The following are current resources, across a variety of formats, that address loss of control inflight (LOC-I). While this list intends to be comprehensive and informative, it may not be all-inclusive. The published resources are sorted by date with the most recent items listed first, and will be updated as new resources become available.

If you would like your LOC-I resource to be featured on this page, share your information via the online form.


In addition to resources developed by NBAA’s Safety Committee, you can find upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT) from Safety Committee-reviewed providers on our LOC-I Training Page. Additional UPRT and LOC-I material can be found from the following organizations:

Upset Prevention & Recovery Training Association (UPRTA)
The Upset Prevention & Recovery Training Association is a non-profit organization supporting the role of UPRT services in reducing the threat of Loss of Control In-flight (LOC-I) accidents and improving overall airmanship.

International Aerobatic Club (IAC)
The IAC has an extensive listing for aerobatic flight schools, some of which may also offer Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT).

Regulatory Resources

Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid Rev 2 (AURTA)
This training aid is intended to be a comprehensive training package that airlines can present to their flight crews in a combination of classroom and simulator programs. It is structured to be a baseline tool to incorporate into existing programs or to customize by the operator to meet its unique requirements. NOTE: Revision 3 will likely be released late 2016.

Airplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training Aid – Revision 3
Based upon ICAO document 10011, Airbus, ATR, Boeing, Bombardier, Embraer, and ICAO have created Revision 03 of the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid to emphasize the importance of prevention. This revision is expanded to include transport category straight wing propeller airplanes and regional jet airplanes.

ICAO Doc 10011 Manual on Aeroplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training
The focus of the material presented in this manual is to better prepare flight crew members to recognize and avoid situations that are conducive to encountering an in-flight upset; in other words, focusing on ‘prevention’. Notwithstanding, any risk mitigation effort would be incomplete without including recovery training. The guidance on recovery training and techniques provided herein has been influenced by the recommendations of the major original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of transport category aeroplanes. Overall though, the manual has been carefully developed by an international team of subject-matter-experts (SMEs) and flight instructors from: the major aeroplane manufacturers; Civil Aviation Authorities; commercial air transport operators; FSTD manufacturers; approved training organizations; pilot associations; international aviation industry associations; aviation accident investigation bureaus; and scientific institutions in aerospace.

FAA AC 120-111 Upset Prevention and Recovery Training
This advisory circular (AC) describes the recommended training for airplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT). The goal of this AC is to provide recommended practices and guidance for academic and flight simulation training device (FSTD) training for pilots to prevent developing upset conditions and ensure correct recovery responses to upsets. The AC was created from recommended practices developed by major airplane manufacturers, labor organizations, air carriers, training organizations, simulator manufacturers, and industry representative organizations. This AC provides guidance to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 air carriers implementing the regulatory requirements of §§ 121.419, 121.423, 121.424, and 121.427. Although this AC is directed to air carriers to implement part 121 regulations, the FAA encourages all airplane operators, pilot schools, and training centers to implement UPRT and to use this guidance, as applicable to the type of airplane in which training is conducted. Although a stall is by definition an upset, stall prevention and recovery training is contained in the current edition of AC 120-109, Stall Prevention and Recovery Training.

FAA AC 120-109A Stall Prevention and Recovery Training
This AC provides guidance for training, testing, and checking pilots to ensure correct responses to impending and full stalls. For air carriers, Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 contains the applicable regulatory requirements. Although this AC is directed to part 121 air carriers, the FAA encourages all air carriers, airplane operators, pilot schools, and training centers to use this guidance for stall prevention training, testing, and checking. This guidance was created for operators of transport category airplanes; however, many of the principles apply to all airplanes. The content was developed based on a review of recommended practices developed by major airplane manufacturers, labor organizations, air carriers, training organizations, simulator manufacturers, and industry representative organizations

Transport Canada – Advisory Circular No. 700-031
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to operators, pilots, flight crews and Transport Canada personnel for the prevention and recovery from stall events. This AC provides best practices and guidance for training, testing, and checking within existing regulations, to ensure correct and consistent responses to unexpected stall warnings and stick pusher activations. This AC emphasizes reducing the angle of attack (AOA) as the most important response to a stall event. This AC also provides guidance for operators and training providers on the development of stall and stick pusher event training.

Certificate Holders Authorized to Conduct the Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Certification Training Program (CTP)
The listed certificate holders are authorized to conduct the Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Certification Training Program (CTP), required by 14 CFR Part 61, § 61.156 for all applicants seeking an ATP certificate in the airplane category with a multiengine class rating.

IATA Guidance and Best Practices for the Implementation of UPRT
This document serves as guidance material for operators to develop an Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT) program as part of their recurrent training. It can also be considered when including UPRT into other programs, such as conversion, upgrading and type rating training. The document specifically focuses on practical guidance for UPRT instructor training. It also includes recommendations for operators cooperating with ATOs providing licensing training for their ab-initio cadets.

Organizational Resources

Addressing Aeroplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training
To maximize the UPRT learning experience, this paper provides guidance on three core issues related to the on-aeroplane training track: on-aeroplane training considerations, airplane/equipment considerations and instructor considerations.

Guidelines for Pilots Seeking All-Attitude Training
This document provides general guidance for those seeking spin, emergency maneuver, upset recovery, loss of control and aerobatic training programs.

NTSB Safety Alert: Prevent Aerodynamic Stalls at Low Altitude
This 3-page bulletin summarizes what pilots can do to mitigate low altitude stalls. It includes a number of additional resources.

This advisory circular (AC) provides information and courseware guidelines to authorized providers, to aid in the development of a training program which meets the requirements of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 61, § 61.156.

NTSB Loss of Control in General Aviation Roundtable
View videos and resources from the April 24, 2018 NTSB roundtable event focused on Loss of Control in General Aviation.

NTSB Aviation Accident Database
The NTSB aviation accident database contains information from 1962 and later about civil aviation accidents and selected incidents within the United States, its territories and possessions, and in international waters.

NTSB: Preventing Inflight Loss of Control in General Aviation through Training and Technology
The NTSB convened this roundtable of industry and government experts to discuss the current state of the problem, and highlight available technologies and training. The roundtable, which was moderated by NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt, also explored challenges to implementation of current technologies to reduce these largely preventable accidents. Prevent Loss of Control in Flight in General Aviation is on the NTSB’s Most Wanted List of transportation safety improvements.

ICAO: ICAO Safety Report confirms 2017 as aviation’s safest year
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) – which works in partnership with the international aviation community to improve safety, emphasizing improving safety performance through standardization, monitoring and implementation – has released its latest Safety Report that shows 2017 was the safest year ever on record for aviation.

Boeing Report – Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents
Boeing’s statistical summary shows that Loss of Control in Flight accidents constitute 48% of all fatalities over the ten years 2007 through 2016. This is the highest percentage contribution in history, while other causal factors are reducing.

AIN: UK Report: Loss of Control Is Main GA Accident Cause
Loss of control in flight (LOC-I) was cited as the “dominant causal” factor in the majority of general aviation (GA) accidents in the UK last year, according to the 2017 Annual Safety Review from the UK’s Air Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB).

Public Domain Military Publications

Out of Control Flight – TA6 Manual
This publication is issued for information, standardization of instruction, and guidance for all flight instructors within the Naval Air Training command. It is used as an explanatory aid to the T6A/B Instructor Under Training (IUT) curriculums and is the authority for the execution of all flight procedures and maneuvers it contains.

Academic Papers

These academic publications cover the underlying basic research into causes and mitigating LOC-I.

Baker, S. P., Qiang, Y., Rebok, G. W., and Li, G. (2008). Pilot error in air carrier mishaps: longitudinal trends among 558 reports, 1983–2002. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine, 79(1):2–6.

Baldi, P. and Itti, L. (2010). Of bits and wows: a bayesian theory of surprise with applications to attention. Neural Networks, 23(5):649–666.

Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: An experimental and social study. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Belcastro, C. M. and Foster, J. V. (2010). Aircraft loss-of-control accident analysis. In Proceedings of AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, Toronto, Canada, Paper No. AIAA-2010-8004.

Benthem, K. V. and Herdman, C. M. (2013). Individual pilot factors predict simulated runway incursion outcomes. In Tsang, P. and Flach, J., editors, Advances in Aviation Psychology, volume 1, pages 197–214, Ash- gate.

Beringer, D. B. and Harris, Jr, H. C. (1999). Automation in general aviation: Two studies of pilot responses to autopilot malfunctions. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(2):155–174.

Borst, C., Sjer, F., Mulder, M., Van Paassen, M., and Mulder, J. (2008). Ecological approach to support pilot terrain awareness after total engine failure. Journal of Aircraft, 45(1):159–171.

Burki-Cohen, J. (2010). Technical challenges of upset recovery training: Simulating the element of surprise. In Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference.

Casner, S. M., Geven, R. W., and Williams, K. T. (2013). The effectiveness of airline pilot training for abnormal events. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55(3):477–485.

Dekker, S. W. (2002). Reconstructing human contributions to accidents: the new view on error and performance. Journal of Safety Research, 33(3):371–385.

Driskell, J. E. and Salas, E. (1996). Stress and human performance. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., and Simons, R. C. (1985). Is the startle reaction an emotion? Journal of personality and social psychology, 49(5):1416.

Endsley, M. R. (1996). Automation and situation awareness. Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, pages 163–181.

Field, J., Rogier Woltjer, A. R., and Mulder, M. (2015). Experimental investigation of flight crew strategies in handling unexpected events. In Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology.

Gillan, C. (2003). Analysis of multicrew decision making from a cognitive perspective. In Proceedings of the12th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pages 427–432.

Haus, M., Rooney, C., Barnett, J., Westley, D., and Wong, W. (2012). Evaluating the effect of startling and surprising events in immersive training systems for emergency response. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 56, pages 2467–2471. Sage Publications.

Horstmann, G. (2015). The surprise–attention link: a review. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1339(1):106–115.

Hurts, K. and de Boer, R. J. (2014). “What is it doing now?” results of a survey into automation surprise. In Proceedings of 31st EAAP Conference, pages 197–210.

International Civil Aviation Organisation (2013). Manual of Evidence-Based Training. Number Doc 9995. Montreal, QC.

Kish, B., Bernard, T., Kimberlin, R. (2016). A Limited Investigation of Airplane Response to Flap Extension, Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.

Klein, G., Wiggins, S., and Dominguez, C. O. (2010). Team sensemaking. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 11(4):304–320.

Kochan, J., Priest, J., and Moskal, M. (2006). Human factors aspects of unexpected events as precursors to unwanted outcomes. In 18th Annual European Aviation Safety Seminar, pages 13–15.

Kochan, J. A. (2005).The role of domain expertise and judgment in dealing with unexpected events. PhD thesis, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida.

Kochan, J. A., Breiter, E. G., and Jentsch, F. (2004). Surprise and unexpectedness in flying: Database reviews and analyses. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 48, pages 335–339. SAGE Publications.

Lambregts, A., Nesemeier, G., Wilborn, J., and Newman, R. (2008). Airplane upsets: Old problem, new issues. In AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit 2008-6867.

Lazarus, R. S. and Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer, New York.

Maguire, R., Maguire, P., and Keane, M. T. (2011). Making sense of surprise: an investigation of the factors influencing surprise judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(1):176–186.

Martin, W. L., Murray, P. S., Bates, P. R., and Lee, P. S. (2016). A flight simulator study of the impairment effects of startle on pilots during unexpected critical events. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors.

Martin, W. L., Murray, P. S., Bates, P. R., and Lee, P. S. Y. (2015). Fear-potentiated startle: A review from an aviation perspective. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 25(2):97–107.

Martin, W. L., Murray, P. S., and Bates, P. R. (2012). The Effects of Startle on Pilots During Critical Events: A Case Study Analysis. 30th EAAP Conference : Aviation Psychology & Applied Human Factors – working towards zero accidents Proceedings of. Retrieved from

Meyer, W. U., Reisenzein, R., and Schutzwohl, A.(1997). Toward a process analysis of emotions: The case of surprise. Motivation and Emotion, 21(3):251–274.

Mumaw, R. J., Groen, E., Fucke, L., Anderson, R., Bos, J., and Houben, M. (2016). A new tool for analyzing the potential influence of vestibular illusions. In ISASI Forum, January-March, 6-12.

Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. W. H. Freeman and Company.

Nieuwenhuys, A. and Oudejans, R. R. (2011). Training with anxiety: short-and long-term effects on police officers’ shooting behavior under pressure. Cognitive processing, 12(3):277–288.

O’Connor, P., Campbell, J., Newon, J., Melton, J., Salas, E., and Wilson, K. A. (2008). Crew resource management training effectiveness: A meta-analysis and some critical needs. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 18(4):353–368.

Orasanu, J. and Martin, L. (1998). Errors in aviation decision making: A factor in accidents and incidents. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Human Error, Safety, and Systems Development, pages 100–107. Citeseer.

Parasuraman, R. and Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39(2):230–253.

Previc, F. H. and Ercoline, W. R. (2001). Trends in spatial disorientation research. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine, 72(11):1048–1050.

Rankin, A., Woltjer, R., Field, J., and Woods, D. (2013). “Staying ahead of the aircraft” and Managing Surprise in Modern Airliners. In 5th Resilience Engineering Symposium: Managing trade-offs, 25-27 June 2013, Soesterberg, The Netherlands.

Rasmussen, J. (1983). Skills, rules, and knowledge; signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. IEEE transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics, (3):257–266.

Raymond, M. W. and Moser, R. (1995). Aviators at risk. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, pages 35–39

Rivera, J., Talone, A. B., Boesser, C. T., Jentsch, F., and Yeh, M. (2014). Startle and surprise on the flight deck similarities, differences, and prevalence. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 58, pages 1047–1051. SAGE Publications.

Ross, J. M., Szalma, J. L., and Hancock, P. A. (2004). Efficacy of transfer in simulation-based training: implications for stress exposure training. In Second Swedish-American Workshop on Modeling and Simulation, February 2004.

Salas, E., Prince, C., Bowers, C. A., Stout, R. J., Oser, R. L., and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1999). A methodology for enhancing crew resource management training. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 41(1):161–172.

Sarter, N. B. and Schroeder, B. (2001). Supporting decision making and action selection under time pressure and uncertainty: The case of in-flight icing. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 43(4):573–583.

Sarter, N. B., Woods, D. D., and Billings, C. E. (1997). Automation surprises. Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 2:1926–1943.

Schroeder, J. A. (2012). Research and technology in support of upset prevention and recovery training. In AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference.

Schroeder, J. A., Bürki-Cohen, J., Shikany, D. A., Gingras, D. R., and Desrochers, P. (2014). An evaluation of several stall models for commercial transport training. In Modeling and Simulation Technology Conference, Washington, DC.

Shappell, S., Detwiler, C., Holcomb, K., Hackworth, C., Boquet, A., and Wiegmann, D. A. (2007). Human error and commercial aviation accidents: an analysis using the human factors analysis and classification system. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(2):227–242.

Sherry, L., Feary, M., Polson, P., and Palmer, E. (2001). What’s it doing now? taking the covers off autopilot behavior. In Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pages 1–6.

Singer, G. and Dekker, S. W. (2000). Pilot performance during multiple failures: An empirical study of different warning systems. Transportation human factors, 2(1):63–76.

Stokes, A. and Kite, K. (1994). Flight Stress. Ashgate, Brookfield, VT.

Thackray, R. I. and Touchstone, R. M. (1983). Rate of initial recovery and subsequent radar monitoring performance following a simulated emergency involving startle. Technical report, DTIC Document.

Vine, S. J., Uiga, L., Lavric, A., Moore, L. J., Tsaneva- Atanasova, K., and Wilson, M. R. (2015). Individual reactions to stress predict performance during a critical aviation incident. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 28(4):467–477.

Wickens, C. D., Stokes, A., Barnett, B., and Hyman, F. (1993). The effects of stress on pilot judgment in a midis simulator. In Maule, A. and Svenson, O., editors, Time Pressure and Stress in Human Judgment and Decision Making pages 271–292. Springer.