I’ll admit I missed this May 2020 memo from the FAA.
“With the assistance of aviation community members of the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) Airman Certification Standards (ACS) Working Group (WG), the FAA is reviewing and revising a number of its reference handbooks.”
Among the books being revised, the Aviation Instructor Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9B), effective with the May 2020 release will, among other things, replace “Student” with “Learner” and replace “Cockpit” with “Flight deck” throughout the handbook.
What? Why? Who?
Well, let’s back up, shall we. As language — and what we call people and things — has become a more common topic of conversation, I pulled up the Merriam-Webster dictionary website.
Student is defined as “one who attends a school” or “one who studies: an attentive or systemic observer.” And Learner, when defined as the verb learn, means “to gain knowledge or understanding of or skill by study, instruction, or experience,” and “to come to be able,” or “to come to realize.”
When looking specifically at the definition, I can see why learner is replacing student. Even if it doesn’t roll off the tongue quite so easily.
A story on the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association website, the genesis of this column, (thanks to AOPA’s Jennifer Non for bringing it to my attention), says: “As for the rationale: “The change from student to learner started several years ago in an industry working group,” Chris Cooper, AOPA director of regulatory affairs, said. “Industry wanted to get away from using the word ‘student’ because traditionally we think of student as in ‘student pilot’ or a beginning student pilot/mechanic.”
And replace student with… what?
From the same story: “Within the industry group the air-carrier people wanted to use ‘pilot-in-training’ and the general aviation people wanted ‘learner.’ After about two years of discussion, the FAA decided on ‘learner’ with the thought that at different times we are all learners.”
We can’t say we never won one from airline folks.
From my perspective, the term “flight deck” is an easier term to get my head around. Words are often borrowed and “cockpit” has a nautical (as in sea), not aeronautical (as in sky), origin.
Again, from the AOPA story: “Replacing ‘cockpit,’ a term of nautical origin, with ‘flight deck’ was an imperative for the airlines where the term is already common place — and obviously more reflective of that flight environment than, say, for a primary training airplane or a biplane with its driver’s seat exposed to the elements.”
I can go along with that. But it may take me some time to commit that change to memory.
And what the about the who of these changes…
The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) Airman Certification Standards (ACS) Working Group (WG) is made up of people, of course, representing myriad institutions and organizations.
The ARAC, from which the ACSWG is comprised, includes (in no particular order): The Cargo Airline Association (CAA), Airline Dispatchers Federation (ADF), National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), National Organization to Insure a Sound Controlled Environment (NOISE), General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), National Air Disaster Alliance Foundation (NADAF), Aerospace & Defense Industries Association of Europe (ASD), Embry Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU), FlyersRights.org, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Aeronautic Repair Station Association (ARSA), Helicopter Association International (HAI), Airlines for America (A4A), Pratt & Whitey, National Air Carrier Association (NACA), Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA), Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), Coalition of Airplane Pilots Association (CAPA), American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), Aviation Capital Group, Regional Airline Association (RAA), Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), and the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA).
I even recognized most of those acronyms.
So, whether you happen to agree, or vehemently disagree, with the aforementioned changes coming to a favored reference handbook near you, know that those changes were years in the making and discussed by people, just like you.
And just like you, they are informed by the many hats they wear. As a person (first and foremost), but also by their professions, employers, and interests. And I appreciate the time, energy, and thought they put into this process. Words matter.
In reading up on the various aspects of this topic, I “learned” a great deal while writing this column.
And while I found the journey interesting, I’m not yet sure how directly useful that knowledge will be on the “flight deck” of the Cub I sometime fly.
Bert Zimmerly says
I am glad that I was in the aviation industry when I was. I’ve seen the best of it and wouldn’t want to deal with it now. 70 years of logging time and flying 100’s of different airplanes, seeing changes from no radios, no heaters, no paperwork other than your log book, to what has become a nightmare to accomplish what? I out of it and glad for that!
Terry says
I’ve spent the last 11 years as an FAA inspector. I am an A&P with IA mechanic, pilot, CFI. I owned and operated an FBO for 18 years. I spent a year in Vietnam. I was an airport manager during the FBO years. I taught a number of people to fly. I loved the industry, but it was a struggle.
I’m here to say that the pressure to change for social tenderness, to adjust words to fit the current mindset rather than to train people to learn and tolerate how things are, tends to alienate older people. It’s not just the effort to modify their vocabulary, it’s the erosion of the industry they called their own. I believe we are missing the boat. I’m on the fence as to whether I stick with General Aviation or turn my back on it. I’m glad I lived when I did.
Jerry Cornwell says
I always thought the flight deck was the ramp/runway used by the Navy. This does not apply to GA. How much money does this change cost ? Dumb. Jerry
Lee Taylor says
Change merely for the sake of change should first be examined in the light of, “Does it need changing?”
I can understand the airlines wanting the change from cockpit to Flight Deck, because being “politically correct” when there are many women airline pilots today,——-but the others??????
Andy T. says
In the (NASA) astronaut world, folks who have been selected but not yet certified for flight are called Astronaut-Candidates (ASCANS). Seems like a better approach than “Learner”. PICANS?
Lee Taylor says
(HUGE grin!)
James K. says
This is as bad as when they changed it from “position and hold” to “line up and wait”. Line up and wait sounds like something you say to your 4th-graders before heading off to the cafeteria for lunch. It just sounds wrong – and it’s as lame as it gets. Sign of the wimpy, milk toast times we live in these days.
Larry says
You piqued my interest on when the old acronyms for airspace changed to letters. Now, almost 30 years later, I still think of it all as PCA, TCA, ARSA, ATA and CZ. Once “learned” first, always remembered. (That’s called Primacy). And “line up and wait” … fuhgetaboutit.
DARRELL B HAY says
Larry I chuckled at your comment. I still struggle with Class A, B, C, etc etc, and that all changed in 1993! Line up and wait is lame, and I actively resist the metric system, but flight deck is a much better term than cockpit which just sounds like a farm term or blatantly sexist bad joke.
Capt.JPMooney says
I seriously don’t think my J-3 cub has a flight deck even though the 767 that I flew for over 6000 hrs. does. All airplanes are not the same period!
Captain says
I believe Line Up and Wait is an ICAO term used by the rest of the world and Position and Hold used only in the USA. I can see the change for standardization, I think ICAO should have changed to Position and hold.
Alex Nelon says
The origin of “cockpit” is really an enclosure where sporting (?) folk watched roosters fight. Navies adopted the term, then aviators. Maybe the FAA decided since the flight decks of today’s aircraft are frequently staffed by women as well as men it has become more appropriate to gender-neutralize the environment.
Tradition has no place here.
As for those acronyms, … pffffft
After 41 years, I’m not renewing my instructor certificates. While I love watching the lights come on as a primary student (oops – learner) grasps a concept, the pinheads have made it not so much fun anymore.
Lee Taylor says
I Agree fully with you, Alex. And at now age 76, and 10K+ hours of instruction given, I feel much the same way. I let my CFII expire a couple of sessions ago, but I am about to get “recertified” by some of the new breed. I expect to do some training while I do that. Experience does have some merit.
I am getting my DFII’s back current for one thing. I see a resurgence of causal everyday aviation, people who are rediscovering the joy of flight, not just the “enjoyment” of letting the autopilot do it all, and the microphone being their connection to other pilots. As an old-line type with a deep appreciation of being a pilot, actually flying a plane, I feel that I owe it to those people to help them learn the “right way”. One of the things I usually do is cover up all the instruments except the airspeed and oil pressure on my initial instruction. Learn to fly the airplane, THEN learn how the instruments can help you. And the single earphone headset is on MY head, not my student’s. I want them WATCHING and LOOKING, not necessarily listening until they learn the basics.
Lee Taylor (still flying my Christen Eagle)
Capt.John Mooney says
To Alex and Lee, I too let my CFII expire after approximately 55 years of holding it and many many learners in both general and airlines flying . I do miss the flying and the teaching but at 81 I guess it was time to hang it up, but I don’t know what a DFII is so please enlighten me; Thanks, Capt. JPMOONEY TWA Ret.
Richard Ewing says
I am pleased to see that the stupidity in changing words that everyone understood anyway, Is just as rampant in the USA with the FAA, as it is in CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) in Australia. I can’t wait to introduce people to The Flight Deck of my little Sonex.
Bob Cassidy says
How about control cabin for light aircraft? Typical FAA, change things that don’t mean anything but, keep major performance items like a electric constant speed propellers from certified airplanes. Just because it might take some serious thought. No, lets change the name of a few things that don’t really mean squat.
The next pop you hear might be the FAA getting their heads out of their butts. Good thing the FAA does not rule over the auto industry or we would still be going around in covered wagons.
Doug Haig says
Fits the stupidity of the times.
Bruce Hinds says
What do they call the surface on top of an aircraft carrier that the aircraft land on?
Larry S says
You’ve spent too much time in Test Ops and not enough time at SouthBase, Bruce. 🙂
Bruce Hinds says
Maybe too much time in aviation, it’s all becoming absurd.
Larry S says
I wasn’t being mean, Bruce … I was trying to hook you into possibly remembering who I am … one of Jimmy’s helpers at the Aero Club and with orange wires on Main Base when you were there and then Site 4.
I agree … we’re still flying 1946 airplanes because the intransigence of the FAA while thinking up stuff like this. Time to defund the FAA not change definitions.
Bruce Hinds says
Hi Larry, you must have the wrong Bruce HInds – never associated with an Aero Club and have no idea what Site 4 might be.
Larry S says
Well, I do … sorry, Bruce. That’s an uncommon name so I thought it HAD to be him and I’d “mess” with him and have some fun. The Bruce Hinds I thought you were flew the B-2. Those words would all have meaning to him; both of us spent MUCH time at Edwards AFB. I thought it odd that he’d comment here so took a (wrong) chance. Have a great day.
Lee Taylor says
Mr. Hinds, I understand your question, but as Ex Air Force, NAVY pilots do not “land”. They are highly adept at crashing exactly on a spot. Ever take a look at the difference in the landing gear struts on an Air Force plane, and then the exact same struts on the Navy version? The Navy ones aren’t twice the size for no good reason.
cody says
Cant wait to see the “Learner certificates” overhaul that is now necessary, the wheels of bureaucracy turn ever slowly…
RC says
Almost all of our aeronautical rules that were not original to aviation came down from nautical rules. The previously mentioned position lights, right of way rules, and so forth. The FAA surely has better uses for resources (manpower) than having them invent issues that need to be corrected such as this.
It’s always seemed to me that the litmus test should be understanding. i.e. ‘would an average intelligence individual understand what the context for “student” is, in this case?’. No? Then change the term. Yes? Then leave it alone and move on.
Wild Bill says
When the biggest thing you’ve got to do is change a couple words, that honestly didn’t need to change, perhaps its time for your organization to head west. Because none of this helps anyone be a better safer pilot, nor does it reflect reality. The red snd green nav lights are nautical in origin, should we change them to blue and yellow? See what I mean? This does, however, provide the perception of action, which organizations must have to remain relevant.
CathyV says
Sounding a lot like “1984” and whole departments re-writing history, “new-speak”…vocabulary. Damn! the FAA duped into it. They must have way too much time on their hands! What brilliant mind came up with “new speak” for the FAA. That’s what they did in “1984”…re-re-wrote books, constantly, changing words.
You’re only a “student’ once, as student pilot. After you have your certificate and you go on you’re not longer a ‘student’ you’re in advanced training. So now they’re going to be “learner pilots”….with “learner certificates” or maybe ‘certificate’ needs to be changed to “learner papers”? Absurd!
MICHAEL A CROGNALE says
Change for the sake of change. It is a virus that infects every government agency. In the end it’s just another exercise in self-justification.
Lee Taylor says
True reality. Deskbounders justifying their jobs.
John Munroe says
It took two years to make this ludicrous change? Good thing we just keep paying our taxes.
Arcy says
Two years and untold dollars, donuts, coffee and tax paid ‘conferences’ to do this.
Meanwhile a 172 is $600k and has an engine designed in 1930
Will says
The flight deck in my Cherokee 140 – indeed.
Roger Overandout says
Small airplanes don’t have flight decks, and very few of them have cockpits. Better start over again..
Lee Taylor says
Are you a man? do you sit IN your plane? :>)))