 


23 24 47 


21 21 42 



flight time required to reach proficiency was nine hours and forty- 
seven minutes. The average Link time prior to passing the flight test 
was ten hours and forty minutes. The average of the combined Link 
and air time required to pass the test was twenty hours and twenty- 
seven minutes. 7 

These results indicated that it was possible for the new student to 
achieve private pilot proficiency in substantially less time than is nor- 
mally required. The design of the study, however, made it impossible 
to determine the relative contribution of the methods used. Because of 
this, the present experiment was undertaken. 



THE PRESENT EXPERIMENT 

Experimental design 

The fourth experiment was designed to test the hypothesis that 
a student could be trained to pass the Private Pilot Flight Test after 
ten hours of flight training if a revised training syllabus were used. It 
was also designed to determine the contribution of a synthetic trainer, 
the School Link, to such a program. 

In order to evaluate the contribution of the synthetic trainer, two 
groups of students were trained under the revised training syllabus. 
The Link group was given practice in the synthetic trainer while the 
control group was not. At the end of the ten hours of flight time both 
groups were given flight tests. The performance of the students on 
these tests was the measure used to compare the two groups. Distribu- 
tion of the students by group is shown in Table 1. 

7 See Appendix A. 



10 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

Table 2. Distribution of Students by Instructor and Group 







Number of Students 


Number of Students 




Instructor 


Originally Enrolled 


Completing Course 




Link 


Control 


Link 


Control 


1 




3 


3 


2 


3 


2 




6 


5 


6 


4 


3 




3 


3 


3 


3 


4 




4 


5 


4 


4 


5 




2 
3 
1 


2 
3 
1 


1 
3 
1 


1 


6 


3 


7 




1 


8 




1 


2 


1 


2 






Total 


23 


24 


21 


21 



In order to approximate more closely the use of the revised syllabus 
and of the synthetic trainer in a "practical" training situation, eight 
flight instructors were used. Although students were assigned to these 
instructors at random, each instructor was to train an equal number 
of Link students and control students. It was not possible to meet this 
requirement completely, due to difficulties in scheduling. The distri- 
bution of students by instructor and group is shown in Table 2. 

All students were trained to "intellectual" proficiency in a group 
of maneuvers before attempting to perform them. "Intellectual" 
proficiency was defined as the ability to verbalize the pertinent cues 
and cue responses necessary for successful acomplishment of the 
maneuvers. When the subjects in the control group reached this level, 
they attempted the maneuvers in the aircraft. When the Link subjects 
attained this proficiency, they practiced the maneuvers in the synthetic 
trainer until an acceptable level of performance was reached. Following 
this, they attempted the maneuvers in the aircraft. Both groups of 
students received an equal amount of training in the aircraft. The 
distribution of each student's air time, Link time, and discussion time 
is shown in appendices B and C. 

Upon the completion of the ten hours of flying, each student was 
given two Private Pilot Flight Tests. The first flight test was ad- 
ministered by CAA Air Safety Agents, and the students were as- 
signed to them at random. The second flight examination, given the 
following day, was conducted by Private Pilot Plight Examiners. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 11 

Again, the students were assigned at random. Neither the CAA Ex- 
aminers nor the Private Pilot Examiners were informed of the type 
of training received by any student. They knew, however, that the 
students had had only ten hours of flying time and that, in an attempt 
to mask the identity of the experimental subjects, several private pilots 
were added as "ringers" to the groups being tested. Unknown to the 
CAA Agents and Examiners, the ringer group was composed of seven 
private pilots recruited from other flight classes and their average 
flight time was approximately 100 hours. 

In addition to the measures of proficiency mentioned previously, 
records of each student's flight time before he was allowed to solo, as 
well as of the instructor's over-all grade of the student's proficiency at 
the end of the ten hours, were kept. 

Subjects 

Subjects participating in this experiment were selected from two 
sources within the University. The first source was the Private Pilot 
Flight Course at the University's Institute of Aviation. This elective 
course, for which credit is given toward graduation, is offered to all 
University students. The second source was other academic depart- 
ments. Students from the latter source were not enrolled in the Private 
Pilot Flight Course. They received only the ten hours of flight instruc- 
tion and did not participate in the formal ground school program which 
is part of the Private Pilot Flight Course. A person who had had 
previous flight training could not become a subject for the experiment, 
nor could a person who was unable to pass successfully a third-class 
CAA physical examination. 

A total of forty-seven subjects were selected, seventeen from the 
first source and thirty from the second. The distribution of students 
by source is given in Table 1. All students selected from the second 
source were required to pay a fee of $25. The fee was assessed to 
help assure the students' continuing in the experiment, as well as to 
help defray the cost of the program. Prior to the completion of the 
experiment, five students withdrew for personal reasons, and their data 
were not included in the results. The subjects selected from the first 
source received additional formal instruction in ground school; hence, 
the number of these subjects in the Link and the control group was 
equated as nearly as possible. 

Instructors 

Eight instructors, six men and two women, were used. These in- 
structors were selected on the basis of availability and experience level. 



12 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

The experience level of the instructors ranged from no previous in- 
struction time to over 2,500 hours of instruction time. Only one had 
previously given instruction in the School Link. The instructors were 
given approximately five hours of indoctrination and training. They 
were briefed on the purpose of the experiment, the methods of in- 
struction to be employed, the controls to be observed, and the use of 
the School Link. Instruction in the use of the School Link included 
demonstrations of its flight characteristics and its limitations and of 
starting and stopping procedures, as well as information concerning the 
coordinated use of the blackboard in teaching ground contact maneuvers 
and the tolerances to be observed in grading the various maneuvers. 

After the initial indoctrination period, each instructor received 
a mimeographed pamphlet, "Purpose of the Experiment, Instructor's 
Guide, and Some Principles of Learning Applicable to the Flight 
Situation," and copies of the Link and the Control syllabi. 8 The syllabi 
were presented as guides, and strict adherence to them was not re- 
quired. The students' individual differences determined the manner in 
which each instructor applied the information. However, the im- 
portance of equalizing instruction for the control and the Link groups 
was carefully explained to the instructors. The desirable instructional 
techniques were outlined, but the actual instruction was not supervised 
in either the air or the Link situation. The supervision of the instruc- 
tors was concerned only with maintaining the basic design of the 
experiment. 

Equipment 

The two synthetic flight trainers used in this experiment were 
modified models of the preflight trainer known popularly as the School 
Link. They were furnished by Link Aviation, Inc., of P>inghampton, 
New York. 

The trainer, made of aluminum, resembles an all-metal, open cock- 
pit, midwing monoplane of the light aircraft type. Its wing span is 
9 feet 6 inches, and it has the same measurement from nose to tail. 
Mounted on a pedestal, the trainer is free to pitch, yaw, and bank, and 
to turn 360° in response to control manipulation in the cockpit. This 
manipulation is also reflected in the movement of the appropriate con- 
trol surfaces. 

The trainer possesses the following flight characteristics: dynamic 
Stability, adverse yaw, nose-heaviness during turns, change in pitch 
attitude with change in power-setting, overbanking tendency, torque 

"Sec appendices I), E, and F. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 13 

effect with power and airspeed change, spinning (accidental and/or 
intentional), elevator trim effect, power-on and power-off stall, and 
positive stall recovery. In addition, the effects of turbulent air can be 
simulated. The cockpit configuration is that of the usual light aircraft 
and includes operative light aircraft instruments, the usual flight con- 
trols, plus an elevator trim control, and a functioning headset and 
microphone. 

A cloth cyclorama 15 feet in diameter, 11 feet in height, and 270° 
in circumference was placed around each trainer. The white cloth was 
unmarked except for a black line representing the horizon, reference 
marks for normal climb and glide attitudes, and indications of cardinal 
compass directions. A projector in the nose of the trainer made it 
possible for the instructor to flash a small silhouette on the screen so 
that he could check the aircraft's attitude or give the student a refer- 
ence point in the initial stages of learning. 

For certain maneuvers the student was required to wear blue gog- 
gles, and the projector light was covered by a small piece of amber 
plexiglass. This combination of blue goggles and amber plexiglass pre- 
vented the student from seeing the projected silhouette. Thus the in- 
structor could use it as a scoring device. 

A portable schoolroom blackboard was used as a device for teach- 
ing ground reference maneuvers. The blackboard was equipped with 
rollers so that it could be moved to simulate drift effects and the 
effects of forward and side slips. 

A small wooden replica of a typical light airplane was available 
for the demonstration and practicing of the various maneuvers and 
attitudes. It did not have movable surfaces. 

A wooden mock-up and an actual photograph of the University 
Airport were used for student orientation and for teaching traffic 
patterns. Both of these training aids were of a size which permitted 
the student to move a small paper silhouette along the runways and 
taxiways in a manner which simulated the actual taxiing and traffic 
patterns. 

The airplane used for the actual flight training was an Aeronca 
7 AC, a tandem-type, high-wing, lightplane powered by a 65-horsepower 
Continental four-cylinder engine. 

Criteria 

The CAA Flight Test administered either by a CAA Examiner or 
by a Private Pilot Examiner is the final measure of the student's pro- 
ficiency as a private pilot. The student must receive an over-all grade 
of seventy or better on this test to be eligible for the private pilot rating. 



14 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

Table 3. Coefficients of Correlation Among the Several Criteria 

Measures of Over-all Grade 



Link (n = 21) 



Control (n = 2T 



Link and Control 
(n = 42) 



Private 



Private 



Private 



Pilot Instruc- Pilot Instruc- Pilot Instruc- 



Exam- tor Exam- tor 

iner iner 



Exam- tor 
iner 



CAA Examiner. . . . 


. . .240 


.478 


.489 


.641 


.520 


.590 


Private Pilot 

Examiner 




.550 




.539 




.561 



This test consists of seventeen items or maneuvers. Each item is scored 
on a scale from one to five; five being the failing score. Failure on any 
one of the items constitutes failure to pass the flight test. 9 

The grade given by the examiner at the conclusion of the flight test 
is based not upon a simple summation or equivalent weighting of the 
individual items or maneuvers, but rather upon the examiner's judg- 
ment of the student's over-all performance during the test. The ex- 
aminer may assign the student a grade between zero and one hundred. 
The student's proficiency may be evaluated also by his instructor and 
given a numerical value between zero and one hundred, with seventy or 
higher indicating proficiency adequate to pass the CAA Flight Test. 

A subgoal for the student in the early stages of training is time 
to solo. This constitutes a "time to learn" or "time to criterion" measure 
of proficiency, although there is undoubtedly variation between and 
among instructors as to the level of proficiency believed necessary 
before solo. 

Thus, the proficiency measures or criteria available for study of 
training procedures within the private pilot training program may be 
first, the CAA Flight Test, second, the instructor's grade, and third, 
the amount of flight time before solo. For an over-all evaluation of 
any training program, any one or a combination of these might be used. 
The choice of any one or all would seem to be dependent upon the 
immediate question to be answered concerning the training program 
and upon available information as to the reliability of the criteria. In 

'These items are shown in Appendix J. 



-.211 


-.618 


21 


-.595 


-.539 


21 


-.484 


-.587 


42 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 15 

Table 4. Correlation Between Solo Time and Over-all Grades 

Graded by : Private 

CAA Pilot 

Group ~^\^ Examiner Examiner Instructor N 

Link -.385 

Control — . 374 

Link and control — .451 



general, however, the CAA Flight Test seems preferable since, prac- 
tically speaking, it is the one which the student must pass to receive the 
private pilot rating. Further, this flight test offers an opportunity to 
analyze the effects of the training program in some detail in terms of 
particular maneuvers. 

In the present study, the CAA Flight Test was administered to each 
of the experimental groups by two groups of examiners. The CAA 
Examiners checked the students first, and then the Private Pilot Ex- 
aminers from other airports checked them. The flight test provided 
data for three analyses: a dichotomous breakdown of "pass" or "fail"; 
the over-all grades received by both the Link and the control groups 
on the check flights with either the CAA Examiners or the Private 
Pilot Examiners; and the number of items passed or failed by the 
students within each of the groups for each of the check rides. The 
data were also analyzed with respect to the instructors' over-all grades 
as well as the time before solo for each of the two experimental groups. 

The several coefficients of correlation between the various measures 
or criteria were computed in order to obtain an estimate of the extent 
of agreement among the measures. These coefficients of correlation 
are presented in Tables 3 and 4. 

Table 3 shows that there was fair agreement among the various 
observers in their grading of the students' over-all proficiency. The 
lack of high correlation may be due, in part, to lack of reliability of 
observations. Some notion as to the reliability of the check ride itself 
as a measuring instrument may be obtained from the correlation be- 
tween the CAA Examiners' grades and the Private Pilot Examiners' 
grades. For the combined Link and control groups, this coefficient of 
correlation was .52. 

The coefficients of correlation between over-all grades and flight 
time before solo were, in general, lower than those between over-all 
grades. An exception to this, however, is the correlation between in- 



16 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

Table 5. Frequencies and Percentages of "Pass" or "Fail" 
on the Private Pilot Flight Test 

CAA Examiners Private Pilot Examiners 

Link Control Link Control 

Nam- Per Nam- Per Num- Per Num- Per 
her Cent her Cent her Cent her Cent 



Pass 

Fail 


9 

12 


43 

57 


4 
17 


19 

81 


4 
17 


19 
81 


1 
20 


5 
95 


Total 


21 


100 


21 


100 


21 


100 


21 


100 



structor over-all grade and solo time, which suggests that the instruc- 
tor's grading of a student may be affected to some extent by time to 
solo. 

It should be pointed out again that the CAA and Private Pilot 
examiners were unaware of the type of training, either Link or non- 
Link, received by any student being checked. Further, seven pilots 
already holding private pilot licenses were tested along with the two 
experimental groups. The examiners knew only that some students 
were "experimental" and had received but ten hours of air training 
time, while others were certified private pilots. 



RESULTS 

The statistical analysis of the data was oriented toward testing the 
null hypothesis with respect to the two subgroups concerned, that is, 
that there were no differences in performance between the Link and 
the control groups as measured by any one of the criteria used. The 
first criterion considered was the dichotomy of "pass" or "fail" on the 
flight lest as administered by either the CAA Examiners or the Private 
Pilot Examiners. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 5. 
The hypothesis tested in this case was that there was no significant 
difference between the proportions passing the test in each of the two 
groups, cither Link or control. 

The analysis showed that a higher percentage of students in the 
Link group had passed the flight test for both types of examiners. A 
test for the significance of the difference between proportions passing 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 17 

Table 6. Means, Standard Deviations, and Tests of Significance 

Between Over-all Grades of Link and Control Groups 

for the Three Criteria Employed 

X SD F 10 P u r n P 

CAA Examiners 

Link 68.14 5.23 3.25 .02 3.91 .001 

Control 58.71 9.41 

Link and control ... 63 . 43 8 . 96 

Private Pilot Examiners 

Link 67.71 4.21 3.11 .02 2.25 .05 .01 

Control 63.42 7.42 

Link and control. . . 65.57 6.40 

Instructors 

Link 68.28 7.70 1.70 .20 1.24 .30 .20 



Control 64.76 10.05 

Link and control. . . 66.52 9.13 



the test in each of the groups showed that, although more Link-trained 
students than control students passed each of the flight tests, the dif- 
ference was not highly significant. The results of the CAA Examiner's 
test showed that 43 per cent of the Link group passed while 19 per cent 
of the control group passed. This difference in proportions was found 
to be significant at the .10 level of confidence. The difference in propor- 
tions for the Private Pilot Examiner's test was found to be significant 
at the .15 level of confidence. It is interesting to note that, of the 
small group of private pilots (n = 7) who took the test at this time, 
only 43 per cent passed. 

Over-all grades on the CAA Flight Test, as well as the instructors' 
over-all grades, were analyzed. Two hypotheses were tested for these 
measures. These hypotheses were, first, there are no differences be- 
tween the grougs in terms of the variability of grades received, and 
second, there are no differences between the groups in terrns of mean 
grade received. The results of these analyses are presented in Table 6. 

Table 6 shows that in the evaluations by both the CAA and the 
Private Pilot examiners the grades of the Link group showed signifi- 
cantly less dispersion about the mean grade. In other words, the per- 

10 F ratio between the variances of the Link and control groups. 
"Palmer O. Johnson, Statistical Methods in Research. New York: Prentice- 
Hall, Inc., 1949, pp. 74-75. 



18 



SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 



50 
4 5 
40H 



Figure I 

OVER-ALL GRADES ON CAA FLIGHT TEST 



Percentage of Link Groups Receiving Score N — 21 



R^^M Percentage of Control Group Receiving Score N = 21 



35- 



30 




OVER-ALL GRADE — CAA PRIVATE PILOT FLIGHT TEST 
PERCENT 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 19 

formance of the Link group was more homogeneous with respect to 
over-all grades than was that of the control group. This trend was re- 
peated in the instructors' grading, although the difference did not 
approach the significance level of the other two sets of grades. 

The lack of homogeneity of variance for the two groups poses a 
problem in testing the null hypothesis with respect to mean differences. 
The test of this hypothesis was made, however, utilizing the method 
of W. G. Cochran and G. M. Cox as outlined by Palmer O. Johnson 
in which a weighted criterion "t" is obtained. The complete computa- 
tion was not necessary in this case, since N x = N 2 and the interpreta- 
tion of "t" was made by entering the "t" table with df = Ni — 1. 

The test of this second hypothesis — that is, that there are no 
differences between the groups in terms of mean grades received — 
showed that the CAA grades discriminated between the groups at a 
high level of statistical significance (P = .001). The Private Pilot 
Examiner grades discriminated at a lower level (P = <.05>.01), 
while the flight instructor grades, although showing the same trend, 
failed to show a high level of discrimination (P = <.30>.20). 

The percentage of students receiving the various over-all grades 
is shown in Figure I. The raw data are presented in appendices G, 
H, and I. 

Since over-all grades, as well as grades on the separate items in 
the test, may reflect an over-all evaluation of the student by the ex- 
aminer, it was decided to examine the groups in terms of the number 
of items failed. That the over-all grade given by the examiner is par- 
tially independent of the number of items failed is indicated by a 
coefficient of correlation of — .479 between items failed on the CAA 
test and the over-all grades for that test. Thus, there is no direct corre- 
spondence between the over-all grade and the number of items failed, 
which indicates a differential weighting of the items by the examiners. 

The items were rated "pass," a score of one through four, or "fail," 
a score of five. The item scores for each of the students in the two 
groups were tabulated to determine the number of students failing no 
items, one item, and so forth. 12 With twenty-one cases in each group, 
it was necessary to combine the data as shown in Tables 7 and 8 to 
obtain enough cases in any one cell to make an analysis meaningful. 
Chi square values were then computed for the two four-fold tables. 

From Tables 7 and 8 it can be seen that the two groups of examiners 
discriminated between the groups of students on the basis of the num- 
ber of items failed at a level of statistical confidence of .03. No data 



These scores are presented in appendices J and K. 



20 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

were available as to the instructors' ratings in terms of items passed 
or failed. 

A related measure of pilot proficiency which is sometimes used is 
the amount of flight time required before solo. This measure was avail- 
able for the two groups in the experiment and was examined for dif- 
ferences between the groups. This analysis is summarized in Table 9. 

Table 9 shows the Link group to have had less average flight time 
than the control group had had before being allowed to solo. However, 



Table 7. CAA Examiner's Ratings 
Number of Items Failed 







Link 


Control 


Total 


Failed to 3 items 




15 
6 


8 
13 


23 


Failed 4 to 9 items 




19 








Total 




21 


21 


42 










X 2 


= 4.708 


P=.03 





Table 8. Private Pilot Examiner's Ratings 
Number of Items Failed 







Link 


Control 


Total 


Failed to 3 items 

Failed 4 to 7 items 




14 

7 


7 
14 


21 

21 








Total 




21 


21 


42 










X 2 


= 4.668 


P=.03 





Table 9. Flight Time Before Solo 
Means, Variabilities, and Tests of Significance 





Group 


X 


SD 


F 


P 


"t" 


P 


Link.... 
Control . 




.... 3.27 
. ... 4.36 


1.86 
1.71 


1.20 


U.S. 


1.93 


.05 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 21 

the mean difference between the two groups does not show a high 
degree of statistical significance. 

Some additional pertinent, though subjective, evaluations of the 
performance of the group can be made. In the Link group an additional 
six individuals, or 28.6 per cent, received scores from 66 through 69, 
a score of 70 or better being passing. In the control group, no indi- 
vidual received a score in this "near-passing" range. Thus, a total of 
71.6 per cent of the Link group received scores of 66 or above, while 
only 19 per cent of the control group received scores in this range. This 
suggests that the Link group would have profited more than the control 
group, in terms of the number of individuals passing, from an ad- 
ditional two to three hours of training. 

The findings of this experiment become more significant when 
viewed in the light of the following facts: The records of 685 primary 
flight students trained at the University of Illinois between the spring 
semester of 1947 and the summer session of 1949 were examined; these 
records showed that, among the students whose instructors recom- 
mended that they take the Private Pilot Flight Test, only 67.9 per cent 
passed the test at the end of 35.9 hours of flight training. The other 
32.1 per cent were unable to pass the test at this time, either because 
they were not recommended by their instructor, or because they failed 
the test after recommendation. 

Summary of analysis 

After all the data relevant to the experiment were compiled, an 
analysis of the data was made. The following points form a summari- 
zation of this analysis: 

1. A comparison of the performances of the two groups, the Link 
and the control, showed that the Link-trained group was more pro- 
ficient with respect to the several criteria analyzed. 

2. The criterion of "pass" or "fail" on the flight test differentiated 
between the groups but not at a high degree of statistical significance. 

3. The criterion of over-all grade on the flight test showed that 
the Link group received a significantly higher mean score than the 
control group. 

4. With respect to the criterion of number of items failed, the 
analysis showed that a significantly smaller number of students in the 
Link group than in the control group failed four or more items. 

Conclusions 

Students trained in the synthetic trainer exhibited greater pro- 
ficiency in performing the maneuvers in the CAA Private Pilot Flight 



22 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

Test than did the students who did not receive this training, but not 
all of the students were trained to a level of proficiency that enabled 
them to pass the test at the end of ten hours of flying. However, the 
results indicate that the time required to train students to pass this test 
may be substantially reduced from the thirty-five hours now required. 



QUALITATIVE FINDINGS 

The analysis of the data showed that ten hours of flight training 
were not sufficient to train all students to private pilot proficiency. 
However, from these data and from observations during the course 
of this experiment, it is believed that, with further revisions in this 
type of training program, the goal of training students to private pilot 
proficiency in ten hours may be attained. This belief is predicated on 
the following observations: 

1. At the completion of the experiment, it was evident that addi- 
tional supervision of the instructors giving the Link training would 
have been desirable. The inadequacy of supervision resulted in some 
instructors' omitting certain parts of the Link training syllabus, par- 
ticularly those maneuvers requiring the coordinated use of the black- 
board and the trainer. 

2. It is postulated that, if the instructors who were used in this 
experiment had received more training on the syllabus and in methods 
of using the trainer, the general performance of the Link group would 
have been improved. 

3. The time factor in the scheduling of the flight checks prevented 
the full utilization of the Link trainer in the latter part of the course. 
The Link periods that were omitted would have been devoted to prac- 
ticing the complete flight test in the trainer. 

4. Certain modifications in the mechanisms of the trainers used 
in this experiment resulted in excessive malfunctionings and break- 
downs. This caused frequent disruptions of the training schedule and 
prohibited optimal use of the training time. Further, it seemed evident 
that these malfunctions caused a decrease in confidence on the part 
of some students and instructors in the value of the School Link and 
a i onsequent decrease in motivation. 

Suggested research 

During the course of the experiment, problems arose which indi- 
cated the need for further research. Some of these follow: 

1. There are many possible ways of using synthetic trainers as aids 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 23 

in the learning of specific and general flight tasks. On the basis of our 
past experience with this trainer, certain temporary and experimental 
methods of utilizing the trainer seemed desirable and were incorpo- 
rated into the Link training syllabus. However, the fact that these 
may not be the optimal methods is indicated by an item analysis of the 
scores made by both groups of students in performing the maneuvers 
of the flight test. These scores show that the Link group did better on 
some maneuvers, while on others there is little or no difference between 
the groups. It may be assumed that any one, or a combination, of the 
following reasons could account for the low transfer of training that 
occurred in the learning of these maneuvers: 

a. There was insufficient trainer practice given in certain ma- 
neuvers. 

b . Inadequate methods were used in teaching these maneuvers. 

c . The transfer of training on certain maneuvers was limited by the 
trainer design. 

Each of these possibilities should be investigated in relation to the 
maneuvers that showed low transfer from practice in the trainer to the 
performance of the maneuver in the aircraft. 

2. The results of "intellectualizing" a maneuver, as referred to 
here, include the ability to verbalize the important cues, their source, 
the correct responses to the cues, their sequence, and the additional 
cues arising as an immediate result of these responses. If this is done, 
the student should know when to respond and how to respond. He 
should know whether his response was appropriate, that is, whether 
it was too soon or too late, too fast or too slow, too much or too little, 
coordinated or uncoordinated, and so forth. Student performance in this 
and previous experiments indicated that intellectualizing a maneuver 
before attempting it in the air reduced the time necessary to learn it 
in the air and, also, that additional time could be saved in the air if 
the intellectual knowledge of the maneuver had been previously asso- 
ciated with the psycho-motor response via practice in the synthetic 
trainer. This indicates that the trainer will be more efficient as a syn- 
thetic flight-instruction device if the cues and required responses in 
the correct performance of a maneuver in the trainer are similar to 
those in actual flight. Again, the contribution of these factors to the 
efficient use of synthetic flight trainers is a matter which will require 
further investigation. 

3. To date, there is no evidence as to the level of proficiency a 
student should attain in the trainer to give a maximum transfer of this 



24 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

training to the performance of the same maneuver in the aircraft. 
The importance of this information in designing an efficient syllabus 
warrants additional investigation. 

4. The problem of determining the optimal time interval between 
synthetic training and flight training still exists. Experimental findings 
are needed in this area for practical scheduling of synthetic training 
in a flight syllabus. 

5. Other factors which are worthy of experimental investigation are 
the motivation of the students while they operate the synthetic trainer, 
the effect of their knowledge of results, and the effect of freedom from 
distracting and extraneous stimuli. 

6. It is expected that when certain functional faults of the School 
Link are eliminated — redesign is now in process by the manufacturer 
— the trainer's utility as an aid in the teaching of primary flying will 
be increased. As a result of this experiment the following recommenda- 
tions for modification were made: 

a. The functioning of the rudder should be changed so that 
"weathercocking" will occur if the rudder is used without ailer- 
ons when making a turn. 

b. A device should be installed by means of which the instructor 
can determine the adequacy of the student's coordination. 

c. A 360° cyclorama for the School Link should be designed which 
will provide a smooth and fixed horizon line equidistant in all 
directions from the trainer. 

d. The trainer should be redesigned to function consistently with 
students weighing up to 200 pounds. 

e. The trainer should be improved to withstand prolonged periods 
of operation with a minimum of maintenance. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 



25 



>< 

z 

LU 

Q_ 

< 



Ov 





E 
E 

CO 



Si 
*o 



CO 



















o 










C IO f^ ^ i*N *- 


i co 


-a 
c 




IT; IT; IT) Tt lO lO C<" 


> to 


u. 








re 


< 






! 


(fi oj 














OO w^t)<(Nt- 




) i— 1 


•js H 










U, <D 










— ££ 










o r 3 










s-. 






CN 








lO OO (N fO N (N O - 


CN 


3d 


^ ^ ^ lO i/) lO CN 


"?! 


c 


G 








3 










Z 


J 






■^ 






■^ rO lO fO (N (N 


CO 








l> 






-o 










— c 


to o io o o c 


c 


r^ 




^ cti u, 


lO (^ ^ •* (N C 


T* 


CN 




t2|< 


t^ © © ~ ^ ^~ 


cn 


© 


0) >-, 


■r-t cn cn cn cn cn 


cn 


CN 


-M U 


J 








cti c 










> o 




















^ o 


^ 


O O O O O C 


C 


© 


"5 fO fO f^ f^ f 


c 


"* 


O u 


J 


© © © ^ © c 


^ 


© 


^ CL 




NC 


T— 1 


o ^_ 










c ,o 




















H E 




to © io © © c 


c 


t» 




S- 


fN O ^ " >0 " 


-+ 


^ 




< 


t^' © On © © c 




ON 




-o 










— c 


© to © © © © 


tr 


LO 




i5 ^ J - 


IT) CO CM *— I © C* 


CN 


rs) 




r o •* < 


On On © <^h ^ C 


CN 


© 




H .£ 


,— 1 ^H ^H ,— 


NC 


*— i 


o 


J 








o 










CO 










o 


3! 


© to © © © © 


ir 


CO 




G 


m <h ro O O C 




CO 


c 


J 


t^ i>- f^ oo do t^ 


tr 


r^ 












H 












s- 
< 


© © © © © c 


© 


CN 




(N CN i^ h O (^ 




to 




(N (N (N ^ r^ rr 


t^- 


CN 














+j 


































































<U 






















TD 






















































































CO 
















*> 








CN 


CO 


-t- 


I'- 


ve 


E- 


^ 





26 



SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 







on 


-h o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


c-» 


CO 


t^. 


CO 


CO 




t^ 


■r- on co 


t^ t^ 




't 








ID 


t-~ to 


LO 


lO 


iO 


LO 


LO 


o 


X 


t^ 


o 


X 


t^ 


o 


On lo NO 


NO NO 


t-» 


o 


NO 


-o 










































c 






































rJH 




J3 <L> 


< 






































CN 


5 E 




r~ 


** 30 


X 


t^- 


1^- 


t^. 


CO 


LO 


cs 


CO 


o 


CS 


"* 


LO 


-H N NO 


LO LO 


-r 


H 


'O 






































CS 








































CO 




Uh oj 










































v_, bfl 










































o 2 










































£ > 




CO 


"* vO 


X 


LO 


t^ 


LO 


co 


00 


X 


o 


LO 


CS 


X 


Tt< 


CO CS o 

LO NO NO 


NO CO 


NO 


NO 






oo 


on no 


o 


1- 


o 


o 


o 


LO 


LO 


■o 


o 


LO 


o 


1- 


LO NO 


NO 


o 


c 


3 




































▼~ • 




£ 


J 












































CN 


O TjH 




c 


-+ 


co 


1^ 


-f 


-P 


CO 


r o 


CS 


o 




•— 1 NO O 


O r- 


CN 


CO 
CN 


tfi 








* 


























* * * 


* 














a> 


























IU 11 D 


D 










i 




1° 


























<V QJ <U 


V ^ 








^1 


3 £ 

o o 


o 


00 


-+ 


CS 


t- 


o 


LO 


CO 


LO 












LO 


~ 




LO 


£ on 


r— 


i^ 


1— 1 


00 


t^ 


o 


ON 


J^- 


r-H 


o 


o 


o 


£ P g 


P o 


'O 


LO 


(T\ 


a - 




o 






■"-I 












*— ' 


*— 




'— 


o o o 


o ^ 




^ 




U 




u 


























u a o 


u 












c 


























c c c 


c 








o 




















































































OJ 










































E 


c 


o 


Tti CS 


"* 


lO 


-r 


LO 


LO 


^ 


i — I 


X 


** 


CS 


^ 


,—l 


X On o 


CN t^. 


On 


CN 


LO 


H 




© 


On On 


t^ 


1-- 


ON 


oo 


o 


00 


OO 


l^ 


X 


o 


vC 


X 


lo On CM 


i-H d 


t— 


X 


X 


hJ 


T— ( 




























t— i 


^-H ^— 1 




t-- 




















































* 










































<V 


























a> a; aj 


aj 










i 




UO 


























a> a; a; 

a a a 


lo 










3 C 
cj o 

5 " 


o 


t— 


00 


— ' 


t-. 


o 


CO 


o 


VO 


t^ 


co 


t^ 


^ 


CS 


t-» 


t^ 




LO 


E^ 

o 

u 


-+ 


-+ 


00 


00 


LO 


SO 


LO 


ro 


o 


NO 


00 


On 


S E S 
o o o 
u o o 


£ ^ 

o 

u 


o 


o 


vO 








c 


























C G C 


c 














i— i 


























i— i i— i i— i 


1— H 








o 


XJ 








































o 


.3 rt u, 


cs 


vO 00 


o 


CS 


LO 


-+ 


LO 


o 


CO 


CS 


t^ 


00 


"* 


O 


** NO ON 


t^ co 


LO 


^ 


CO 


o 

0) 


,° •£ < 


e> 


On O 


o 


o 


o>" 


d 


1^ 


d 


od 


00 


co 


so 


d 


o 


OlHO 


On CS 


t^ 


NO 


c 














~ 




" 






" 














CS 


" 






















































































H 




^ 


rh OO 


o\ 


^o 


NO 


LO 


1— 


o 


CS 


CO 


t^ 


On 


tH 


CS 


X t^ »H 


H ^ 


On 


1^- 


o 




J 


r^ 


t^ t^. 


NO 


l-~ 


t-. 


OO 


LO 


<? 


SO 


LO 


t^ 


T* 


NO 


t^ 


lo r^ On 


t— X 


t^. 


t— 

rh 


t^ 




u, 


,_, 


CS O 


o 


On 


On 


On 


OO 


NO 


^H 


o 


o 


On 


co 


t^ 


NO On X 


NO On 


NO 


t^ 


CO 




<5 


cn 


CS CO 


CO 


CS 








"* 


(N 


CS 


VO 




^ 


^J 


co co *-H 


CS CO 


On 


X 

NO 


CO 














































c 










































<L> 










































X! 








































































































































































Ul 




































g 


I 

I 






_i 


CN 'O 


Tf 


iO 


NO 


t-» 


X 


On 


c 


^H* 


CS 


CO 


-+ 


LO 


no r- X 


On O 


^h 


s2 




































i-H CS 


CS 





THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 



27 



APPENDIX C 

Analysis of Instruction Periods for Control Group 





Time to Solo 


Discussion 

Time to 

Check 


Air Flights 


Student 


. . Discus- 
Air 

sion 


Num- Average 
ber Time 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 


4.9 4.6 

5.8 5.0 

8.2 3.4 

3.9 8.6 

4.0 6.1 

3.7 8.4 

4.1 5.0 
5.0 7.7 

3.6 6.3 

4.9 7.3 
3.0 5.6 

3.3 6.2 

3.2 8.1 

2.8 5.0 

2.9 8.9 

4.7 5.4 
2.9 4.5 
6.7 6.5 

2.5 4.4 
3.2 4.2 
8.2 8.9 


5.7 
5.1 
4.2 

13.0 

8.0 

12.1 

Incomplete* 

8.5 

10.0 

11.4 

9.0 

10.7 

13.8 

6.8 

15.7 

7.1 

9.4 

Incomplete* 

8.7 

Incomplete* 

9.1 


13 .77 
12 .83 
11 .91 

18 .56 
18 .56 
17 .59 

17 .59 

18 .56 


9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 


18 .56 

17 .59 

16 .63 

17 .59 

16 .63 
15 .67 

15 .67 

16 .63 

18 .56 

19 .53 

16 .63 
16 .63 
19 .53 


Total 


91.5 130.1 


168.3 


342 13.22 


Averages 


4.4 6.2 


9.4 


16.3 .63 



Data not available from log books. 



28 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

APPENDIX D 

Some Principles of Learning Applied to the Flight Situation 

The instructors were informed that in this experiment an attempt 
would be made to reach the highest level of flying proficiency in the 
allotted flight time, and that to attain this goal use would be made of 
some of the applicable conditions which had been found to promote 
efficient learning and performance. 

In order to aid the instructors in conducting their part of the ex- 
periment a set of generalized principles was drawn up for their use. 
These principles, as they were presented to the instructors, follow: 

A. Motivation. The instructor's first task is to maintain a high de- 
gree of interest on the part of each subject and to secure cooperation from 
him. One approach to securing cooperation is to point out to the subject 
the rewards and advantages that will be available to him according to 
the time he requires to develop proficiency. These rewards, depending 
upon the hours saved, may include many items such as the following: 

1. Additional solo cross-country flights. 

2. A 1,000-mile cross-country flight in a four-place airplane. 

3. A dual night cross-country flight. 

4. A dual practice flight on "lost procedures." 

5. Additional proficiency in the regular maneuvers required for a 
private pilot rating. 

6. Work on such advanced maneuvers as deadstick landings, short 
field landings and take-offs, and crosswind wheel landings. 

7. Check-out and solo in types of aircraft other than the type used 
for primary training. 

8. Check-out and night solo in the Aeronca. 

9. Link experience in instrument and radio range flying. 

10. Radio communications practice in the airplane, leading to a 
restricted radio operator's permit. 

11. An opportunity to visit the control tower, weather station, air 
traffic control center, and a representative airline operation at the 
Chicago Municipal Airport. 

These opportunities apply only to those students enrolled for the 
full thirty-live-hour course. The ten-hour group should be motivated 
by an explanation of the pioneering nature of the experiment and by 
the presentation of the challenge of reaching private pilot proficiency 
in less than one-third the time normally required. 

B. Knowledge of results. It is generally accepted that perform- 
ance will improve more rapidly if there is a knowledge of the results. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 29 

For the students receiving Link training-, the instructor should give 
readily understood and comparable scores on such items as straight and 
level flight, torque correction, stalls, climbing and gliding turns, and 
slow flight. This can be done by counting the number of times the 
projected image on the screen is outside the arbitrarily set standards. 
For the control group, knowledge of results will be the instructor's 
evaluation of the student's performance given immediately after com- 
pletion of each maneuver. 

C. Anticipatory set. Experiments have shown that efficiency of 
performance can be increased if the individual knows in advance exactly 
what he is expected to do when a particular event occurs; that is, if a 
set is developed, he will respond in a certain way when a given stimulus 
occurs. An example of this in the flying situation is the experienced 
pilot who is quite prepared to put the stick forward in a spin recovery 
long before the strategic second arrives. It is possible for the Link sub- 
jects to get practice in these sets via practice in the trainer. The control 
group should also have the importance of these pointed out. It is ex- 
pected that they will learn them to some extent by verbalizing, in 
minute detail, the maneuvers to be practiced in the flight lesson. 

D. Part versus whole learning. When the task to be learned is 
simple and relatively short, the most efficient learning method is prob- 
ably that of learning the task as a whole. When the task is complex 
and relatively long, the most efficient learning may take place if the 
task is divided into smaller units and these units are learned first and 
then combined. It is possible to divide any maneuver into its component 
parts and to practice these parts as such in the Link and in the air. 
For example, in a turn the task may be broken down into an entry, 
maintaining altitude and bank in the turn, a roll out of the turn to 
straight and level flight, and directional control. 

E. "Supervised practice" method. By the "supervised practice" 
method the student performs the task as he receives verbal instructions 
from the instructor. This method differs from the much-used "follow 
me through" technique by which the student is introduced to the 
maneuver by the instructor who performs the maneuver while the stu- 
dent attends by putting his hands and feet on the controls. When this 
technique is used, the student fails to get the kinesthetic cues, or the 
"feel," that would result from his own manipulation of the controls. 
After following through, the student attempts to perform the maneuver 
himself. At the completion of the trial, the instructor tells him of his 
errors. This results in a trial and error type of practice which is a 
relatively inefficient method of learning. 



30 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

The "talk through" method provides a situation in which the stu- 
dent is able to associate the correct response with the various stimuli 
or cues which bring about the correct reaction of the aircraft. For 
example, during the performance of a turn the instructor will point 
out the cue, such as nose down, and tell the student which maneuver 
will correct the condition. Hence the student learns what the im- 
portant cues are and associates them immediately with the correct 
response. 

F. Overlearning. Additional practice of a task after the task has 
been learned to criterion will usually increase the subject's retention 
of the task and his facility in performing it under different conditions. 
This principle does not lend itself to economical use of the actual 
flight period, but it can be utilized in the School Link because of its 
relatively low operating cost. The principle can be applied to the con- 
trol group by additional verbalizing of the maneuvers. 

G. Spaced practice versus massed practice. There is some evi- 
dence from experiments in the use of synthetic flight trainers that 
spaced practice in learning a flight maneuver is more economical than 
continued or massed practice. In addition, most of the evidence from 
other types of experiments demonstrates the same theory. Conse- 
quently, the syllabus for this experiment was planned to provide a 
series of short practice sessions on individual maneuvers. 

H. Intellectual knowledge of maneuvers. The two groups must 
be thoroughly briefed on the flight maneuvers, and both written and 
oral information should be used. Briefing should consist of a detailed 
explanation of each technique or maneuver to be presented or practiced 
in the next flight. The flight lesson should be given to the student when 
he can verbalize accurately and completely these techniques, procedures, 
and maneuvers. After this verbalization or "intellectualization," the 
control group should receive the lesson in the aircraft and the Link 
group in the synthetic trainer. The Link students should be instructed 
in the trainer until, in the instructor's opinion, they have reached a 
satisfactory level of proficiency. When this proficiency is attained in 
the desired number of maneuvers, the student may attempt them in 
the airplane. 

Immediately following each air flight, both the Link and the control 
groups should have a discussion period in which the flight is discussed 
in detail. The short flight periods, which should be employed especially 
during the pre-solo stage, should aid both the instructor and the student 
in remembering nearly every feature of the lesson and thus enhance 
l lie value of the post-flight discussion periods. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 31 

APPENDIX E 

Methods Used in Teaching Individual Maneuvers 
in the School Link 

The following is a description of the methods employed in teaching 
the various maneuvers in the School Link. 

Prefiight. The instructor required the Link students to preflight 
the School Link, using the same procedure followed in prerlighting the 
Aeronca. When a particular part which was regularly inspected on the 
airplane, such as the landing gear assembly, was not on the trainer, the 
student verbalized the check procedure as he would in checking that 
component on the aircraft. This was done prior to each Link flight 
until each student had reached a satisfactory level of proficiency. 

Starting. In starting the School Link the students employed the 
same procedure used in starting the Aeronca. The instructor, after 
calling out the appropriate commands, simulated the swinging of the 
propeller. This procedure was continued until the student reached a 
standard level of proficiency. 

Taxiing. The Link students practiced taxiing procedures in the 
trainer by leaving the lateral and longitudinal locks in place and 
releasing only the pedestal lock. The trainer then responded to rudder 
pressure only. By calling out winds from various directions, the in- 
structor drilled the Link student in the proper use of the ailerons and 
elevator to correct for wind from any desired relative direction. 

Run-up check. The instructor taught run-up checks by having 
the student go through the same procedure in the Link as required in 
the Aeronca. The physical limitations, such as the single "on-off" 
magneto switch in the Link instead of the "on-left-right-off" switch 
in the Aeronca, were partially overcome by having the student verbalize 
the whole procedure, item by item, while accomplishing the check. 

Steep turns. The instructor taught steep turns by first instruct- 
ing the student in the proper procedure to use in rolling into and out 
of the turn. This involved learning the correct use of the throttle as 
well as noting the large amount of back pressure necessary in the 
steeper turns. Also included in this phase was instruction in decreas- 
ing the throttle and applying forward pressure on the controls when 
rolling out of the turns. When the student reached satisfactory pro- 
ficiency in rolling into and out of turns, he was instructed in the 
complete 720° turn. In this practice the student utilized the trainer 
altimeter as his altitude reference. Because of the physical limitations 



32 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

of the trainer, the actual angle of bank in a steep turn could not be 
simulated, but the student could practice certain procedures required 
in such a turn. 

After proficiency in maintaining orientation and altitude had been 
attained, the student was told to disregard the trainer altimeter and to 
make his attitude corrections from the cues given him by the instructor. 
For example, if the instructor told him he was either high or low, the 
student was to use the controls to effect the proper attitude response. 

Stalls, spins, climbs, glides, climbing turns, gliding turns, me- 
dium turns, shallow turns, and straight and level flight. All of these 
maneuvers were taught in the Link in essentially the same manner 
employed in the airplane. The instructor checked coordination by 
watching the student's movements of the controls and the resulting 
control surface motion. By standing beside the trainer, the instructor 
also observed the instrument readings. He used the cues from the 
trainer attitude and the instruments to instruct the student in the 
maneuvers just as he would in the aircraft. 

Take-off. In order to facilitate instruction in take-offs, a rough 
diagram of the runway was drawn on a blackboard which was placed 
directly behind the trainer. After take-off, the student was instructed 
to look behind him and note the position of the runway to determine 
whether or not he appeared to be maintaining a straight path off the 
end of it. Because the Link was not designed to simulate the proper 
airspeed readings on a take-off, the student was told to disregard the 
readings of the instrument and take his cues of airspeed from the 
instructor. 

The instructor simulated drift by moving the board to one side. If 
the student noticed drift, he was to institute the proper corrections. 
The instructor would then slide the board back to the proper position 
so the student could get the conception of drift correction on take-off. 

The student learned actual take-off procedure by easing the trainer 
up to the three-point attitude while the lateral straps were locked and 
then giving it full power to start the take-off run. The instructor 
supplied extra torque and weathercocking effects of crosswinds by 
pushing against the side of the trainer. When the trainer reached 
flying speed, a matter of about thirteen seconds depending on the 
simulated wind conditions, the instructor would unlock the lateral 
straps, thus completely freeing the trainer and simulating leaving the 
ground. The student would then proceed with the take-off, making the 
power and attitude adjustments and looking behind at the runway to 
< heck for drift. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 33 

Taxi and traffic patterns. As an aid in giving instruction in 
taxiing to the take-off position, making the take-off, and flying the 
traffic pattern, a constant scale drawing of the airport, its runways, 
and taxi strips was made on the portable blackboard which was placed 
close to the trainer. 

As the student went through the procedure of taxiing from the 
ramp to the take-off point, the instructor indicated the course the 
student was following by tracing the course on the board. When 
the take-off point was reached, the student went through the simulated 
cockpit check, made his clearing turn, and proceeded with the take-off 
as previously described. 

The instructor kept the chalk line moving in the proper direction, 
varying the trace to show drift and to indicate the correction of it as the 
student corrected the heading of the trainer. The student was able to 
watch his progress throughout the traffic pattern as the instructor 
moved the chalk to keep pace with the position of the trainer in relation 
to the runway. 

For practice in entering the traffic pattern, a small wind-tee was 
drawn in the proper position on the field layout on the blackboard; and 
the student was started at a scaled distance of one to five miles from 
the field. The distance depended upon the particular problem. Then the 
student determined the wind direction by checking the tee, planned his 
pattern, and proceeded to maneuver the trainer so that he arrived at the 
proper entry point at the proper altitude. The instructor could check 
the student's altitude in the pattern, either by looking in the cockpit 
when the trainer was facing the proper direction or by having the 
student call out the indicated altitude. If the student had difficulty in 
any part of the pattern, such as in planning the entry, using carburetor 
heat, placing the downwind leg or base leg, or in planning the turn onto 
the final approach, that particular part could be singled out and given 
concentrated practice. The practice continued until the student had 
mastered the particular part sufficiently to incorporate it correctly in 
the over-all pattern. 

Pylon eights. The instructor prepared for teaching eights by 
drawing on the blackboard a grid pattern which resembled section 
lines of the local terrain. He explained the scale of the rectangles and 
squares so that the student could pick his pylons at the recommended 
one-half to three-quarters of a mile apart. The student then maneu- 
vered the trainer into position so that he was flying directly crosswind 
at the proper altitude for eights. 

The instructor continuously plotted the student's progress in the 



34 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

same manner as he used for the other ground-contact maneuvers. The 
student would look upwind from the trainer's position and pick out and 
identify his pylons. Intersections of the grid lines were most fre- 
quently used because they corresponded more closely to what was 
available to the student in the actual flight. The student maneuvered 
the trainer so that he would pass on the downwind side of the pylons 
on a line parallel to the two pylons and about one-quarter of a mile 
from them. When he was opposite the second pylon, he would start his 
turn and proceed with the pattern. The student observed the path of 
the chalk in relation to the path he desired, and, if any deviation 
occurred, he would institute the proper correction which would then 
be reflected by the corresponding change the instructor would make 
in the direction of the trace. 

Forced landings. The blackboard was first laid off in rectangular 
patterns resembling the local terrain, and certain portions were desig- 
nated as being of suitable surface to permit a forced landing. The 
instructor moved the chalk line across this area at a relative rate of 
speed and in a direction corresponding with the speed and direction 
of the trainer. At some point in the area, he would declare an emer- 
gency landing. The student, taking into consideration his altitude, 
direction of wind, availability of fields, and other pertinent factors, 
would plan his approach. The instructor would continue to move the 
chalk with a speed and in a direction corresponding to those of the 
trainer while estimating and indicating the effect of the wind. The 
student would maneuver the trainer in appropriate patterns in order 
to arrive at the key position for his field at the proper altitude as indi- 
cated by the trainer's altimeter. If he reached the key position at an 
improper altitude, he was to recognize the fact and start the proper 
correction procedure immediately. For example, if he reached his key 
position at an altitude that was too high, he would immediately start 
to alter his base leg to take him away from the field, allowing his 
extra altitude to be dissipated before turning on the final approach. 

Spot landings. The airport runway system was first drawn on 
the blackboard and then the spots for landing were drawn at appro- 
priate places. The instructor would have the student start the ma- 
neuver on the downwind leg at the proper position and altitude. To aid 
the student in estimating the placement of the base leg, the wind 
velocity for the problem was indicated before each attempted spot 
landing. The student would go through the proper procedure of using 
carburetor heat, closing the throttle, establishing the glide, planning the 
turns, clearing the engine, and making the proper corrections for drift. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 35 

By moving the chalk on the blackboard, the instructor would apply 
the effect of wind and keep track of the student's position. 

Practicing spot landings in this manner was aimed at teaching the 
student to recognize the need for correction and what correction should 
be made. It was also brought to his attention that he could maintain a 
consistent pattern by allowing only one component of the maneuver to 
vary at a time, that is, the placement of the base leg. The altimeter in 
the trainer gave the only altitude cue available for spot landings. The 
student attempted to maneuver the trainer so that when the chalk mark 
arrived at the landing spots on the "blackboard runway" the altimeter 
would register zero altitude. To aid him in making spot landings, 
several methods of regulating the glide path were taught in the trainer. 
These included making slight changes in the airspeed above and below 
the normal gliding speed and in making slips. 

Landings. Landings were also simulated with the help of the 
blackboard. A rough perspective diagram of the runway was drawn 
on the board. By rotating the board about its horizontal axis, a reason- 
able simulation of the appearance of the runway during the final 
approach and landing could be produced. Thus the student was taught 
to respond to visual cues similar to those he would receive during an 
actual landing. 

The method used was based on the fact that the closer the plane is to 
the ground, the more nearly horizontal the runway appears from the 
pilot's viewpoint. The instructor, starting the board at about a 45° 
angle, would gradually reduce the angle to simulate the plane's ap- 
proach to the runway. When the blackboard was horizontal the trainer 
appeared to be at ground level. The rate of angular change of the 
board was varied by the instructor to simulate a variety of conditions. 
By bringing the board down to a horizontal attitude before the student 
attained the three-point attitude with the trainer, a simulation of flying 
into the ground was obtained. 

When a simulated bounce was desired, the angle of the board was 
quickly increased a few degrees to give the appearance of leaving the 
runway. As the student initiated the correction to ease the trainer back 
to the runway, the board was brought back to the horizontal position. 
By using other similar methods, nearly all conditions that the student 
could be expected to encounter on the final approach and landing were 
simulated. Because only the last one hundred feet of descent were 
simulated, taking about thirteen seconds in the Aeronca, a large 
number of landings could be practiced in a short period of time. 



36 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

APPENDIX F 

Instructor's Guide 

Each instructor was given a copy of a guide which contained the 
following rules to promote uniformity in carrying out the experiment: 

1. To the very best of his ability, the instructor should give the 
same instruction to both experimental and control students. 

2. Accurate entries should be made in the logbooks for all students 
on the following items: Aeronca flight time, Link flight time, discus- 
sion time on the ground, and the number of landings made in the 
Aeronca (by either instructor or student) during the pre-solo stage. 

3. Both groups of students should be able to verbalize a maneuver 
correctly and in minute detail before attempting the maneuver in the 
Link or in the Aeronca. Part of the requirements for all students 
should be to draw on the blackboard any maneuver which can be so 
transcribed. The instructor may supplement these requirements by 
asking pertinent questions on the maneuvers. 

4. During an instruction flight in the Aeronca, the instructor should 
refrain from touching the controls except in extreme cases. He should 
rely more on talking the student through an adequate performance. 

5. Although the time required for a student to solo is not a major 
measure in this experiment, it is, nevertheless, of some significance; 
therefore, part of the instructor's task is to solo his students as soon as 
it is possible with safety. The usual criteria for solo include practice 
on all pre-solo maneuvers to reach a safe level of proficiency, adequate 
performance while flying the traffic pattern, three consecutive safe 
landings, and the ability to demonstrate positive recovery from bounce 
landings and from leveling off too high during a landing. 

6. In general, the total solo time allowed the student prior to the 
flight test should be not more than thirty minutes. Additional solo time 
may be advantageous to those students lacking in self-confidence and 
may be used at the discretion of the instructor. 

7. The syllabus in this experiment should be considered as a guide 
and not as a schedule to be followed rigidly. However, the maneuvers 
arc to be given to all students in the same sequence and the student 
is to progress at his own best rate. 

X. The criteria used to determine when the student has had optimal 
practice in the Link on a certain maneuver or exercise remain largely 
a matter of the instructor's judgment. Some indications an instructor 
mighl look for when making this judgment of the student include, 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 37 

first, consistent correct reactions in the performance of a maneuver; 
second, ability to anticipate all details or events of a maneuver; third, 
corrections for bank, altitude, and so forth, made rapidly enough that 
the required correction is a small one; fourth, knowledge of where to 
look for pertinent cues; and finally, adaptation of as much of a 
maneuver as possible to habitual type responses. 

One method of determining this latter criterion is to distract the 
student's attention while he is performing a maneuver and note his 
reactions on the controls. By using the projector light on the Link, 
scores for proficiency in the following maneuvers can be obtained: 
straight and level flight, climbs, glides, stalls, turns, climbing turns, 
gliding turns, and slow flight. 

9. The time normally required for discussion can be reduced 
through the use of prepared student lesson plans. The student will be 
given the lesson plan prior to his next scheduled period. He will be 
required to study this material and repeat it to the instructor at their 
next meeting. 

10. The student should be told before his first flight and prior to 
each flight thereafter that if he experiences the first signs of airsick- 
ness he is to tell his instructor immediately. The instructor will allow 
the student to fly back to the Airport at once, expediting the traffic 
pattern. It is important for the instructor to end the period as soon as 
possible. A student who is airsick will not be receptive to instruction. 

11. Students of both groups may sit in an Aeronca when they have 
a few spare minutes at the end of a nonflight period. This time in the 
cockpit need not be recorded, but the student should be impressed with 
its importance. He should be told that the reason for spending this time 
is to make him feel at home in the Aeronca and by looking out of it 
from every possible angle to familiarize himself with the three-point 
attitude. Familiarity with the three-point attitude is vital for making 
early solo possible, since a landing will seldom be dangerous if this 
attitude is never exceeded. 

12. The instructor should remember that if he speaks to the stu- 
dent in other than a friendly manner or a well-modulated voice, regard- 
less of whether or not the student is in the Link or the Aeronca, the 
student is apt to become tense, and his receptiveness to instruction may 
be decreased. 

13. When flying the Link or the Aeronca, the student should learn 
to divide his attention continually between the performance of his 
trainer or plane and his surroundings. There should be a definite 
procedure including where to look and what to look for. 



38 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

14. Flight time will be recorded from the take-off until the airplane 
is returned to the parking area and the switch turned off. 

15. The instructor will find that any maneuver or pattern shown 
in the private pilot syllabus can be analyzed into very small component 
parts. If each component part is looked upon as a separate procedure, 
the student can learn much of how to fly before he ever attempts the 
maneuver or pattern in the airplane. 

16. It is very doubtful that the student can learn much "control 
feel" when he is tense. During the first few flights the instructor should 
pay particular attention to keeping the student relaxed. 

17. Before every flight period the instructor should be sure that 
the weather conditions will not hinder the learning of the maneuver 
or patterns scheduled for that flight, that the intercommunication 
equipment is operating satisfactorily, that both instructor and student 
feel up to the flight period, and that the student knows intellectually 
what he is going to do, how it is to be done, and why. 

18. The instructor should check to see that his student, either in 
the Link or the Aeronca, has as many seat cushions as are necessary 
for him to have good visibility and as will enable him to maintain a 
constant relationship to the reference points in each flight. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 39 

APPENDIX G 

Private Pilot Flight Test 
Over-all Grades for Link Group 





nt Instructor 




Over-all Grades 


Stude 












T ♦ * 
Instructor ~ 

Examiner 


Private Pilot 
Examiner 


1 


A 


75 


65 


65 






72 


70 


69 


3 


B 


70 


72 


65 


4 




60 


70 


69 


5 




55 


66 


67 


6 




75 


80 


67 


7 




80 


67 


69 


8 




80 
60 


68 
67 


80 


9 


C 


60 


10 




75 


70 


69 


11 




72 


73 


67 


12 


D 


65 


69 


69 


13 




75 


74 


68 


14 




70 


71 


71 


15 




60 


62 


66 


16 


E 


60 


60 


62 


17 


F 


70 


60 


72 


18 




70 


76 


69 


19 




75 


68 


71 


20 


G 


60 


60 


60 


21 


H 


55 


63 


67 



40 SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 

APPENDIX H 

Private Pilot Flight Test 
Over-all Grades for Control Group 





nt Instructor 




Over-all Grades 


Stude 












T 

Instructor ~ 

Examiner 


Private Pilot 
Examiner 


1 


A 


70 


60 


69 


2 




70 


65 


60 


3 




30 


40 


54 


4 


B 


65 


76 


64 


5 




50 

75 


45 
70 


60 


6 




83 


7 




70 


75 


69 


8 


C 


60 
65 


52 
50 


50 


9 




65 


10 




67 


45 


64 


11 


D 


70 


60 


69 


12 




67 


65 


66 


13 




65 


60 


66 


14 




70 


60 


55 


15 


E 


73 


60 


69 


16 


F 


55 


50 


60 


17 




70 


55 


69 


18 




55 


60 


55 


19 


G 


68 


60 


65 


20 


H 


74 


70 


68 


21 




71 


55 


52 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 41 

APPENDIX I 

Private Pilot Flight Test 
Over-all Grades for Experienced Private Pilot Group 



Pilot Flying Hours 



Over-all Grades 
CAA Examiner Private Pilot Examiner 



1 80 68 68 

2 80 69 65 

3 80 80 66 

4 102 65 69 

5 95 80 87 

6 120 70 80 

7 170 68 80 



42 



SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 



Item 



APPENDIX J 

Item Analysis of Flight Grades 
CAA Examiners 



Grades 



Link 



Control 



12 3 4 5 NG Total 12 3 4 5 NG Total 



1. Equipment exam 

(oral) 1 15 5 21 17 3 1 21 

2. Preflight check... 1 19 1 21 18 3 21 

3. Taxiing 20 1 21 1 18 2 21 

4. Run-up check.... 1 19 1 21 18 3 21 

5. Take-off 13 7 1 21 11 7 3 21 

6. Climbs and climb- 
ing turns 10 9 1 1 21 4 11 5 1 21 

7. 720° steep turn... 4 10 7 21 1 2 6 11 1 21 

8. Stalls 5 13 3 21 2 5 14 21 

9. Maneuvering 

(slow flight) 15 3 3 21 6 12 2 1 21 

*10. Spins Not graded Not graded 

11. Glides and gliding 

turns 005 14 11 21 005952 21 

12. Pylon eights 2 9 9 1 21 1 9 10 1 21 

13. Emergencies 005952 21 0025 14 21 

14. Slips 007950 21 003 11 61 21 

15. Accuracy landings 004115 1 21 00 195 6 21 

16. Landings 007617 21 005637 21 

17. Judgment 008922 21 001 11 63 21 

18. Smoothness and 

coordination 4 10 7 21 2 7 11 1 21 

Total 2 1162 127 50 15 357 2 116 119 95 25 357 

By per cent 06 002 45 36 14 04 06 32 33 27 7 

I'm to recent changes in the CAA requirements for a private pilot certificate, students were 
• 'I on Spins. 



THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 



43 






APPENDIX K 

Item Analysis of Flight Grades 
Private Pilot Examiners 



Item 



Grades 



Link 



Control 



12 3 4 5 NG Total 1 2 3 4 5 NG Total 



1. Equipment exam 

(oral) 18 8 10 3 

2. Preflight check.. . . 6 13 2 

3. Taxiing 6 14 1 

4. Run-up check 1 5 14 10 

5. Take-off 5 14 2 

6. Climbs and climb- 
ing turns 11 9 1 

7. 720° steep turns.. . 2 5 8 6 

8. Stalls 1 7 12 1 

9. Maneuvering 

(slow flight) 14 6 1 

*10. Spins Not graded 

11. Glides and gliding 

turns 15 5 1 

12. Pylon eights 1 6 5 8 1 

13. Emergencies 3 3 11 3 1 

14. Slips 3 3 11 2 2 

15. Accuracy landings 1 3 116 

16. Landings 1 2 1 17 

17. Judgment 9 8 2 2 

18. Smoothness and 

coordination 00 3 8 8 2 

Total 2 41 143 91 48 32 

By per cent 06 11 40 25 13 09 

* Ibid. 



21 


1 


7 


7 


2 





4 


21 


21 


1 


10 


6 


4 








21 


21 


2 


8 


9 


2 








21 


21 


2 


7 


10 


2 








21 


21 





5 


14 


2 








21 


21 





4 


9 


8 








21 


21 





2 


5 


4 


10 





21 


21 





3 


7 


3 


5 


3 


21 


21 





2 


10 


4 


1 


4 


21 








N 


ot s 


graded 




21 


1 


2 


6 


6 


2 


4 


21 


21 





2 


1 


5 


12 


1 


21 


21 





1 


4 


4 


11 


1 


21 


21 





1 


4 


5 


7 


4 


21 


21 








1 


1 


19 





21 


21 











7 


3 


11 


21 


21 


1 


2 


6 


9 


3 





21 



21 



11 2 7 10 



21 



357 



9 57 101 75 83 32 357 



3 16 28 21 23 9 



44 



SCHOOL LINK EVALUATION AND INSTRUCTION 



APPENDIX L 

Comparative Analysis of Flight Test Grades 
by Number of Items Failed 





Link 


Control 




Item 


Private 

^ ^ AA Pilot Total 
Examiner Examiner 


TAA Private 
^ ^ AA Pilot Total 
Examiner ^ 

Examiner 


Differ- 
ence 
(L-C) 


1. Equipment 
exam (oral) .... 

2. Preflight check 

3. Taxiing 

4. Run-up check. 

5. Take-off 

6. Climbs and 
climbing turns 

7. 720° steep turns 

8. Stalls 








1 1 

1 1 

7 6 13 
3 1 4 

3 3 
Not graded 

1 1 2 
9 8 17 

5 3 8 
5 2 7 

5 16 21 

1 1 2 

2 2 4 

7 8 15 







3 3 

5 5 
11 10 20 

14 5 19 

2 1 3 
Not graded 

5 2 7 

10 12 22 
14 11 25 

6 7 13 

4 19 23 
4 3 7 
6 3 9 

11 10 21 







-2 

-4 

-7 

-15 

+ 1 

-5 

-6 

-17 

-5 

-2 
-4 

-7 

-6 


9. Maneuvering 
(slow flight) . . . 
*10. Spins 


11. Glides and 
gliding turns. . . 

12. Pylon eights. . . 

13. Emergencies. . . 

14. Slips 

15. Accuracy land- 
ings 

16. Landings 

17. Judgment 

18. Smoothness 
and coordina- 
tion 


Total 


50 48 98 


95 S3 177 





Ibid. 



UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA 





3 0112 005630444 








11