EHEST

Component of ESSI

European Helicopter Safety Team

The Principles of Threat and Error Management

(TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and
Training Organisations
FOR HELICOPTER PILOTS AND INSTRUCTORS

TRAINING LEAFLET

HE8

2 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 3

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION 4
1. TEM MODEL

1.1 Threat and Error Management Components

1.2 Threats

THREATS AND ERRORS MANAGEMENT

CAN AVOID UNDESIRED AIRCRAFT STATE

1.3 Errors

1.4 UAS

1.5 Potential Outcome

10

1.6 Countermeasures

11

2. TEACHING TEM

12

2.1 Teaching Threat Management

12

2.2 Teaching Error Management

13

2.3 Teaching UAS Management

14

2.4 Debriefing

14

3. ASSESSING TEM

15

4. DEFINITIONS & ACRONYMS

18

APPENDIX I

20

4 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

INTRODUCTION

This leaflet was developed by the European Helicopter Safety Implementation Team (EHSIT), acomponent
of the European Helicopter Safety Team (EHEST). The EHSIT is tasked to process the Implementation
Recommendations (IRs) identified from the analysis of accidents1 performed by the European Helicopter
Safety Analysis Team (EHSAT).
Data from the EHSAT accident review confirms that acontinuing significant number of helicopter accidents
occur due to poor decision making and human performance made both prior and during flight. The aim of
this leaflet is to introduce the concept of Threat and Error Management (TEM) to flight crews and training
organisations.
TEM proposes that threats, errors and Undesirable Aircraft State (UAS) are everyday events that flight crews
must manage to maintain safety.
EASA Part FCL 2 and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) require that Human Factors and
TEM be introduced into all pilot training. In every flight phase all pilots, from student through professional,
shall demonstrate attitudes and behaviours appropriate to safe conduct of flight, including recognising and
managing potential threats and errors.
TEM training needs to be structured and designed to meet competency standards. Therefore, it is essential
that flight training organisations develop techniques and material for teaching TEM and that flight examiners
conducting flight tests have methods and tools to assess competency. Training and assessment information is
included in this document for use by students, instructors and examiners.

see the EHEST Analysis of 2000-2005 European helicopter Accidents, Final Report 2010.

see Part FCL GM1 to Appendix 5

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 5

1. TEM MODEL

1.1 Threat and Error Management Components

There are three basic components in the TEM model, from the perspective of flight crews:
Threats
Errors
Undesired Aircraft State (UAS)
Management in the context of TEM is defined as plan, direct and control an operation or situation. In
practical terms this means the timely detection and response of threats and/or errors that may lead to UASs.

THREATS AND ERRORS MANAGEMENT

CAN AVOID UNDESIRED AIRCRAFT STATE

Figure 1: Undesired Aircraft State (UAS)

1.2 Threats
The first component of the TEM model is the threat. Threats are events that occur beyond the influence of the
flight crew, increase operational complexity, and which must be managed to maintain the margins of safety.
Unmanaged or mismanaged threats frequently lead to aUAS.
The TEM model considers 3 categories of threats, anticipated, unanticipated and latent which all have
the potential to negatively affect flight operations by reducing margins of safety. The objective of threat
management is to gain awareness of the potential threats within the operating environment both prior
to and during flight. Understanding what athreat is, and being aware of these threats enables the flight
crew to both plan and execute the flight in asafe manner by selecting the appropriate countermeasure and
achieving asafe outcome.
Anticipated
Some threats can be anticipated, since they are expected or known to the flight crew such as:
Thunderstorms/icing/wind shear and other forecast inclement weather;
Congested airport/heliport;

6 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

Wires/obstacles;
Complex SIDs/STARs/clearances;
Cross and/or downwind approaches/landings;
Outside air temperature/density altitude extremes;
Mass and balance;
Forecast/known bird activity.

Unanticipated
Some threats can occur unexpectedly, suddenly and without warning. In this case, flight crews must apply
skills and knowledge acquired through training and operational experience such as:
In-flight aircraft malfunction;
Automation - anomalies/over reliance;
Un-forecast weather/turbulence/icing;
ATC re-routing/congestion/non-standard phraseology/navigation aid un-serviceability/similar call-signs;
Ground handling;
Wires/obstacles;
GA/Ultra-light/light aircraft activities;
Unmanned aircraft systems;
ACAS RA/TA;
Un-forecast bird activity;
Laser attacks;
Contaminated/sloping landing areas;
Latent
Lastly, some threats may not be directly obvious to, or observable by, flight crews immersed in flight
operations, and may need to be uncovered by safety analysis. These are considered latent threats and may
include organisational weaknesses and the psychological state of the pilot such as:
Organisational culture/changes;
Incorrect/incomplete documentation;
Equipment design issues;
Operational pressures/delays;
Optical illusions;
Fatigue/rostering;
Stress;
Complacency;
Over or under confidence;
Lack of recent experience and proficiency
Regardless of whether threats are anticipated, unanticipated, or latent, one measure of the effectiveness of
aflight crews ability to manage threats is whether threats are detected promptly enough to enable the flight
crew to respond to them before aUAS develops by taking the appropriate actions.

Threat management is abuilding block to error management and UAS management, and provides the most
proactive option to maintain margins of safety in flight operations. As threat managers, flight crews are the
last line of defence to keep threats from impacting flight operations.

1.3 Errors
Errors are defined actions or inactions by the flight crew that lead to deviations from organisational or flight
crew intentions or expectations. Errors can be divided into the two following types:
Slips and lapses are failures in the execution of the intended action. Slips are actions that do not go as
planned, while lapses are memory failures. For example, pulling the mixture instead of the (intended)
carburetor heat is aslip. Forgetting to apply the carburettor heat is a lapse.
Mistakes are failures in the plan of action. Even if execution of the plan were correct, it would not have
been possible to achieve the intended outcome.
Unmanaged or mismanaged errors, as with threats, have the potential to reduce the margins of safety and
could lead to additional errors or UAS.
The TEM model considers 3 categories of error, aircraft handling, procedural and communications all of
which have the potential to negatively affect flight operations. Indicative examples are listed below:

Types of Error

Activating mixture
instead of Carb Heat

Forgetting to put
the Carb Heat
away

Not conducting
any checks in an
emergency

Reason, 1990

Figure 2: Types of Error

Not putting
enough fuel
onboard
(because of
the headwind)

Aircraft handling
To be classified as an aircraft handling error, the pilot or flight crew must be interacting with the aircraft (for
example through its controls, automation or systems).
Manual handling, flight controls: vertical, lateral or speed deviations, flight or power settings;
Automation: incorrect upper-mode settings and failure to monitor mode, engage/disengage and arm/
disarm;

8 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

Systems, radio, instruments: incorrect anti-icing, incorrect altimeter, incorrect fuel switches settings or
incorrect radio frequency dialled;
Heliport/airport operations: hovering too low/too fast, attempting to turn down wrong taxiway or
runway, failure to hold short or missed taxiway or runway.
Procedural
To be classified as aprocedural error, the pilot or flight crew must be interacting with aprocedure (for
example checklists; SOPs; etc.).
Documentation: wrong mass and balance, fuel information, ATIS, or clearance information recorded,
misinterpreted items on paperwork; incorrect logbook entries or incorrect application of MEL procedures.
SOPs: failure to cross-verify automation inputs;
Checklists: from memory; items missed, checklist performed late or at the wrong time; wrong challenge
and response;
Callouts: omitted or incorrect callouts;
Briefings: omitted briefings; items missed;
Communications
To be classified as acommunication error, the pilot or flight crew must be interacting with people (ATC,
ground crew, other crewmembers, etc.)
Crew to external: missed calls, incorrect phraseology; transmitting while another transmission is in
progress; misinterpretations of instructions, incorrect read-back, wrong clearance, taxiway, pad or
runway communicated;
Pilot to pilot/crew: miscommunication or misinterpretation.
Regardless of the type of error, it is the detection, interpretation and response that influence the potential
effect on safety. The objective of error management is the timely detection and prompt appropriate response
in flight operations in order for the error to become operationally inconsequential.
A mismanaged error is defined as an error that is linked to or induces an additional error or UAS.

1.4 UAS
UASs are flight crew-induced aircraft position or speed deviations, misapplication of flight controls, or incorrect
systems configuration, associated with areduction in margins of safety. UASs that result from ineffective
threat or error management may lead to compromising situations and reduce margins of safety in flight
operations. UASs must be managed by flight crews.
The TEM model considers 3 categories of UAS, aircraft handling, ground navigation and incorrect aircraft
configurations which all have the potential to negatively affect flight operations by reducing margins of safety.
Indicative examples are listed below:
Aircraft handling
Vortex ring state;
Loss of Tail rotor Effectiveness (LTE);

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 9

Degraded Visual Environment (DVE);

Aircraft control (attitude);
Vertical, lateral or speed deviations;
Unnecessary weather penetration;
Unauthorised airspace penetration;
Operation outside aircraft limitations;
Unstable approach;
Continued landing after unstable approach;
Over shooting the landing area or ahard landing.

Ground navigation (heliport operations)

Proceeding towards wrong taxiway or runway;
Wrong taxiway, ramp, pad or hold spot.
Incorrect aircraft configurations
Systems;
Flight controls;
Automation;
Engine;
Mass and balance.

Figure 3: Threat and Error Management (TEM) model

Figure 3 shows threats and errors are part of everyday aviation operations that must be managed by flight crews,
since both threats and errors carry the potential to generate aUAS. Once aUAS has arisen it is equally important
to manage the UAS as it is the last opportunity for flight crews to ensure asafe outcome in flight operations.

10 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

UASs can be managed effectively by returning the aircraft to normal operations, or alternatively, they can be
mismanaged resulting in an additional error, or occurrence (incident/accident).
Another important point in the use of TEM for flight crews is the timely switching from error or threat
management to UAS management. An example would be as follows:
A pilot detects agenerator failure (unanticipated threat) while on approach to acontrolled airport and
responds to the failure. While dealing with the generator failure (threat management) and responding to an
ATC clearance, the airspeed reduces (manual handling error), and rate of descent increases without the pilot
realising. The first signs of vortex ring state are now apparent (UAS). The pilot identifies this handling error
by checking the instruments and responding to visual cues and returns the aircraft to astabilised approach,
thereby managing the UAS to achieve asafe approach and landing (outcome).

Unanticipated
Threat
Generator
Failure

Handling Error
Pilot distracted and
allows inadvertent
/unintentional
aircraft attitude
change without
acorresponding
application of power
and fails to identify
the situation.

UAS
Airspeed decays, rate
of descent increase
Incipient vortex ring
state

Outcome
Return to safe
operation (stabilised
approach)

Figure 4: TEM example

As the example in Figure 4 above shows, the flight crew has the possibility through the successful
application of TEM to recover the situation and return to safe flight operations.

1.5 Potential Outcome

It is also important to understand there is aclear differentiation between UAS and outcomes. AUAS is a
transitional state. An outcome, on the other hand, is an end state. The potential outcomes can be categorised as:
Return to safe operations (inconsequential)
An additional error
Occurrence Incident/Accident

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 11

1.6 Countermeasures
Flight crews must, as part of the normal discharge of their operational duties, employ countermeasures
to keep threats, errors and UASs from reducing margins of safety in flight operations. Examples of
countermeasures would include: planning, checklists, briefings, training, SOPs, and CRM.
There are basically three categories of countermeasures:
Planning countermeasures are essential for managing anticipated and unexpected threats, for example:
Thorough planning/briefing, concise, not rushed, and meet requirements;
Plans/aims/decisions communicated and acknowledged;
Workload assignment roles and responsibilities defined and communicated for normal and non-normal
situations;
Contingency management with effective strategies to manage threats to safety;
Threats and their consequences anticipated and all available resources used to manage threats.
Execution countermeasures are essential for error detection and error response, for example:
Crew members actively monitored and cross-checked systems and other crew members;
Aircraft position, settings, and crew actions verified;
Operational tasks prioritised and properly managed to handle primary flight duties;
Avoidance of task fixation;
Avoidance of work overload;
Automation properly managed to balance situational and workload requirements;
Automation setup briefed to other crew members;
Effective recovery techniques from automation anomalies.
Review countermeasures are essential for managing the changing conditions of aflight, for example:
Evaluation and modification of plans;
Crew decisions and actions openly analysed to make sure the existing plan was the best plan;
Crew members asked questions to investigate and/or clarify current plans of action;
Crew members not afraid to express alack of knowledge: Nothing taken for granted;
Crew members state critical information or solutions with appropriate persistence;
Crew members speak up without hesitation.
Further guidance on countermeasures can be found in the ICAO manual, Line Operations Safety Audit
(LOSA) (Doc 9803).

12 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

2. TEACHING TEM

Part FCL.920 Instructor competencies and assessment states:

All instructors shall be trained to achieve the following competences:
-Integrate Threat and Error Management (TEM) and crew resource management.

Figure 5: From Threat to Safe Operation

2.1 Teaching Threat Management

Instructors must understand that threats (and errors) are apart of everyday aviation operations that must be
managed through all the phases of flight. The instructor should instil in the student that TEM is an on-going
process and should be considered not only in flight but both in the pre-flight and post flight stages, namely:
Pre-flight:
Time spent on the ground anticipating possible threats associated with the flight will provide the
opportunity to plan and develop countermeasures (e.g. action in the event of weather changes);
Brief (self, crew members and passengers) planned procedures before take-off;
Include anticipated threats and countermeasures in briefings (e.g. adverse wind).
In flight:
Brief (self, crew members and passengers) planned procedures prior to commencing each significant
flight sequence (e.g. approach to an aerodrome/heliport);
Include anticipated threats and countermeasures in briefings (e.g. adverse wind);
Prioritise tasks and manage workload to avoid being overloaded (e.g. use checklists);
Identify and manage any UAS;
Recover to stable flight and normal safety margins before dealing with other threats/errors/UASs.
Post flight:
Reconsider what threats, errors and/or UAS were encountered during the flight. Ask the student how well
these were managed and what could have been done differently to improve the management of similar
threats and errors on future flights.

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 13

It is very important for instructors to emphasise to students that anticipated and unanticipated threats are
identifiable and most likely to affect them before and during flight operations.
Latent threats are not always obvious to the instructor or students since they may include organisational
weaknesses and the psychological state of the pilot as identified in paragraph 1.2.
Detection of anticipated threats relies mainly on knowledge and experience. As pilots learn (and gain
experience) they may be able to predict more accurately where threats can occur. For example, being able
to interpret ameteorological report will allow apilot to prepare better for adverse weather. Experience can
assist pilots to understand more about their own capabilities and limitations.
Unanticipated threats are most likely in flight. These threats are generally managed by applying skills and
knowledge acquired through training and flight experience. Typically, apractice engine failure or simulated
system failure can be amethod of training astudent to manage an unanticipated threat. Knowledge and
repetition prepare astudent to manage such events should they occur for real in flight.
Instructors should develop relevant TEM training scenarios including what if questions or examples that will
address the different categories of threats and thereby develop the students ability to detect and respond
appropriately to threats.
During flight training the instructor must identify unanticipated threats such as incorrect ATC instructions,
traffic hazards or adverse weather and point them out to the student if they fail to identify them. Then it is
important to ask the student to see what countermeasures would mitigate the threats, ensuring that these
are completed in the time available.
In flight the instructor may well foresee an impending threat well in advance of the student in such cases
agood technique to teach the student to recognise an unanticipated threat is for example:
Prompt
Question
Response
Decision
Action

Reducing visibility
What are our available options/actions?
Turn 1800 or land
Student selects appropriate response
Student turns or lands

2.2 Teaching Error Management

The acknowledgement that errors will occur has changed the emphasis in aviation operations to error
recognition and management rather than just error prevention. Rather than just pointing out errors as they
occur, instructors should show students how to minimise the chances of errors happening, and then if they
do happen, recognise the fact and implement strategies to manage them.

14 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

Instructors must afford the student the opportunity to recognise an error rather than intervening as soon as
the error occurs. If it is safe to do so the instructor should allow the student the time to identify the error and
correct it.

2.3 Teaching UAS Management

Unmanaged or mismanaged threats or errors may result in an UAS. Ideally, pilots should be taught to
manage threats and errors before an UAS develops. During flight training, instructors will be dealing with
many training UASs as students develop their flying skills.
Some typical training UAS examples would be:
Erratic hovering;
Lateral movement during Take-off and landing;
Taxiing too fast;
Too fast or slow on final approach; or
Inability to maintain altitude or heading during straight and level flight.
Although such examples would be classified as UAS when committed by aqualified pilot, they are not
unusual events during flight training. The difference is that the instructor should be aware of the threats and
errors and should not let an UAS develop into an undesired outcome (accident or incident).
In this context, instructors have the dual role of practicing TEM by ensuring that UASs are managed and then
teaching students how to do the same. Because students may not have the manipulative and cognitive skills
of aqualified pilot, they will often not meet specified flight tolerances or procedures.
A critical aspect that instructors must teach is the switch from error management to UAS management.
During the error management phase, apilot can become fixated on determining the cause of an error and
forget the old adage aviate, navigate, communicate. Refer back to worked example in Section 1.4.

2.4 Debriefing
Debriefing is an essential tool for teaching TEM and should be applied during and post flight. The content of
TEM debriefing, although at the discretion of the instructor, should address in flight the critical issues as they
occur and leave the detailed analysis and in-depth discussion to post flight.
It may be appropriate for the instructor to take control of the helicopter in order to debrief the student
in flight. By the instructor taking full control the student can relax and concentrate on the instructors
comments.

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 15

3. ASSESSING TEM

The basic concept for TEM is simply to:

Timely detect, interpret and promptly respond appropriately to the threat, error or UAS.
Although this sounds uncomplicated, instructor/examiners must obtain evidence to ensure that TEM is being
practiced. Since observation is the sole means available to the instructor/examiner to obtain this evidence,
it is important that the instructor/examiner actively questions the pilot pre-flight, in flight and post flight to
gain insight into the reasons why specific TEM was applied. It must be emphasised that questioning during
flight should not distract the pilot. Instructor/examiners cannot assume that just because apilot completed
asafe flight, competent TEM was used.
On aflight test it is unlikely acompetent pilot will get into an UAS or, if encountered, would fail to correct
it and therefore it could be necessary for the examiner to suggest asuitable scenario to assess TEM. For
example:
create ascenario that will be analysed during the pre-flight briefing;
when approaching adestination aerodrome simulate athunderstorm over the airfield;
simulate aradio failure approaching areporting point or entering acontrol zone;
simulate precautionary or forced landing;
simulate an instrument or display failure.
To assist the instructor/examiner in assessing apilots TEM performance the following can be considered:
Maintain effective lookout
Maintains lookout and traffic separation using asystematic scan technique at arate determined by traffic
density, visibility and terrain;
Maintains radio listening watch and interprets transmissions to determine traffic location and intentions
of traffic;
Performs airspace-cleared procedure before commencing any manoeuvres.
Maintain situation awareness
Monitors all aircraft systems using asystematic scan technique;
Collects information to facilitate on-going system management;
Monitors flight environment for deviations from planned operations;
Collects flight environment information to update planned operations.
Assess situations and make decisions
Identifies problems;
Analyses problems;
Identifies solutions;

16 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

Assesses solutions and risks;

Decides on acourse of action;
Communicates plans of action (if appropriate);
Allocates tasks for action (if appropriate);
Takes actions to achieve optimum outcomes for the operation;
Monitors progress against plan;
Re-evaluates plan to achieve optimum outcomes.

Set priorities and manage tasks

Organises workload and priorities to ensure completion of all tasks relevant to the safety of the flight;
Puts the safe and effective operation of the aircraft ahead of competing priorities and demands;
Plans events and tasks to occur sequentially;
Anticipates critical events and tasks to ensure completion;
Uses technology to reduce workload and improve cognitive and manipulative activities;
Avoids fixation on single actions, tasks or functions.
Maintain effective communications and interpersonal relationships
Establishes and maintains effective and efficient communications and interpersonal relationships with all
stakeholders to ensure the safe outcome of the flight;
Defines and explains objectives to applicable/involved stakeholders;
Demonstrates alevel of assertiveness that ensures the safe completion of the flight;
Encourages passengers to participate in and contribute to the safe outcome of the flight.
Recognise and manage threats
Identifies relevant environmental or operational threats that are likely to affect the safety of the flight;
Develops and implements countermeasures to manage threats;
Monitors and assesses flight progress to ensure asafe outcome; or
Modifies actions when asafe outcome is not assured.
Recognise and manage errors
Applies checklists and standard operating procedures to prevent aircraft handling, procedural or
communication errors and identifies committed errors before safety is affected or aircraft enters an
undesired aircraft state;
Monitors aircraft systems, flight environment and crewmembers, collects and analyses information to
identify potential or actual errors;
Implements countermeasures to prevent errors or takes action in the time available to correct errors
before the aircraft enters an UAS.

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 17

Recognise and manage UAS

Recognises UAS;
Prioritises tasks to ensure management of UAS;
Manipulates aircraft controls or systems, or modifies actions or procedures to maintain control of the
aircraft and return to normal flight operations, in the time available.
In addition Appendix Iprovides an example of aTEM assessment criteria showing the different aspects that
could be assessed by the instructor/examiner.

18 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

4. DEFINITIONS & ACRONYMS

ACAS RA/TA: Airborne Collision Avoidance System Resolution Advisory / Traffic Advisory.
Airmanship: The consistent use of good judgement and well developed knowledge, skills and attitudes to
accomplish flight objectives (International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
ATC: Air Traffic Control.
ATIS: Automated Terminal Information Service.
Error: Flight crew actions or inactions that:
lead to adeviation from crew or organisational intentions or expectations;
reduce safety margins; and
increase the probability of adverse operational events on the ground and during flight.
Flight environment: The environment, internal and external to the aircraft that may affect the outcome of
the flight.
Aircrafts internal environment: The aircrafts internal environment may include, but is not limited to, aircraft
attitude and performance, instruments, observations, flight controls, equipment, warning and alerting
devices, trainee members, procedures, publications, checklists and automation.
External environment: The external environment may include, but is not limited to, airspace, meteorological
conditions, terrain, obstacles, the regulatory framework, other stakeholders and operating culture.
Formative assessment: Formative evaluation monitors learning progress during instruction and provides
continuous feedback to both trainee and instructor concerning learning success and failures.
GA: General Aviation.
Human factors: Optimising the relationship within systems between people, activities and equipment.
LOFT: Line Orientated Flight Training.
MEL: Minimum Equipment List.
Non-technical skills: Specific human factors competencies, sometimes referred to as soft skills, such as
lookout, situation awareness, decision making, task management and communications.
SID: Standard Instrument Departure.

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 19

Situation awareness: Knowing what is going on around you and being able to predict what could happen.
SOP: Standard Operating Procedure.
STAR: Standard Terminal ARrival.
Summative assessment: Asummative evaluation is conducted at the end of acourse of training and
determines if the instructional objectives (competency standards) have been achieved.
Threat: Events which occur beyond the influence of the flight crew, increase operational complexity and
which must be managed to maintain the margin of safety.
Threat and Error Management (TEM): The process of detecting and responding to threats and errors
to ensure that the ensuing outcome is inconsequential, i.e. the outcome is not an error, further error or
undesired state.
Undesired Aircraft State (UAS): Pilot induced aircraft position or speed deviations, misapplication of flight
controls, or incorrect systems configuration, associated with areduced margin of safety.

20 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

APPENDIX I

An example of threat and error management assessment criteria

Objective:
To determine that the candidate:
(1) Can recognise, assess and manage potential threats in the performance of the various task elements, in
accordance with TEM techniques.
(2) Can avoid or trap errors which may occur in the performing of the various task elements, in accordance
with TEM techniques.
(3) Follows SOPs with evident situational awareness to avoid and trap errors which may occur in the
performance of the various task elements.
(4) Applies strategies which will mitigate the effects of any errors which may occur, in accordance with TEM
techniques.
Not yet competent

COMPETENT

VERY COMPETENT

(1) Is ignorant of potential threats

in the performance of the various
task elements

(1) Recognises, verbalises and

assesses potential threats in the
performance of the various task
elements

(1) Immediately recognises,

verbalises and assesses all potential
threats in the performance of the
various task elements

(2) Takes no significant action

to reduce or manage the
potential impact of threats in the
performance of the various task
elements

(2) Takes reasonable action

to reduce and manage the
potential impact of threats in
the performance of the various
task elements

(2) Effectively manages potential

threats and/or implements strategies
to minimise the impact of potential
threats in the performance of the
various task elements

(3) Limited adherence to SOPs

and procedures, poor situational
awareness and/or no review
of flight progress. Is ignorant
of errors which occur in the
performance of the various task
elements

(3) SOPs and procedures are

followed, and good situational
awareness evident to avoid and
trap errors which may occur in
the performance of the various
task elements

(3) Strict adherence to SOPs and

procedures. Applies effective
strategies to avoid and trap
errors which may occur in the
performance of the various task
elements

(4) Is ignorant of or deficient

in the application of strategies
which could mitigate the effects
of any errors which occur

(4) Adequately mitigates the

effects of any errors which
occur

(4) Applies strategies which

effectively mitigate the effects of
any errors which

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 21

Action:
The examiner may:
Question the candidate on potential threats which may impact the operation of the helicopter in the
performance of the various task elements.
Observe the candidates assessment and management of threats in the performance of the various task
elements, in accordance with TEM techniques, and determine that the performance meets the objectives.
Observe the candidates avoidance and trapping of errors in the performance of the various task
elements, in accordance with TEM techniques, and determine that the performance meets the objectives.
Observe the candidates adherence to SOPs and (as well as is possible) monitor the candidates situational
awareness of threats and errors.
Observe the candidates application of strategies to mitigate the effects of errors in the performance of
the various task elements, in accordance with TEM techniques, and determine that the performance
meets the objectives.

22 >> The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations

The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors and Training Organisations >> 23

IMPRINT

Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this leaflet are the exclusive responsibility of EHEST. All information provided is of ageneral
nature only and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Its only
purpose is to provide guidance without affecting in any way the status of officially adopted legislative and regulatory
provisions, including Acceptable Means of Compliance or Guidance Materials. It is not intended and should not be
relied upon, as any form of warranty, representation, undertaking, contractual, or other commitment binding in law
upon EHEST its participants or affiliate organisations. The adoption of such recommendations is subject to voluntary
commitment and engages only the responsibility of those who endorse these actions.
Consequently, EHEST and its participants or affiliate organisations do not express or imply any warranty or assume any
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information or recommendation included
inthis leaflet. To the extent permitted by Law, EHEST and its participants or affiliate organisations shall not be liable
forany kind of damages or other claims or demands arising out of or in connection with the use, copying, or display of
this leaflet.

Credits:
CASA guidance material TEACHING AND ASSESSING SINGLE-PILOT HUMAN FACTORS AND THREAT AND
ERROR MANAGEMENT
CAA NEW ZEALAND FLIGHT TEST STANDARDS GUIDE AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT LICENCE ISSUE
HELICOPTER
Contact details for enquiries:
European Helicopter Safety Team
Email: [email protected], www.easa.europa.eu/essi/ehest

Download the EHEST leaflets:

EHEST HE 1 Training Leaflet Safety considerations
http://easa.europa.eu/HE1
EHEST HE 2 Training Leaflet Helicopter airmanship
http://easa.europa.eu/HE2
EHEST HE 3 Training Leaflet Off airfield landing site operations
http://easa.europa.eu/HE3
EHEST HE 4 Training Leaflet Decision making
http://easa.europa.eu/HE4
EHEST HE 5 Training Leaflet Risk Management in Training
http://easa.europa.eu/HE5
EHEST HE 6 Training Leaflet Advantages of simulators in Helicopter Flight Training
http://easa.europa.eu/HE6
EHEST HE 7 Training Leaflet Techniques for Helicopter Operations in Hilly and Mountainous Terrain
http://easa.europa.eu/HE7
EHEST HE 8 Training Leaflet - The Principles of Threat and Error Management (TEM) for Helicopter Pilots, Instructors
and Training Organisations
https://easa.europa.eu/HE8

EHEST
Component of ESSI

European Helicopter Safety Team

December 2014

EUROPEAN HELICOPTER SAFETY TEAM (EHEST)

Component of ESSI

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)

Safety Analysis and Research Department
Ottoplatz 1, 50679 Kln, Germany
Mail [email protected]
Web www.easa.europa.eu/essi/ehest