Contradictory Provisions in Different Versions of Flight Manuals

Topic

Contradictory Provisions in Different Versions of Flight Manuals

Case number

• 2013-054 (F&R Date: 2013–12–19)

Description

In its analysis of this case, the Committee examined the following three manuals in both their French and English versions:

-          Training Program – Phase I – Primary Flight Training (Advanced) – Contracted Flight Training and Support (CFTS)16 (the “training plan”);

-          Flight Instructor’s Handbook17 (the “Instructors Handbook”); and

-          Aircrew Standards Handbook (the “Aircrew Handbook).

The Committee noted that although the versions consulted covered the same elements, a number of definitions differed from one handbook to the other. Given the importance of definitions in applying standards, the Committee felt that it was necessary to raise these differences.

Recommendation

The Committee recommended that the Chief of the Defence staff (CDS) order a review and harmonization of the different manuals and training guides, as well as the training plans, in order to ensure the consistency of the definitions of what constitutes major errors and minor errors, irrespective of the source used.

The Committee also recommended that the CDS order a review and harmonization of the French versions of the two guides for pilots and aircrew, as well as the Phase II Training Plan (Grob).

Final Authority Decision

The FA agrees with the Committee's systemic recommendation that the different training manuals and guides for pilots and aircrew be revised and harmonised. It therefore asked the Commander Royal Canadian Air Force to take steps to make the English and French versions and the definitions of what constitutes major and minor errors identical in the various documents.