What is SkyRadar’s focus as far as providing aviation training solutions is concerned?

From the beginning we were offering radar training environments, implemented in what EUROCONTROL calls the Next Generation architecture. SkyRadar is also offering System Monitoring and Control Training and cybersecurity. Apart from the latter, EASA’s Easy Access Rules give us a good guideline. We provide training solutions answering on ICAO 10057 and EASA Easy Access Rules, including simulation environments for qualification training in SUR, NAV, COM, DPR and SMC.

What exactly is the idea behind this focus and SkyRadar’s mission statement?

Our goal is to bring hands-on, modular, applied and state-of-the-art training solutions to the learners wherever they are. The challenge with this mission is that we do not want to bring toy solutions. Often what we see in the market is what we would call animation. Our objective is to provide real solutions wherever possible. So, we provide real miniaturized radars and real SMC systems and real infrastructure.

In many cases, we added high-quality simulation, to be able to go further, to simulate mistakes, or in the military or cybersecurity training, to simulate attacks. We even developed a vast amount of virtual reality environments so that students can practice in a familiar non-abstract world, even when they do distance learning. To allow students access concurrently and to handle the big number of students requiring qualification, we also had to rethink the training approach completely. In incumbent training solutions, there was only a place for one or maximum two students. This made training costly. Most trainees never had the chance to really work with the system, to familiarize with it and to develop a feeling for it. So, we allow countless students to access the infrastructure concurrently, even remotely from a distant location. We call this the democratization of ATSEP training. Safety and security become affordable to all ANSPs.

What tools and technologies is SkyRadar offering to the global aviation training market?

SkyRadar provides training radars, System Monitoring and Control Solutions, training hardware and simulators for SUR, NAV, COM, DPR and SMC training as required in ICAO 10057 and EASA Easy Access Rules for ATM.

How do you rate aviation training providers across the world in terms of the deployment of state-of-the-art training systems to facilitate the training of aviation personnel?

We have a close and fruitful cooperation with training academies, no matter whether they are part of the ANSPs, military organizations or third party service providers. They are all doing their best to provide high quality training in times of rapid technical change and limited budgets. As we are not a training provider, but a provider of training equipment, there is no fear of contact and close and trustful cooperation.

Talking about the SkySMC and other training solutions, are your customers restricted to the civil aviation training sphere?

A good part of our clientele are military customers. Here, electronic warfare, air defense, and rapid recovery in combat situations require specific military solutions, which we developed and keep on expanding. However, export is restricted and needs to be in compliance with EU Regulation like the Dual Use Regulation.

Is SkyRadar exploring other areas of competencies besides the aviation training equipment domain?

Yes, indeed. We even own several patents in medical radar applications. My dream is one day to expand some of the solutions into an operational context. But you can always dream. Today, the quick evolution of training requirements keeps us busy enough.

In relation to the skills and competencies of ATSEPs, how relevant is the integration of technological tools into the ATSEP training environments?

I keep on telling the joke of the aircraft pilot, who enters an aircraft and says: “Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to my first flight. Until now, I only trained on PowerPoint”.

 Imagine how many guests would leave the aircraft. The serious side of it is that the job of the ATSEP is as important for passenger safety as the job of the pilot. Consequently, it should be evident that they get trained practically with sufficient depth.

ICAO Doc 10057 defines four ATSEP training phases, namely: Initial training, Unit training, Continuation training and Development training? Which phase or phases would you describe as the most important and which phase demonstrates closer affinity with practical training?

This is really difficult to say. Our focus is on the qualification training as an advanced part of the initial training. Unit training and on the job training is getting more and more important in our product portfolio, especially in the context of training SMC use cases online. But, coming back to your initial question: In a lifelong learning context, all phases are equally important. It just depends in which part of your learning process you are.

How significant is practical training for the enhancement of the competencies of ATSEPs and what role can technology play in this respect?

Coming back to the previous question on ATSEP skills and competencies vis-à-vis technologies, it is vital. Let me answer with the taxonomy levels used by EASA, which are building on Benjamin Bloom’s Cognitive Learning Taxonomy. Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy is a hierarchical framework for classifying educational objectives and cognitive skills into a series of distinct levels. It comprises six levels, starting from the lowest to the highest: Knowledge (remembering facts and information), Comprehension (understanding concepts and principles), Application (using knowledge in practical situations), Analysis (breaking down information into its components for deeper understanding), Synthesis (combining elements to create something new), and Evaluation (judging the value or validity of ideas).

This taxonomy provides trainers with a structured approach to designing curriculum and assessments, enabling them to target specific cognitive skills and promote critical thinking and learning at various levels of complexity. ATSEP are tasked with critical responsibilities in maintaining and ensuring the safety of airspace systems. So, the application of knowledge in real-world scenarios is paramount. Practical training serves as the bridge that facilitates the transition from theoretical understanding to proficient application. It enables ATSEPs to hone their skills, develop the ability to make informed decisions under pressure, and effectively handle complex, dynamic situations that are inherent in air traffic management.

EASA’s taxonomy level 3 is equivalent to Bloom’s “application” level. When we go to level 4 and 5, we really get to the analysis, synthesis and evaluation levels. In short, students learn to transfer skills from one use case to another, even if the latter is completely new. Ideally this happens intuitively. Application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation require intensive training sessions in open systems. Open means, it should not be a behaviorist animation that represents a simple stimulus-response schema.

Higher learning objectives require complex infrastructures with real (miniaturized) systems or very well-crafted animations. To get to the level of “intuitive” behavior and synthesis, lots of practice is required. The time slots for practical training in the learning laboratories will not be enough. Therefore, our solutions offer the possibility of remote access or remote learning possibilities. Students can continue learning after class. They might simply record the raw data of their experiments and replay them in their revision time.

The COVID-19 era elevated the status of virtual learning. Do you see virtual learning serving any purpose in the aviation training sphere?

Our solutions have always been distance-learning enabled. To be honest, until COVID only few academies used it. During COVID-19 our clients instantly started using it. Some ran exercises with prerecorded solutions, others blended it with Zoom or Google Classroom. While the trainer operated the live system, students were able to access remotely. Unfortunately at that time we only had a limited range of simulators. But COVID pushed us to enlarge our simulator portfolio, and it is still growing.

And what more needs to be done in regard to the wholesale adoption of the virtual learning environment in aviation?

It is a continuous journey. For us virtual learning implies practical learning – talking in the language of Benjamin Bloom to reach higher learning goals (application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation). Teachers ideally use a good infrastructure like Moodle to manage the courses. For most teachers it means leapfrogging from instructor-led theoretical training to application-oriented blended learning implemented for virtually connected teams. The biggest challenge for the teacher is the change in mindset. You shift from the role of an instructor to the role of a coach working in a very technical environment. Being a coach is more difficult.

Working in virtual teams needs experience. And in contrast to repeating prefabricated knowledge in an instructor-led teaching context, application based learning may lead to many challenging questions where the trainer has no immediate answer. So when confronted with such a question, best start with: “I do not know yet. But let’s find out together!” ◙