Draft EBT Manual

John FRANKLIN • 1 August 2022
in community Air Operations

Updated - Comments can be provided until 1 November. 

Effective flight crew training is a key part of safe commercial flight operations in aviation. The introduction of Evidence-Based Training (EBT) is the next step in the implementation of best practices across the European aviation community. We have a dedicated Community Site page all about this topic to help with implementation. 

Draft EBT Manual - we want your comments

The latest piece of material is the first draft of the EBT Manual that has now been completed. At this stage it is a draft document - we welcome your comments in the "Comments Section" below or via email to safetypromotion@easa.europe.eu. Please provide comments by 1 November 2022. 

Objective of the EBT Manual

The Objective of this manual is to support you as operators/ATO’s in designing and conducting your EBT program by complying with EASA regulation and facilitating the spirit of competency-based training.

It is designed as support and guidance for the implementation of EBT mixed (ED decision 2015/027/R) and for EBT baseline (following the adoption of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2036 and the ED decision 2020).

The content of the manual will be expanded in future editions to become a living document that helps in the development and implementation of EBT across the European Aviation Community.

What we would like from you:

  1. Readers are invited to submit comments to the EASA EBT manual in the section below
  2. Experts are invited to submit their application for the participation of the EASA SPT.012 task force through their FS TEC or Air OPS TeB representatives

The EASA STP012 Task force aims to organise additional webinars and workshops, improve the existing EASA EBT checklists and complete the EBT manual. The task force will be composed by experts from Member states and Industry with a balanced representation of NAAs, air operators and pilot associations.

The profile of the experts should include (any or several of the following items):

  • experience with recurrent pilot training and checking;
  • experience with performance-based risk management;
  • experience with/knowledge of the oversight of air operator training;
  • experience with competent authority (CA) oversight;
  • extensive knowledge of the ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and the EU regulatory framework;
  • expert knowledge in the implementation and development of EBT programmes (operator, aircraft manufacturer, pilot representative, certifying authority or regulatory authority);
  • substantial knowledge of the European regulatory system;
  • experience with the development of the EBT regulatory framework (RMT.0599) (e.g. participation in the rulemaking group, participation in the focused consultation, etc); and
  • substantial experience with the implementation of operator EBT programmes.

Note 1:   The group should also be geographically balanced at European level.

Note 2:   ‘Ad hoc technical advisors’ — due to the wide scope of the task, EASA may involve ad hoc technical experts for a limited number of meetings to provide specific technical advice.

More information can be obtained from Francisco ARENAS ALVARIÑO (EASA project manager EBT).


Comments (9)

Helen Heenan

Hi John
P 16 refers to blooms taxonomy.
The taxonomy has been updated. The first 4 are the same, knowledge, understanding, apply, analyse. But the last 2 are now evaluate and create, rather than synthesis and evaluation. It was updated to reflect that creation of new theories required the highest order thinking.


Hello Helen, Thanks for your comment on page 16. Can I ask you for a link or reference to documentation where we can find more information about the new Bloom's taxonomy? Thanks again for your comment. Best regards Francisco.

Harry Horvath

Dear John, my experience is that almost every operator asked for guidance on what initial and recurrent training should be described for each staff category. There are a few specific requirements for i.e. the flight dispatchers needing GenFam TRG other than for B1/B2 engineers, but not for other staff, as the CMM and the SM. For those sufficient knowledge od aircraft and aircraft systems is required, but not a basic GenFam TRG required. This is just an example of how operators are in trouble when establishing their training programs. My idea is that a matrix showing each personnel category (FC, CC, SM, NPGO etc) and all training possible taking into account all operations (incl SPAs). An example that is soon not used any more is the DG list of training for each personnel category. I have enormous feedback that everyone is not happy with this loss of clear guidance on DG transport by air. My experience comes from working on both sides of the battle field, as training developer and as flight operations inspector, and operators are waisting a lot of time with endless discussions on what training they should describe and what courses they should book for their staff. Best regards, Harry


You raise a really interesting point Harry. So far this discussion on EBT has focused on pilots but as we have developed the attached system model/ story approach to explaining our system the people box is clearly crying out for a better articulation about training requirements, skills and competencies for people across the aviation system. Including leaders as well as operational staff. Would be great to explore this some more and see what we can do.


John, Harry seems to have hit on the core ‘elephant in the room’. EBT/CBTA looks at workplace performance. It doesn’t look at what is needed in the first place to achieve that performance. You still need a model of initial training design. You cannot deliver competence divorced from underlying technical proficiency. Classical models of training design describe how to get to a certain level of proficiency. Competence models look at the application of that proficiency in the real world.


One of the challenges we have in aviation is that we do detail very well so we have lots of good pieces but sometimes they don't always connect clearly. This is where the "People" box of our safety principles that I uploaded earlier is so important - if we define the whole thing we then we can help tease out these challenges and make the solutions easier to implement.

You are not allowed to comment on content in a group you are not member of.

View group