“The most effective way to do it, is to do it.” – Amelia Earhart
It is a gorgeous VFR day to fly – blue sky, winds light and variable. Anticipation builds as you push the throttle forward, hold right rudder to track the runway centerline, and wait for flying speed. You rotate, start retracting the gear, set your climb pitch, and settle in. The sounds, the sight pictures, are all normal. You have done this countless times before. Then, it happens.
300 feet above the runway, the engine starts stumbling, running very rough, almost shaking itself from its mounts. Oil spatters across the windshield. You immediately lose most of your thrust. The startle effect. Little time to react and no altitude to buy time. You always hoped if this moment came, you would know exactly what to do. But, now that the dreaded moment is hard-staring you in the face, you need time and altitude. Today, fate gives you neither.
Your private pilot training and your past Flight Reviews covered what happens in an engine-out emergency at a few thousand feet in the air. In that scenario, you had both time and altitude – time to think and altitude to pick out a field or nearby airport and glide to a landing.
Reality is often very different. You never practiced for this event on takeoff. You only have time to react, and to do so quickly.
Fortunately, there are relatively very few times in general aviation (GA) where a pilot may be required to react quickly from memory, i.e., “reflex”, instead of from a written checklist to successfully avoid an accident. For example, loss of thrust on takeoff, engine out on takeoff in a twin, or a sudden and unexpected go-around, require an immediate and practiced response.
When suddenly confronted with emergencies such as these, where your decisions and reactions will need to be measured in a few seconds to be successful, wouldn’t you benefit from a training program that teaches you to anticipate and recognize real-world flying threats, trains you for them, and conditions you to promptly and correctly respond if and when confronted by them?
General aviation remains one of the most diverse and dynamic sectors of the aviation industry, encompassing everything under Part 91 from recreational flying to many corporate operations. Yet despite its vibrancy, GA continues to face persistent safety challenges, many of which stem from inconsistent training standards, overconfidence, errors in pilot decision-making, and limited programs for continuous improvement.
As GA continues to modernize and seek reductions in fatal accident rates, one promising solution stands out: the adoption of an Advanced Qualification Program (AQP).
Originally developed for Part 121 air carriers, AQP offers a data-driven, scenario-based, and proficiency-oriented approach to pilot training. While its implementation in GA may seem ambitious, the potential benefits, including focus on real-world flying scenarios, enhanced safety, tailored instruction, and a culture of accountability, make it a compelling proposition. This article explores how AQP could transform general aviation by addressing its most pressing vulnerabilities and ushering in a new era of training excellence.
I am a willing advocate of AQP for GA. I understand that notable pilots, including Dan Gryder, a retired Delta pilot, Gold Seal flight instructor, and host of “Probable Cause,” Steve Thorne, host of “Flight Chops,” and Josh Flowers, CFI, founder, producer, and editor of Aviation 101 Productions, among others, are strong proponents of AQP for GA.
Despite technological advancements, GA fatal accident rates remain stubbornly high compared to commercial aviation. According to the NTSB, loss of or reduction of thrust on takeoff (LOTOT or ROTOT), loss of control in-flight, controlled flight into terrain (CFIT), unstable approaches, go-arounds, and weather-related accidents continue to dominate GA safety statistics. Many of these accidents are linked to human factors, particularly inadequate knowledge or training, decision-making errors, or overconfidence.
Consider the case of a private pilot transitioning to a high-performance aircraft without structured scenario-based training. Absent exposure to realistic simulations of engine failures, weather deviations, and in-flight abnormals or emergencies, the pilot may lack the cognitive flexibility to respond timely and effectively under pressure. This gap in training is precisely what AQP aims to close.
The Advanced Qualification Program for air carriers is a voluntary alternative to traditional training and checking under FAR Part 121 Subparts N and O. It emphasizes: Scenario-Based Training (SBT), providing realistic, mission-specific simulations that mirror actual operational challenges and accidents; Data-Driven Instruction, offering continuous feedback loops using performance metrics to refine training; Crew Resource Management (CRM), emphasizing communication, decision-making, and teamwork; and Proficiency-Based Progression, i.e., advancement based on demonstrated skill, not just time or repetition. When one airline experiences an accident or incident, they all share the facts and data so all can train on and benefit from the same scenario.
In essence, AQP shifts the focus from rote compliance (standard in GA ground and inflight instruction) to meaningful competence. It is not just about passing a checkride or taking a Flight Review; it is about preparing pilots to think, adapt, and act decisively in complex or atypical environments.
While GA lacks the uniformity and consistency, regulatory infrastructure, and scale of commercial airlines, its diversity and decentralization can still make it an ideal candidate for a flexible, modular training system like AQP. There are several components that will need to be developed.
First, Tailored Training for Aircraft Transitions. GA pilots often transition to or from vastly different aircraft types; from piston singles or tailwheels to turboprops or light jets, and from simple avionics to sophisticated GPS navigators and do-it-all autopilots. AQP allows for customized training profiles that reflect the unique demands of each aircraft, including high-altitude operations and complex avionics.
Also included would be emergency procedures specific to aircraft systems that supplement the existing written knowledge and flight maneuvers already required by the FAA. This reduces the risk of overconfidence, reinforces practical knowledge and proficiency, and ensures pilots are genuinely prepared for the nuances of their aircraft and their flying experiences.
Second, Scenario-Based VFR and IFR Instruction. Traditional GA training and Flight Reviews often emphasize FAA-mandated standards and regulatory knowledge over real-world decision-making. AQP flips this model by immersing pilots in realistic scenarios such as a rejected takeoff, loss of thrust on takeoff, loss of a vacuum system in IMC, fuel management, or awareness and use of Defined Minimum Maneuvering Speed (DMMS). These scenarios build cognitive resilience and help pilots develop the judgment needed to avoid common pitfalls.
Third, a Data-Driven Safety Culture. AQP encourages the collection and analysis of performance data – not to punish, but to improve. Flight schools, training organizations, and individual CFIs can use this data to identify common errors (e.g., loss of control, unstable approaches, missed checklist items, etc.), refine training curriculum based on actual pilot behavior, and provide targeted feedback and remediation.
These components foster a culture of shared experience, continuous improvement, and humility, aligning perfectly with the stated values many GA safety experts champion.
One of the most insidious threats in GA is “pilot overconfidence,” especially among experienced aviators who may underestimate the serious risks of unfamiliar aircraft, complicated avionics, or challenging flying environments. AQP addresses this by:
First, normalizing self-critique methods. Pilots are encouraged to reflect on their performance and identify areas for growth.
Second, providing structured feedback. Flight instructors provide detailed debriefs after flying or simulator sessions based on objective data, not just subjective impressions.
Third, allowing for collaborative peer learning. The use of group simulations and CRM exercises promote shared learning and accountability.
AQP helps dismantle the “I’ve got this” mentality of some GA pilots and replaces it with a mindset of curiosity, caution, and responsibility.
While AQP was designed for large commercial air carriers, its principles can be adapted for GA through grassroots initiatives and institutional support. Here are some practical steps:
First, flight schools and CFIs can develop or adapt AQP-style modules, including scenario-based check rides, data tracking via electronic kneeboards or flight review apps, and CRM training for multi-pilot operations or Cockpit Resource Management for single pilot operations. For a suggested list of GA-based AQP training scenarios, see this link:
https://www.aviation101.com/_files/ugd/18095e_a6bc15568fa645b3b86be782c419ccf3.pdf
Dan Gryder, located at Hampton, Georgia (KHMP), actually offers a “supplemental” flight review in your aircraft that focuses solely on GA AQP scenarios. Although not designed to meet the FAA’s technical Flight Review requirements, as a supplement it presents real-world challenges that every GA pilot should experience and train for on a recurring basis.
Second, insurers could offer premium reductions for pilots who complete AQP-style recurrent training, recognizing the reduced risk profiles and benefits of such a program. Some insurers already provide discounts for successful completion of the FAA’s Wings Program or obtaining an additional rating. The insurance industry’s support, which likely will be based on actual data underlying the success of AQP programs and related reductions in incident and accident numbers, could be game-changing in driving acceptance by GA pilots and the GA community.
Third, the FAA could support AQP for GA by offering grants for curriculum development, creating a voluntary AQP framework for Part 91 operators, flight schools, and CFIs, and encouraging integration with existing WINGS Programs and other safety programs, including the current Flight Review requirements under 14 CFR 61.56 (FAR 61.56).
Fourth, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), and other pilot associations and type clubs can develop AQP-inspired training tailored to specific aircraft or mission profiles, fostering peer accountability and shared standards.
Some GA organizations and individuals have already begun experimenting with AQP principles. For example:
Cirrus Approach. Cirrus Aircraft’s training program incorporates scenario-based modules, decision-making exercises, and data analysis – all hallmarks of AQP;
Redbird Flight Simulations. Redbird’s immersive simulators allow flight schools to replicate complex scenarios and track pilot performance over time;
VMC and IMC Clubs. These programs, offered through local EAA chapters or independent groups, use training videos and materials to view, analyze, and discuss specific GA flying scenarios in group settings; and
Air Safety Videos. AOPA’s Air Safety Institute and other organizations and individuals, such as “Hoover” and his Pilot Debrief channel on YouTube, produce high quality videos that review in detail a recent aircraft accident, analyze it, and suggest appropriate corrective actions for GA pilots to consider.
These examples demonstrate that AQP is not just theoretical; it is already reshaping pockets of GA training and has the potential to do so much more. Beyond technical proficiency, AQP has the power to reshape the culture of general aviation. It promotes three worthwhile pilot traits:
First, Humility. Pilots learn to respect the limits of their knowledge and skills.
Second, Responsibility. Training becomes a lifelong commitment, not a one-time or once-every-24 months hurdle.
Third, Collaboration. Flight schools, Certified Flight Instructors, pilots, and pilot organizations work together to elevate standards.
This cultural shift is essential if GA is to evolve from the current patchwork of flight schools and independent CFIs, training primarily to the FAA’s traditional, prescribed knowledge questions and standard flight maneuvers, into a cohesive, safety-first community. By adding real-world GA training scenarios into the existing requirements for Private, Instrument, Commercial, and Multi-Engine pilots, and into FAR 61.56 Flight Reviews, the results should be better and safer GA pilots and fewer fatal accidents.
General aviation stands at a crossroads. The tools for safer, smarter flying exist today, but they require a willingness to rethink how the industry trains, evaluates, and supports pilots. AQP offers a blueprint for that transformation. By embracing scenario-based instruction, data-driven feedback, and a culture of humility, GA can move beyond legacy training methods limited mostly to routine learning and repetitive flight maneuvers, and toward a future defined by excellence – and built on real-world experience.
The skies may be unpredictable, but our preparation as pilots does not have to be. It is time for general aviation and the FAA to push the throttle forward to takeoff power for safer flights. AQP may be the runway we need.
© Copyright Dean Zakos 2025. All Rights Reserved!
