Cross Crew Qualification - FFS 3
Back
Next
Session Date
*
/
Day
/
Month
Year
2 digit day, 2 digit month, 4 digit year
Date
Trainee Details:
Trainee Name
*
Trainee Staff No
*
Trainee Rank
*
Captain
First Officer
Instructor / Examiner Details:
Instructor / Examiner Staff No.
*
Instructor / Examiner Name
*
Instructor / Examiner Auth. No.:
*
Back
Next
BEFORE TAKE OFF
FFS 3 Training
Rows
Grade
Remarks
1. ENG RUNNING HOLD SHORT OF THE ACTIVE
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
2. TAKE-OFF
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
3. ENG Failure after V1
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
4. Single ENG Landing 3D
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
INIT TAKE OFF
FFS 3 Training
Rows
Grade
Remarks
5. TAKE OFF
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
6. Dual ENG Flame out (bird strike)
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
7. Forced Landing
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
AT FL 350
FFS 3 Training
Rows
Grade
Remarks
8. EMER descend Structural Damage
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
9. Restore AT 10,000 FT
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
ELEC EMER CONFIG
FFS 3 Training
Rows
Grade
Remarks
10. COMPLETE APP AND LAND
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
INIT FL 180
FFS 3 Training
Rows
Grade
Remarks
11. Demonstrate UPRT
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
12. Demonstrate Smoke procedure
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
Back
Next
Competencies
Competencies: KNO
Rows
Comment
KNO
5. The pilot had EXEMPLARY knowledge, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot had EFFECTIVE knowledge, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot had ADEQUATE knowledge, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot had knowledge at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not have adequate knowledge, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
KNO O.Bs
KNO Grade
Competencies: PRO
Rows
Comment
PRO
5. The pilot applied procedures in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot applied procedures EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot applied procedures ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot applied procedures at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not apply procedures correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
PRO O.Bs
PRO Grade
Competencies: COM
Rows
Comment
COM
5. The pilot communicated in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot communicated EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot communicated ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot communicated at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not communicate correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
COM O.Bs
COM Grade
Competencies: FPA
Rows
Comment
FPA
5. The pilot managed the automation in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot managed the automation EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot managed the automation ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot managed the automation at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not manage the automation correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
FPA O.Bs
FPA Grade
Competencies: FPM
Rows
Comment
FPM
5. The pilot controlled the aircraft in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot controlled the aircraft EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot controlled the aircraft ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot controlled the aircraft at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not control the aircraft correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
FPM O.Bs
FPM Grade
Competencies: LTW
Rows
Comment
LTW
5. The pilot led and worked as a team member in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot led and worked as a team member EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot led and worked as a team member ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot led and worked as a team member at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall, did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not lead and work as a team member correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
LTW O.Bs
LTW Grade
Competencies: PSD
Rows
Comment
PSD
5. The pilot solved problems and made decisions in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot solved problems and made decisions EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot solved problems and made decisions ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot solved problems and made decisions at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall, did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not solve problems or make decisions correctly, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
PSD O.Bs
PSD Grade
Competencies: SAW
Rows
Comment
SAW
5. The pilot’s situation awareness was EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot’s situation awareness was EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot’s situation awareness was ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot’s situation awareness was at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall, did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot’s situation awareness was not adequate, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
SAW O.Bs
SAW Grade
Competencies: WLM
Rows
Comment
WLM
5. The pilot managed the workload in an EXEMPLARY manner, by always demonstrating all the performance indicators when required, which significantly enhanced safety effectiveness and efficiency.
4. The pilot managed the workload EFFECTIVELY, by regularly demonstrating most of the performance indicators when required, which enhanced safety.
3. The pilot managed the workload ADEQUATELY, by frequently demonstrating many of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in a safe operation.
2. The pilot managed the workload at the MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL, by only occasionally demonstrating some of the performance indicators when required, but which overall did not result in an unsafe situation.
1. NOT YET COMPETENT as the pilot did not manage the workload effectively, by rarely demonstrating any of the performance indicators when required, which resulted in an unsafe situation.
WLM O.Bs
WLM Grade
Observations / Comments (Details must be given in case of any Unsatisfactory Assessment) State Nature of Failure in comments:
Trainee Name
*
Trainee Signature
*
Trainee Email
*
example@example.com
Instructor / Examiner Name
*
Instructor / Examiner Signature
*
ATO Head of Training Signature
ATO Head of Training Comments:
Preview PDF
Submit
Should be Empty: