Sunday, July
1, 2007
Vol. IV No. 13 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Welcome
to the
Over the
Airwaves
aviation journal. This complimentary bi-weekly e-mailing
is being sent to pilots and aviation enthusiasts around the
world. Its aim
is to promote
flight safety, encourage students and new pilots, and to build
enthusiasm for aviation in general.
"Diversions" If there is one word in the lexicon of proficient pilots that speaks to safety, it is the word "diversions." It is used anytime our best efforts at flight planning go awry. Weather is the main reason, but diversions are also caused by mechanical problems aloft, temporary airport closures, or sick passengers. Whatever the reason, we depart from our planned course and begin picking through a variety of options. Curiously, the fatal accident record reveals that too many of us are not good at executing timely diversions. The most classic example of this occurs when the VFR (and non-proficient instrument) pilot marches directly into IFR conditions. In these nearly always fatal cases, we leave the familiar surroundings of sky above and ground below and enter the world often referred to as "pea soup." Other reasons for failing to make timely diversions abound. One example that grabs far too many of us is . . . . low fuel. We press on trusting in the "accuracy" of our fuel gauges.
My choices were to land immediately and check into a hotel for a couple of days, or press on another couple of hours to my home airport. I elected the latter. I encountered IMC weather about the same time I was looking for a sick sack. My spinning head and spinning heading indicator were each demanding my full attention. The workload suddenly became overwhelming as I struggled to keep things level. I nearly lost that struggle! Calling it quits . . . Knowing when to call it "quits" while aloft often requires more self-discipline than many of us can muster. Landing short of our destination is often replete with inconveniences. Missed appointments and unexpected expenses alone can provide sufficient justification to press on in the face of worsening circumstances. In some cases, we might not have the required instrument approach plates to make an unplanned, enroute landing. With all due respect to FAR 91.103, we sometimes do NOT have all available information concerning our flight. In other cases, we may have passengers who "insist" we carry on to our destination. Perhaps we'll have an angry boss if we fail to show up for work in the morning. All of these factors often conspire against our better judgment to make a timely diversion. When these factors succeed, our real problems could just be beginning! Practice diversions . . . Diversions are as much a part of aviation as the vagaries of life itself. Stuff happens, engines run rough, weather changes, we do get sick, whatever. We need to be always "ready at the switch" to change our plans. We need to be continually playing through the various "what if" scenarios in our head. We need to ask ourselves, if such and such happens, where would I land? How would I have to deal with the situation? Then, when the real deal happens, we're prepared. The best place to instill the self-discipline to divert when necessary is right at the primary and instrument training stages. Flight instructors should create diversion scenarios that require their students to suddenly alter their plans, change courses, and find suitable landing sites. This ability to adapt to our changing world of flight could save our life one day!
Windshear Alert!! It doesn't happen very often, but when it does . . . the results can be tragic. So tragic, in fact, that three airliners were lost to windshear. One in 1975 in New York City; one in New Orleans in 1982; and one in 1985 in Dallas-Fort Worth. Altogether, there have been about 500 fatalities and 200 injuries resulting from windshear related accidents involving at least 26 civil aircraft between 1964 and 1985. Since 1985, windshear also has caused numerous near accidents in which aircraft recovered just before ground contact.
Windshear . . . what is it, really? Curiously, windshear activity occurs around us nearly all of the time. It consists of any changing wind currents that occur along our route of flight. In cruise flight, these changing wind currents produce gentle to bone-jarring bumps in our ride. No big deal. It is a big deal, however, when these changing wind currents occur during our departure or approach phase of flight. Here, a sudden gain or loss of 15 to 20 knots of wind speed can have a devastating effect on aircraft performance. With insufficient altitude, recovery may not be possible. The dreaded microburst ! ! The worst manifestation of windshear is the microburst. As illustrated below, a microburst typically occurs at or near the presence of thunderstorms. If those thunderstorms are occurring anywhere near your destination airport, don't even think about landing there! Go someplace else to land.
Most of us go through a lifetime of flying without ever encountering any significant windshear. But when it does happen, the results are guaranteed to be memorable!
A irVenture 2007 Coming Soon . . . Listen up on the approach ! ! !Call it another component of general aviation's "dirty little secret" (because it occurs nearly every year and nobody likes to talk about it). Several of us GA pilots manage to stop listening to ATC while on final approach to busy airports like Wittman Field during AirVenture or Lakeland Airport during Sun 'n Fun.
According to the NTSB report, the RV-6 pilot was instructed to turn on the base leg. He apparently was slow to respond, so the controller called the PA-16, who was next in trail, and instructed him to turn base. With both aircraft now on the final approach leg to Runway 27R, the controller observed the PA-16 pilot overtaking the RV-6 pilot. He immediately instructed the RV-6 pilot to side-step to Runway 27L.
We can only imagine the controller's frustration at this point! Tragically, the next thing the controller observed was the PA-16 settling on top of the RV-6 while both were on short final! The PA-16's left main gear struck the RV-6's empennage and its spinning propeller cut through the RV-6's cockpit area. The result . . . one dead and one seriously injured. The NTSB Probable Cause Finding . . .
The National
Transportation Safety Board determines
the probable cause(s) of this accident
as follows: "The failure of the
PA-16 pilot to maintain a visual lookout
and to yield the right-of-way to a lower
aircraft while on final approach
resulting in a midair collision.
Contributing to the accident was the
failure of both pilots to adhere to an
ATC clearance while landing, and the
subsequent in-flight collision of both
airplanes with terrain." Ordinarily, the flow
of traffic into AirVenture and Sun
'n Fun flows smoothly. Everybody
pays attention and their eyes are
out the window the entire time as
skilled air traffic controllers maintain
an orderly flow of arriving airplanes. Then there is the
isolated case where somebody isn't
listening. As in the above case,
the pilot misses a critical radio
call. The smooth flow of traffic
suddenly becomes compromised.
The controller's
workload begins to ratchet up. He
(or she) begins moving other airplanes
out of the way. That typically
resolves the problem. As in
this case, it sometimes doesn't. What's the
solution?
So what's the
solution? Easy . . . look
out the window! Keep a close eye
on the aircraft you are following.
Don't lose sight of him . . . ever! Then, if we do miss a
radio call, we have a built-in safety
mechanism. Just follow the guy in
front of you. Remain in trail and
land! Special Use Airspace
. . . KNOW IT ! !
Special use airspace
includes warning areas, restricted
areas, alert areas, military operating
areas, and prohibited areas.
Stumbling blindly into one of these
areas without the proper knowledge could
forever alter our flying careers.
Let's look at each WARNING
AREAS:
Warning areas include the
airspace just beyond the 3-mile
limit that surrounds the coastal
areas of the United States.
Entry through these areas
typically requires a VFR or IFR
flight plan. RESTRICTED
AREAS: Restricted
areas denote the existence of
unusual, often invisible hazards
to aircraft such as artillery
firing, aerial gunnery, or
guided missiles. An aircraft may
not enter an active restricted area
unless permission has been
obtained from the controlling
agency. Alert areas advise pilots that a high volume of pilot training or unusual aerial activity is taking place. Parachute jump areas and the scenic Niagara Falls are examples of alert areas. MILITARY OPERATION AREAS:
Military operation areas (MOA)
consist of airspace
Prohibited areas are established
for security or other
ATC is the pilot's eyes in the sky . . . use them!
A Lancair departed VFR from the Carroll County-Tolson Airport, Carrollton, Ohio, at about 1:45pm and headed north to a nearby airport. The PIC was a 500 hour private pilot. Also aboard was a pilot-rated passenger who held an ATP certificate with single- and multi-engine privileges and a Learjet type rating. At just about the same time, a Cessna 172 departed VFR from the Akron Fulton International Airport with a flight instructor and a student pilot aboard to do some air work. The student was undergoing his final stage check prior to taking the instrument pilot practical test. The Lancair proceeded on a 356 degree heading at 2,300 feet. The Cessna was proceeding on 295 degree heading, also at 2,300 feet. Why???? Why neither pilot was talking with ATC remains a mystery. Because, had they been talking with ATC, all four people might be alive today! According to the radar data, the paths of each aircraft intersected at 2:05pm. A witness on the ground said that he looked up shortly before the two aircraft collided. He reported that both aircraft appeared to be in straight and level flight prior to the impact. He also noted that, after the collision, the Lancair entered an inverted, "slow flat" spin. The Cessna entered a "cartwheel-type spin." The Lancair came to rest inverted adjacent to a two-lane roadway located in a residential subdivision. The Cessna airplane was fragmented during the accident sequence. The basic fuselage, including the engine, came to rest inverted in an agricultural field adjacent to a residence. The left wing was found approximately 1,350 feet southeast of the fuselage. All four people perished in the accident.
A simple call is all that it takes! A quick call to ATC is all that it takes to have an extra pair of eyes watching over us. No big deal. Simply check in with ATC, request flight following, get a squawk code.
Sadly, had either the Lancair or Cessna pilots in this accident case simply checked in with ATC, this tragedy likely would not have happened. Instead, four people are dead, families are left grieving for life and the media, of course, have something to splash all over the evening news. Don't ever launch without calling ATC airborne . . .
Tell them your position and altitude, aircraft type, and your intentions. They will ask you to dial in a four digit transponder code. That's it! Sure, you'll have to advise them of any change in your plans along the way and inform them when you are about to land. So what. Do it! The life you save may be yours . . . and mine! Transponder note . . . If you have a transponder, turn it ON whenever you fly and activate its altitude encoding (Mode C) function. Your signal can then be interrogated by any aircraft (all airliners) having a traffic alert system. Aero-News.Net Features Over the Airwaves in Podcasts
This week's Aero-News.Net podcast addresses the risks of thunderstorms. You can hear this 15 minute interview and any of the previously conducted podcasts by clicking on the titles below:
By the way, Aero-News Net is a FREE daily online publication that is packed with aviation related news. It is the first thing I read every morning. You can log on to Aero-News Net and subscribe for your free subscription by clicking HERE. Don't Become a Lawn Dart in the Turn ! ! Tragically, we continue to suffer one fatal stall/spin mishap every week. The hapless pilot makes two basic mistakes as follows:
Mistake #1 - the STALL: Here, we increase our pitch angle to the critical angle of attack. This often happens subtly as we bank the aircraft. The resultant increase in load factor when in the turn produces an increase in stall speed. The steeper the bank, the higher the stall speed. Mistake #2 - the YAW: A stall, by itself, is not particularly critical. Even when occurring close to the ground, as when turning from the base leg to final. A quick lowering of the nose will break the stall with minimal loss of altitude. The danger comes, however, when the stall is combined with yaw (un-centered ball in the inclinometer). This yawing moment can instantly turn a simple stall close to the ground into a fatal spin. One wing literally drops out from under the airplane, thereby causing the stalled airplane to rotate around its vertical axis. Tragedy this past Monday in Greeley, Colorado! It happened again this past Monday as it does nearly every week. The pilot of an RV-6 entered the traffic pattern Greeley-Weld County Airport (GXY), Greeley, Colorado. According to a witness, the airplane was on a "close and tight" downwind leg for runway 34 at an altitude of approximately 400 feet above ground level. While on the downwind leg, the airplane was in "slow flight in a nose high attitude."
The airplane then entered another steep left turn with the wings almost vertical to terrain. The witness observed the "nose pitch up and the right wing stall." Subsequently, the airplane entered a spin (1.5 rotations) and impacted terrain. The pilot and passenger were killed. [Preliminary NTSB Report]Low, slow, stalled, and yawed. These are four flight attitudes that when combined nearly always results in fatalities. Training to prevent yawed/stalls . . . and Spins! A number of my colleague flight instructors and flight schools are content to address the yaw/stall spin problem by telling their students to always keep the ball centered. While fine in theory, other cockpit distractions often get in the way of keeping our eye on the little ball in the inclinometer. There is a far more effective way to impart strong coordinated flying skills. That way is to climb to a safe altitude (>3,000' AGL) with an experienced flight instructor aboard, then deliberately produce yawed stalls. The resultant kinesthetic feeling of a yawed/stalled airplane will leave a permanent impression on the pilot. He or she will quickly observe how this "feeling" transitions instantly into the first turn of a spin. The physiological response is similar to the lesson a child learns when getting his finger burned on the stove.
Applying heat to the finger produces a memorable pain that is roughly equivalent to how a yawed/stall attitude produces a feeling of impending spin. No amount of reading or lecturing will produce this profound level of awareness. The body must "feel" the effect before an instinctive response can be developed. Sadly, anti-spin training proponents seem to miss this important point.  CAP squadrons throughout the United States have incorporated OTA in their list of recommended readings to their members. You can view the CAPblog piece on OTA by clicking HERE. New WINGs Pilot Proficiency Program . . . what were they thinking??
Hmmmm . . . this new egg has all the appearances of being even larger than the FSS egg!! There is no bigger promoter of enhanced flight training than OTA. We applaud ANY effort that encourages pilots to get out and improve their proficiency. That's why I was anxious to see the FAA's "new and improved" version of its WINGS Pilot Proficiency Program.Admittedly, I have not yet given it a comprehensive test drive, but I did review the 21 minute audio tutorial found HERE. Next, I attempted to follow this new program through its many steps. Regrettably, I was dismayed! First, a little background. The FAA had been an enthusiastic supporter of its original WINGS program. They often boasted that the fatal accident record was nearly void of any current WINGs participant. I wondered why the FAA would dramatically revamp a program they had been so proud of. The 21 minute tutorial answered the question by saying that pilot participation in the original WINGs program had been steadily dropping to its current participation rate of 2.5%. The "new and improved" WINGs program is intended to boost pilot participation rate. Boost pilot participation rate . . . HELLO! Only the federal government would take a 'simple to administer' program like WINGs and send it out to a private contractor along with a big fee to make it more complicated . . . then create a 21 minute tutorial to explain its nuances, and then expect to see INCREASED pilot participation! Here is what one experienced pilot participant on AVSIG had to say about the new WINGs program:
In essence, the new WINGs Pilot Proficiency Program is a web-based initiative that requires participating pilots to first register on the FAA's FAAST website. Once a user name and password are secured, the pilot completes a personal profile form that requires the listing of all categories and classes of aircraft flown, pilot ratings, date of the last BFR, and the most recent previous WINGs phase completed. From there, the pilot is taken to the "My WINGs Pilot Proficiency" page where a multi-color matrix tracks the pilot's knowledge and flight training activities in either the BASIC, ADVANCED, and MASTER levels. As for the training itself, the pilot must log on to the Program Credit Search page, then answer a few questions. A search of suitable training activities produces a list to select from. The pilot selects the desired training activity which is keyed to the Practical Test Standards (PTS). The pilot takes the list of training activities to any CFI who is registered in the new WINGs program who, in turn, administers the training. The CFI then confirms training given by logging onto the new WINGs site. The process is even more complicated if the CFI giving the training is not registered with the new WINGs program. Personal observations . . .
The new WINGs web pages use tiny, eye-squinting fonts, lots of abbreviations, and confusing navigational links. Again, only the feds would hope to INCREASE user participation by making a program more complicated and confusing. I wonder what it cost us taxpayers? In summary, my guess is that the new WINGs program will fall flat. That's the bad news. But there is good news, too! Pilots will no longer have an easy way to bypass the old-fashioned BFR! While the BFR, itself, is only marginally effective as a recurrent training device, it is easy to administer and pilots are likely to spend more time in the air than surfing around the WINGs website documenting the process. Recommendation:
Every
year, pilots
truly wishing to become more
proficient should engage the
best CFI they can find, map
out a personally designed
recurrent training
curriculum, then follow it.
Even better, pursuing a new
rating is one of the very best
ways to optimize pilot
proficiency . . . right up
through Airline Transport
Pilot (ATP). Help Spread the Safety Word Over the Airwaves boldly goes where few other GA publications dare to go. It speaks boldly, provocatively, and it focuses the light of day on our dark little GA secrets. While not every OTA reader agrees with all of the OTA content, there is sufficient substance in each OTA issue to get us all thinking about we do aloft. And when we think, fewer mistakes get made. Please help spread the safety word by clicking on the red button below. Then enter the email addresses of other pilots you know who could benefit from some of this thinking. Please note: You are NOT signing your friends up for an unsolicited OTA subscription. Instead, you are simply inviting them to open the OTA web link. If they like what they see, they can sign up.
Sometimes too much airplane is simply too much!! One of the unique benefits of being an active flight instructor is the opportunity to fly an infinite variety of makes and models of airplanes. Most, of course, are vintage trainers like Cessna 172s and Piper Warriors. On occasion, however, we get the opportunity to step up to high performance models like the Cirrus SR22, Lancair 350, and the Columbia 400. When we do, we get to witness first hand just how challenging these high performers can be in the hands of the non-proficient pilot. Tragic lesson learned last month . . .
They made all of the required radio calls, though they were a bit high and fast on the approach. The airplane touched down and bounced about 10 to 20 feet above the surface. The airplane continued about 300 feet further down the runway and bounced again, in a 20 to 30-degree nose up attitude. The pilot deployed the speed brakes. The airplane then veered left of the runway centerline. The pilot applied full power. As the airplane headed toward an embankment off the left side of the runway, it rolled right, and the right wing tip scraped the runway. After traveling up the embankment, the airplane turned back right toward the runway and a row of airplanes parked along the apron that paralleled the runway. The airplane continued across the runway, and impacted two parked airplanes before striking a Cirrus SR-22, deploying its parachute in the process. The accident airplane finally impacted a Cessna 421 before coming to rest. Pilots on the ramp grabbed fire extinguishers from their airplanes and ran toward the burning airplane. The intense heat, however, kept them back over 100 feet from the fire. The pilot and his two passengers perished in the fire.
The approach was "high and fast." The touchdown was well beyond the first one-third of this 2,875 x 50 foot runway. Rather than simply going around for another try, the airplane bounced on the runway surface and was then permitted to veer left into an embankment. From there, it went totally out of control. OTA customarily refrains from commenting upon fatal accidents until the NTSB issues its probable cause finding. We certainly cannot comment upon what was going through the pilot's mind during the final minutes of this tragic flight.The facts of this case, based upon NTSB recorded witness statements, strongly suggest that something went terribly wrong during the landing sequence. Equally compelling is the fact that whatever corrective action the pilot elected to pursue did not satisfactorily resolve the problem. The Lancair 350, like the similar Columbia 400, is a wonderful airplane, beautifully designed and, in the hands of a proficient pilot, is a joy to fly. One of the highlights of my flying career was piloting a Columbia 400 on a transcontinental flight from the factory in Bend, Oregon back to Buffalo, NY. It was a sheer delight! But I also witnessed the demands this airplane places upon a non-proficient pilot. Its tolerance for pilot error is exceedingly slim. Its forgiveness of any control mismanagement is narrow. As the pilot in this Lancair 350 accident scenario discovered, fall behind this aircraft and the outcome can become tragic. Don't be suckered by the salesman!! Every aircraft manufacturer must sell airplanes to survive. In their zeal to sell airplanes, the manufacturers of sophisticated airplanes often suggest that anybody can learn to fly them safely. Unfortunately, this may not be true. As such, it is incumbent upon all of us to recognize our limits as pilots. A high performance aircraft may very well be in your future, but be certain your skills are up to the task before taking delivery! Landing Mishaps: #1 Accident Event
We continually suffer a little over 1,000 serious GA accidents a year or roughly 3 per day on average. Over one-third (actually 41%) of all these accidents occurred while landing. If we could tease these data a bit further, I'd guess that significant crosswinds were present in most of these landing mishaps. We GA pilots are simply not very good at crosswind landings. Blame it on WWII Air Cadet Instructors! I was talking recently with a Boeing Steerman pilot recently. I asked him how his narrow gear craft handled in crosswind landings. His reply was, "These planes were never intended for crosswind landings."
He added that the Army Air Corps versions always landed in wide open fields. That's why early airports were called "airfields" instead of "airports." Without specified runways, pilots could always land directly into the wind! Out of all of this came subsequent generations of crosswind-challenged flight instructors who retreat to the classroom or simulator whenever the crosswinds exceed 12-14 knots. This explains our dreadfully high landing accident rate! You might think it a stretch to blame today's high landing accident rate on WWII Air Cadet instructors . . . but you have to admit that there is a link! Look at the accident data this way. If you were ever to have an airplane accident, there is a 41% probability that it will occur while landing. Therefore, it should be self-evident that we all need to go out and secure meaningful crosswind landing experience. And once we develop crosswind landing skills, we need to go out every week or so and practice crosswind landings. Start by always choosing a crosswind runway whenever one is available. Curiously, I find the crosswind runway at my hometown airport (Buffalo/Niagara International Airport) to be nearly ALWAYS available for training. Nobody wants to use it! Taking off and landing back and forth on the same runway at a tower controlled airport, with teardrop turns on either end, is a great way to build crosswind landing skills! Donations needed to spread the OTA flight safety message around the globe!! If you found Over the Airwaves helpful to you personally and/or beneficial to general aviation and would like to support its continued publication, please consider making a donation to the effort. Simply click on the button below to access a secure link through which donations can be made. Or you can make a check payable to "Over the Airwaves" and mail it to Bob Miller, 41 Summershade Court, East Amherst, NY 14051. Your donations are used exclusively in the preparation, advancement, and promotion of Over the Airwaves to and for pilots all over the globe.
Cirrus Unveils "THE-JET"
Become the first on your block to own your own jet! Cirrus Design Corporation unveiled a mock-up of its much anticipated "the-jet" at a special ceremony held this past Thursday at the company’s headquarters in Duluth, Minnesota. Calling the single-engine aircraft a “personal jet” and a natural extension of the company’s SR22 line, co-founder Alan Klapmeier said, “'The-jet' is designed to be owner-flown and it will be loaded with innovative features, including the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System. "
However, there are some targets they're aiming for, including: speed of 300 knots at 25,000 feet mean sea level; room for up to seven people; and priced between $1 million and $1.2 million. The airplane will reportedly have rotation, take-off, approach and landing speeds similar to those of a modern piston airplane.
The infamous FAR 61.56 is the one Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) that explains why general aviation continues to experience one fatal wreck everyday of the week (on average). It goes on to explain why 80 percent of all fatal accidents are blamed on pilot error. And it certainly explains why general aviation continues to be statistically 100 times more risky, hour for hour, than airline flight! FAR 61.56 is also likely one of the most zealously protected FARs by our large GA organizations including AOPA and EAA. Read below to find out why! Why? The first problem . . . There are three major problems with FAR 61.56. The first is, of course, the frequency at which these flight reviews must be conducted. While airline pilots undergo flight reviews every 6 to 12 months, we GA pilots (who fly less frequently and often fly by ourselves in increasingly complex aircraft) are only required to undergo a flight review every 24 months. Let's compare the two major components in the man/machine relationship represented by an aircraft in flight. The machine undergoes a well-deserved mechanical inspection every 12 months. The man undergoes his or her proficiency inspection every 24 months. Looking the accident data, the machine part is responsible for 15% of all fatal accidents. The man part is responsible for 80% of all fatal accidents. This disparity in fatal accident causes, alone, provides screaming justification for more frequent flight reviews. The second problem . . . The second problem inherent in FAR 61.56 illustrated in sub-paragraph (a), which states:
Per FAR 61.56(a), one hour of ground and one hour of flight are minimally required to ascertain the proficiency of a GA pilot. It also requires that the current general operating and flight rules of Part 91 be covered. Below listed are the major elements of Part 91 that are to be covered in the ground portion of a flight review:
Hmmmm . . . how many CFIs could cover these elements of Part 91 in one hour???? How many GA pilots could exhibit proficiency in each of these areas in one hour of ground work? Let's look at the required flight portion of the flight review. FAR 61.56(a)(2) states that there be a review of the maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate. These would include, of course, short and soft field operations, ground reference maneuvers, performance maneuvers (slow flight, steep turns, power on and off stalls), emergency maneuvers (fires and engine failures), crosswind landings, towered airport operations. Again, per FAR 61.56, a minimum of one hour is required to ascertain pilot proficiency in each of these areas! The third problem . . . The third problem is, perhaps, the biggest. FAR 61.56 states the required flight review be given by an authorized instructor. This makes the CFI the "gatekeeper" of who is deemed to be a safe and proficient pilot. If we CFI's all took this obligation seriously, the biennial flight review could, even with its other shortcomings, be made to be a marginally effective way to improve flight safety. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Truth be told, we GA pilots have nurtured friendly relationships with countless hundreds of CFIs who will happily "pencil" in a flight review endorsement in our logbooks . . . in return for a paid lunch or other favor. The endorsement is there, but no real ground or flight review was ever performed! So where do we go from here? There is little question in any objective observer's mind that the biennial flight review per FAR 61.56 is a flimsy, ill-conceived effort to assure some sort of flight proficiency. Even if it worked as intended, the fact that it is conducted every two years is little more than a joke perpetrated in the name of improving flight safety. Unfortunately, any organized effort to increase the frequency of flight reviews to every 12 instead of 24 months would likely be met with enormous opposition from GA pilot membership organizations including AOPA and EAA. These groups would likely call such increased flight review frequency as "an unnecessary burden on the pilot population in the absence of convincing proof that such increased frequency would, in fact, reduce fatal accidents!" So there we have it. We continue to die in GA airplanes at the rate of one a day (on average). Our insurance rates are soaring. Nearly 80% of every fatal wreck is due to pilot error. And GA continues to be 100 times riskier, hour for hour, than airline flight. What burden are YOU willing to endure to fix this chronic problem?
Upcoming ! ! 
3 Weeks to EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2007! I will be sending daily emails to OTA readers remote from Oshkosh. For those of you attending, be sure to stop by Buffalo's EAA Chapter 46 in the Scholler Park camping area (on Lindbergh between 38th and 39th Street) and say hello. Click HERE for map of our camping location. I'll be at Oshkosh from Saturday, July 21 through Friday morning, July 27th. You can generally find me at the campsite around supper time (5:30pm to 7:00pm)! Stop by and pick up a FREE OTA T-shirt!
For more information on this year's Airventure, click HERE. Supporting OTA Sponsors
APS Emergency Maneuver Training specializes in upset recovery training, stall/spin awareness, aerobatics and spin recovery training.
Over the Airwaves welcomes the FAA Production Studios in Lakeland, FL as its latest supporting sponsor. Click on its logo above to bring you to its website.
Past Issues of
Click
HERE
to open any previous issue(s) of Technical Assistance
I would like to thank the following technical assistance
contributors for their valuable help in producing OTA every two
weeks: Cameron Dunlop, Corning, NY; Barry
McCollom, Kerrville, TX; Thom Riddle, Buffalo, NY; and
[Disclaimer: Material contained in this
e-newsletter is for informational purposes only.
It should not be construed as directive, doctrinal,
or instructive. Readers should consult with
their flight schools, certificated flight
instructors, Flight Standards District Office (FSDO)
and/or appropriate FAA publications including the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs), the
Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), and
applicable FAA Advisory Circulars (ACs) for specific
guidance relative to any information or before
employing any recommendations contained in this
e-publication. Further, nothing in this
e-publication is intended to be inconsistent with or
contrary to any official FAA rule or regulation, nor
should such material be interpreted or construed as
such. Over the Airwaves is intended
exclusively for the purpose of promoting and
enhancing heightened reader awareness of flight
safety issues. This website is not a substitute for
competent flight instruction. There are no
representations or warranties of any kind made
pertaining to this service/information and any
warranty, express or implied, is excluded and
disclaimed including but not limited to the implied
warranties of merchantability and/or fitness for a
particular purpose. Under no circumstances or
theories of liability, including without limitation
the negligence of any party, contract, warranty or
strict liability in tort, shall the website
creator/author or any of its affiliated or related
organizations be liable for any direct, indirect,
incidental, special, consequential or punitive
damages as a result of the use of, or the inability
to use, any information provided through this
service even if advised of the possibility of such
damages.] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One
of my most frightening failures to make a timely
diversion occurred on a flight several years ago from
Norfolk, VA back to Buffalo, NY. I had been
feeling out of sorts physically. Believing it to
be a transitory thing, I launched thinking that it would
pass. It didn't. A full-blown case of the
flu settled in just as I reached my cruising altitude.
Take
the case of a PA-16 (photo left) and an
RV-6 (pictured below) who were both in
the pattern approaching the Lakeland
Lindner Regional Airport's Runway 27R
during Sun 'n Fun several years ago.
Curiously,
the RV-6 pilot did not respond.
The controller then instructed the PA-16
pilot to remain higher than the RV-6
pilot he was following. Sadly, the
PA-16 pilot did not respond either.
Any
of us who has ever flown into AirVenture
or Sun 'n Fun during rush hour realizes
how easy it is to miss radio calls.
The excitement of the moment produces
increasing levels of stress.
Otherwise skilled pilots occasionally
turn into jelly during the last several
moments of the approach.
We
know it by different names yet these
large swaths of special use airspace all
offer a similar warning . . . . beware!
Free
sign up for
Over
the Airwaves
It
was a beautiful autumn afternoon over the
Akron-Canton Regional Airport in Ohio in October,
2005. A gentle wind was blowing from 220
degrees, visibility was 10 statute miles with a few
wispy clouds at 3,900' and a broken layer at
25,000'. It was one of those picture-perfect
weather days we all love to fly in.
Workload
permitting, of course, ATC will provide traffic
advisories whenever any other aircraft appears on
the scene. It cannot get any easier than
that! 
Unless
you still believe that ATC is a Communist conspiracy
to penetrate your personal privacy, call them EVERY
time you launch, even if it's just to the practice
area or over to the next town for breakfast.
The
witness then observed the airplane enter a steep left turn
from the downwind to base leg. The airplane's wings rolled
level and the airplane began to porpoise. 
I
do not claim to be an
Internet power user, but I
have spent a lot of time
designing and using the Web.
This new WINGs program will
definitely challenge
non-Internet power users. Neophyte web
users will get lost faster
than a new pilot taxiing
around O'Hare, LAX, or JFK!
It
was a fair weather day in Burnsville, NC this past May 26th
when a Lancair 350 entered the traffic pattern. The
pilot along with two passengers had been traveling northward
from St. Petersburg, Florida.
Inquiring
further, he said that Navy versions of these early trainers
landed on aircraft carriers . . . and carriers were always
turned directly into the wind when their airplanes were
landing. 
At
the unveiling, Klapmeier stressed that no specifications
have been established and the company has not yet set a
production timetable.
