December, 2008 Vol. V, No.
11 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Welcome
to the
Over the
Airwaves
aviation journal. This complimentary e-publication
is prepared monthly for 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.
NY Yankee catcher and team
captain, Thurmond Munson, was homesick following his
many days on the road . . . so he took flying lessons as
a way to see his family more often.
Armed with a big dream and lots
of money, Munson apparently was not content with your
typical Cessna 172 or Piper Warrior. Instead, he
acquired a Citation I/SP twin engine jet.
With far more airplane than
most mortals could hope to manage with his limited
piloting time and training, Munson proceeded to drill
his airplane into the ground
 just
short of the runway while practicing touch and goes at
the Akron-Canton, Ohio Airport, killing himself and
injuring others. The year was 1979.
The facts vary
but the story is the same for countless hundreds of
inexperienced pilots whose fledgling skills were no
match for the sleek airplanes they purchased and
attempted to fly. I call this the "Munson
Factor."
I was reminded
of the "Munson Factor" this past month when my
friend and locally prominent businessman from my
community traded up from his Piper Archer to a Cirrus
SR22. Having just a few hours of transition
training from a local CFI, my friend and his wife took
off from Buffalo, NY to Tallahassie, FL, with an enroute
stop in Ohio. Like Thurmond Munson, this
pilot managed to land two miles short of the runway,
killing both himself and his wife.
While the
probable cause of this wreck has not yet been
determined, the end result was the same.
Newspapers and local radio and TV splashed images of the
carnage across the living rooms and kitchens of families
throughout both the WNY and the Northern Florida region.
And we wonder why the public is afraid of little
airplanes!
More
affordable today . . . but just as challenging!
 Okay,
so most of us cannot afford a Cessna Citation jet like
Thurmond Munson was able to purchase, but many of can
afford high performance, carbon composite singles like
the Cirrus SR22 and the Cessna 400.
Each of these
sleek piston beauties are miracles of modern
aeronautical engineering. They are
well-constructed and bountifully equipped with the most
advanced avionics.
There is only
one very serious problem with each of these airplanes.
That problem is . . . they go fast, very fast!
Unlike the metal airplanes of an earlier era, the Cirrus
SR22 and Cessna 400 are built for speed and performance.
Lightly loaded and trimmed for climb, each can race up
to the flight levels at an ear-popping 2,000 feet per
minute. And they can come down at twice that rate
without losing their wings.
Is
there a problem here somewhere?
So what's the
problem? Isn't flying about speed? Don't we
want to go fast?
Answer:
Sure . . . . but let's not forget the cost of speed.
We all know that
each increasing knot of indicated airspeed costs us
money. What we often forget, however, is that each
increasing knot of airspeed also has a training and
proficiency cost. Sadly, if we fail to underwrite
this training and proficiency cost, we die!
 Want
proof? Take a look at the Cirrus record.
Back in 2003, we GA pilots were given access to an
affordable airplane called the Cirrus SR22. It has
near jet-like qualities with a 21st century glass panel
cockpit. It is fast, efficient, and affordable.
Like the Cessna 400, in the hands of properly trained
and proficient pilots, the Cirrus SR22 is a dream to
fly.
But let a moment
or two of pilot incapacity, oversight or neglect occur,
these airplanes quickly turn themselves into
high-powered lawn darts!
As for proof,
the NTSB accident database provides details on 30 fatal
Cirrus SR22 accidents. Twenty-three of these fatal
accidents involved either weather issues or maneuvering
mishaps. In short, the pilot either exercised poor
judgment or weak stick and rudder skills. To
Cirrus' credit, many more fatalities were prevented by
installing ballistic recovery systems (BRS) in these
airplanes to protect us against ourselves.
Think . . . this
is just the beginning. Very light jets (VLJs) are
just around the corner! One must wonder what that
fatal accident experience will look like?
Here's the message . . .
The Cessna 400
and the Cirrus SR22 are not your typical single engine
GA aircraft. Transitioning into one of these birds
is not like moving up from a Cessna 152 to a 172 or from
a Piper Cub to a Piper Warrior. You cannot strap
yourself in, receive a few lessons, do a couple of touch
and goes and be sufficiently proficient to stay ahead of
these airplanes. Those who think they can often
leave grieving families. Remember the "Munson
Factor!"
The message here
is simple. If we're going to fly sophisticated
carbon composite airplanes, we must receive
sophisticated initial, transition, and recurrent
training in these airplanes. We need, yes (hold
your breath), something equivalent to a "type" rating
required of all aircraft over 12,500 pounds and/or
turbine-powered pure jets. Such training, of
course, can be provided by the factory or by
factory-training flight instructors in the field.
Essential
elements of this training should include:
How long will
such training take? It's hard to tell but
something equivalent to 25 hours of dual instruction and
a matching number of ground hours is good beginning.
Such training should be reinforced by one or two days of
annual FITs (FAA/Industry Training Standards) recurrent
training.
So who is going
to encourage this to happen? AOPA?? The
manufacturers?? The FAA??
Answer:
No, on all counts. Such training, they all say,
would likely create an "undue burden" on the GA
pilot community. Thus, the only way such training
will ever come about is if we, ourselves, step up to the
plate and do it. If we all do this, the "Munson
Factor" will simply fade away just like the
trusty old ADF radio.
Fly safe, fly smart.
Dark is here . . . know the risks??
Night flying is fun. The air tends to be smoother and the lights of the city add a whole new sense of wonderment. Radio chatter and associated air traffic is reduced to a trickle. With few exceptions, the only people flying at night are freight dogs and airliners. The rest of us are sitting at home watching TV. Night flying is fun . . . but it's not without its risks!
As in many night flying scenarios, the overcast skies blended in with the featureless horizon. Other than the departure airport, there were no lights on the ground to provide any indication as to which way was up and which way down. Lacking an instrument rating nor the skills to properly interpret his attitude instruments, this pilot suddenly found himself in a state of confusion. The weather itself was not a problem. It was a genuine VFR night. The only problem was, there was nothing but darkness outside the windows! One can only imagine the helplessness this pilot must have felt as he struggled to find his bearings. Likely nothing made sense to him as he turned north, then back to the west, then to the south in hopes of finding something upon which he could establish his bearings. One must wonder what was being talked about in the cabin during the last several minutes of this ill-fated airplane. The aircraft impacted a deep ravine on the side of a mountain. It struck with such force and resultant fire that investigators could not find sufficient specimens for toxicological study! What can we learn from this tragedy? The facts of this case speak for themselves. Cloud covered sky coupled with a dark, featureless terrain leaves no outside references for a non-instrument rated pilot to remain right side up in the sky. It's instant IFR despite what is otherwise VFR conditions. The lesson here is simple. Pilots lacking an instrument rating (or who are not instrument current/proficient) should think twice (perhaps three times) before launching into night skies!!!
OTA Reader Relates a "Near Death" Experience!!! Just in case you -
take a minute and read the following piece sent in from an OTA reader:
Steve, that scenario had tragedy written all over it. You were, indeed, quite fortunate! The lessons learned are obvious. NEVER, no not ever, fail to request radar advisories from ATC whenever you're aloft. Second, if you have a transponder (and everybody should), turn it on to altitude encoding (Mode C). This enables ATC as well as various onboard traffic collision avoidance systems to "see" you. Third, if you have TCAS, TIS, or TAS systems on your airplane, be sure it is turned on and working properly. Lastly, don't do as many pilots do and turn on your autopilot, then turn around and entertain your passengers with your wit and wisdom. Somebody (you) needs to be looking out the window!
Vertical Descent Planning!! You're cruising along with me in my T-210 at 21,000 feet enroute from the Chicago area to Buffalo, NY. Our true airspeed is 190 knots and we're being pushed along by a 90 knot tailwind (yes, life is sometimes good). This means we're making 280 knots over the ground!!!!! Question: How many miles before reaching Buffalo must we begin our descent?? [Note: The field elevation of our landing airport is 750 feet.] Who cares, anyway??? To some, this may be one of these academic questions found only on FAA knowledge tests or in flight school classrooms. Who really cares when we start down as long as we can reach the airport low enough to make a normal approach and land? Actually, this is far more than an academic question. Instead, it addresses each of the following flight components:
It is obvious from the above four considerations that effective vertical descent planning goes a long way in making us more proficient pilots.
So what's the answer to the opening question above. How many miles from my Buffalo destination should I start down? Let's look at the variables:
Answer = 19 (min) x 4.6 (miles per minute) = 87.4 miles. Automation helps . . . For those of us who are mathematically challenged, having a GPS or FMS (flight management system) onboard goes a long way in simplifying vertical descent planning. With either of these boxes, you go to the VNAV page, plug in your desired descent rate and, voila', a TOD (top of descent) point is automatically inserted in your displayed moving map. However we compute it, knowing when to start down offers big benefits to the proficient pilot!
Mastering the Airport Traffic Pattern! Last month we talked about the many traffic pattern foibles that compromise safety while maneuvering around the traffic pattern. Today, we're talking about the CORRECT way to negotiate this most hazardous portion of the national airspace system.
First . . . a few principles Here's a few things we all should know about the airport traffic pattern.
Given the fact that more accidents occur in and around the
airport traffic pattern, it is incumbent upon all of us to
execute our traffic pattern entries as prescribed above.
Any deviations from these principles substantially increases
our risk of mishap. Resist that overwhelming temptation!!!
For example, a
turbocharged Cessna 210 took off on Runway 6 from Teterboro
Airport in New Jersey. Witnesses observed a sharp
reduction in power as the airplane's gear was coming up
midpoint over the airport. The aircraft suddenly
rolled left, then right as the pilot was apparently looking
for a place to put down on
He made one more steep turn and the airplane stalled, entered a spin, then slammed into the ground on the northeast corner of the airport. The airplane was consumed with fire. Needless to say, the pilot died in the wreck. Fortunately, there were no passengers aboard. Choices are few While Teterboro is arguably one of the worst airports to experience an engine failure on takeoff because of its surrounding urbanization, tall buildings, and city streets, attempting a 180 degree turn back to the airport is typically the least desirable option. The risk of a stall/spin is simply too great. The better choice (and one prescribed in the Cessna 210 POH) is to establish an 85 knot speed and land straight ahead. In this accident scenario, finding a four-lane highway and settling in between the moving cars possess far less risk than a return to the airport. Exceptions apply As with all things aviation, there are exceptions to every prescribed procedure (though many of my CFI colleagues disagree). For example, malfunctioning engines on takeoff sometimes do not quit. Instead, the only malady may be severe engine roughness, coughing, or sputtering. Despite this, the engine is still developing power. In such cases, re-entering the traffic pattern and making a normal, albiet quick, approach to landing could be a better procedure than continuing away from the departure airport.
Donations
Help!
It is your continuing donor support of
Please help me in
this important lifesaving endeavor by donating to the cause.
You can do so by check or credit card. Follow the
instructions below.
If you prefer to send a
personal check, you can do so by making it payable to
"Over the Airwaves" and mail it to:
Your donations are used exclusively in the preparation,
advancement, and promotion of
Over the
Airwaves to
and for pilots all over the globe. No landings are ready before their time! There is a great gulf between those pilots
who can and who cannot make great landings every time.
This gulf is defined by many factors including, for example,
experience level, currency and frequency of flight, landing
skill sets, and . . . basic understanding of the
aerodynamics of flight. Let's take a look at the latter factor -
basic understanding of the aerodynamics of flight. It
is here where most pilots who have trouble with consistently
good landings need to devote their attention. Take a look at the above photo of an
aircraft coming over the runway numbers. Note,
particularly, the fact that this airplane is still flying.
Herein lies the first hint as to why we sometimes have
difficulty making smooth landings every time. Simply
put, an airplane has to STOP flying before it touches the
runway! Question - "If it stops flying before
it touches the runway, won't this result in a hard
landing?" Answer - No hard landing will result IF
the airplane stops flying precisely at a point just
one inch above the runway surface. Consider what will happen if the airplane is
still flying as it descends down on the runway surface.
The first wheel to strike the runway will produce a bounce
that launches the aircraft skyward again. Hmmmm . . . then what happens if the
airplane stops flying 10 or 15 feet or more above the runway
surface? You guessed it . . . a very hard landing will
result. So what's the solution? The solution
is found in our understanding of the aerodynamics of flight.
We know that lift is created by air flowing over our wings.
Simple enough, right? Okay, so the faster the
airflow, the greater the lift. The formula is
quite simple. Lift increases in relation to the square
of airspeed. Double airspeed and lift increases by a
factor of four. Conversely, reduce airspeed in half,
lift decreases by a factor of four. We control the speed of air flowing over our
wings in two ways. The first is pitch. Pitch up,
the airplane slows. Pitch down, the airplane speeds
up. The other way is power. Reduce power, the
airplane slows. Add power, the airplane (in most
situations) speeds up. Scroll back up to the above photo.
Which way is the stabilizer (rear wing) lifting?
Unlocking the answer to this question, alone, will help to
make every landing a greaser! The stabilizer is
designed to lift DOWNWARD. It does this to counter-act
the nose-downward force created by having a forward center
of gravity (CG). Thus, as the aircraft slows moments before
touchdown, increased back pressure on the yoke is required
to keep the nose up. The closer to touchdown, the
greater the required back pressure. Putting it all together . . . Again, the key to producing smooth landings
every time is to have the airplane stop flying just one inch
above the runway surface. Since lift is a function of
airspeed and airspeed is a function of pitch and power, our
focus MUST be on pitch and power as we descend down the
final approach course to landing. I suggest we start with power. By
dialing in a predetermined power setting at a known aircraft
configuration, e.g., flaps/wheels down, this leaves us to
deal exclusively with pitch. With power set at idle immediately prior to
touchdown, our sole remaining task is to maintain sufficient
back pressure on the yoke to keep the nose wheel off of the
runway surface until AFTER the main gear kisses the runway.
That's all there is to it! Common mistakes . . . While easy in theory, we pilots manage to
complicate the landing process. Here are several ways
we do this: 1. Landing too fast - As the title of
this article implies, no landing is ready before its time.
Attempting to plant the airplane on the runway before it has
stopped flying typically produces a bounced landing. 2. Flaring too high - Should we allow
the airplane to stop flying at more than several inches
above the runway surface, the end result is sure to be a
very hard landing. The airplane, in effect,
simply "drops" to the runway surface with bone-jarring
consequences. 3. Poor runway/nose wheel alignment -
While it makes perfect sense that the airplane should be
perfectly aligned with the runway when the wheels
touch down, many of us fail to do this. The resultant
side-loads on the wheels may be enough to cause disastrous
results. 4. Feet on the brakes - Touch down on
the runway surface with our feet planted firmly on the
brakes is the quickest way to ruin a perfectly good (and
expense) pair of main gear tires. These events are
typically accompanied by the sound of screeching tires and
puffs of blue smoke trailing behind the airplane! In summary, landing is arguably the most
challenging part of any flight. Do it right and
everybody applauds. Do it wrong, egos (and sometimes
more) get damaged! As in all things aviation, a combination of
good instruction and lots of practice are the keys to good
landings every time. Aero-News.Net Features OTA in Podcasts
"The Near Miss" is the latest in a series of podcasts Bob Miller has been doing with Aero-News.Net's Paul Plack. You can hear, or download for later listening, these 15 minute interviews and any of the previously conducted podcasts by clicking on the titles below: Podcast Titles[Click on desired titles - several minutes may be required to download.] Titles in RED are new since the last OTA. 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.
Imagine having the piloting skills, time, money, enthusiastic spouse, and capable airplane to spend long weekends flying to romantic places throughout the Western Hemisphere. OTA knows such a couple. They are John and Connie Bouck of Auburn, NY.Not only do John and Connie spend nearly every weekend in either their Cessna 210 or their Cessna 180 on floats, they are eager to share their experiences with us via this new OTA feature. Click HERE to read the second in an ongoing series of "It's Up to You to Get Away." This trip is to New York City!!!! This is particularly good reading for pilot spouses who haven't yet captured the excitement of flying!!!!! Lifesaving Exercise - Practice it often! If you have ever have thoughts about your engine quitting in flight, here's an exercise that will put your mind to ease. It's called the 180 degree power-off landing. As illustrated below, this exercise begins on the downwind leg of the traffic pattern. Abeam the approach end of the runway, at a point we call the key position, we reduce the power to idle (to simulate an engine failure).
We adjust the pitch to produce an airspeed equal to 1.4 times our stall speed in the landing configuration (Vso). From there we complete the base and final leg turns, add flaps as needed, and gently land on the runway touchdown zone. But what if I lose my engine someplace other than on the downwind leg of the traffic pattern? The key feature of this exercise is that it enables us to mentally convert any emergency landing site into an imaginary airport. We look down, locate a suitable landing site, then establish a descending spiral turn so as to arrive at the key position on the imaginary downwind leg at 1,000' AGL. From there, we simply repeat what we've been practicing. Works every time! Caution: Exercise extreme care when practicing this maneuver over unfamiliar terrain! In fact, it's best to do it over an actual airport. Helpful Sponsors Please support OTA's helpful sponsors by clicking on the images below where you will find ordering information.
Note: If you have an aviation-related product or service you would like to promote and help underwrite the continued publication of Over the Airwaves, please send an email to rjma@rjma.com.
A 15 year-old lad walked into my office the other day and indicated his desire to learn how to fly. I asked if he had ever been in a small airplane. He replied, "Yes, I started taking flight lessons at a nearby flight school, but I soon quit in frustration." Naturally, this statement caught my attention. I asked him to be more specific. He said, "My very first lesson involved lots of maneuvers that I didn't understand. We circled, climbed, turned, did stalls, and lots of other things that made me want to get on the ground!" This young man's remarks made me think immediately of the Private Pilot Practical Test Standards (PTS), that ubiquitous FAA publication that is worshipped by most traditional flight schools and narrow-minded CFIs. I had little doubt that this man's first flight school was wasting no time in getting him ready to pass the checkride! So what's wrong with that? Plenty. The first bad outcome of this traditional approach to flight instruction is that the school lost a flight student right after the first lesson. Had he not found a more enlightened flight school, he'd likely find some other way to spend his time and money. And he would not have been alone in his decision to quit learning to fly. Current estimates suggest that nearly 60 percent of all new flight students who walk through the front door never make it to checkride. That translates to about 50,000 lost future pilots EVERY year! Second, teaching flight maneuvers fails to reinforce why we're learning to fly in the first place! Rather than illustrating the wonderful utility of airplanes, traditional flight schools, in the grand tradition of the WWII flight training model, send their fledgling students directly in the practice area. Then they proceed to drill the excitement of flight right out of their minds and hearts. A more enlightened and, frankly, exciting first flight scenario would be a 45 minute trip to a grass strip, or to an airport with an on-field cafe, or to an air museum. Use the travel time to illustrate trimming, climbs, cruise, and descent maneuvers. Allow the student to experience the genuine benefit of air travel! A third bad outcome occurs when the importance of aeronautical decision making (ADM) is NOT introduced in the first several lessons. Instead, the instructor makes all the calls. Instead, we should be inviting the student to pick the destinations. Allow them to assess the distances and the time available to complete the trip. Have them look at the enroute and destination weather. Ask them to plot the course using pilotage as their primary means of navigation. FITS, of course! Kudos to the FAA for helping us out of this flight training morass. They and industry giants like Cessna Aircraft Company and other industry players, along with a growing number of flight schools, have been leading the charge to change the way we train new pilots. They call it FITS, which is short for "FAA/Industry Training Standards." Based loosely on the workhorse model of airline-type training called "LOFT," or "Line Oriented Flight Training," the newer FITS model is a scenario- rather than a maneuvers-based approach to flight training. Instead of teaching maneuvers in the vacuum of the practice area, FITS training puts students out into the national airspace system where the same maneuvers are learned surreptitiously rather than deliberately. It is here where students learn ADM (aeronautical decision making) and risk management assessment at the beginning of their training rather than at the end (if at all). They encounter changing terrain, changing weather, changing fuel loads, changing human factors, and changing mechanical risks. Students witness first-hand the vagaries of flight and the decision making process that goes along with them. Real world FITS training Still in all, there are weaknesses in the FITS training model. Some FITS proponents place far too much emphasis on simulator rather than actual flight training. While simulators do play a valuable role in FITS training, particularly when it comes to working through emergency procedures and learning instrument approach procedures, nothing short of a $38 million full-motion airline-type simulator comes close to replicating the real world challenges of flight. Setting the sim to replicate an ILS approach to LaGuardia Airport is nothing close to the real deal, particularly after the wheels touch the runway and we're faced with the challenge of finding our way to the FBO. In summary, the world of flight training is in the throws of change, at last! Long time OTA readers have been watching and waiting for this happen for years.Curiously, however, this push for change hasn't come from our big GA membership organizations like AOPA or EAA or NAFI, who vigorously resist any change that may become a burden on its members. Instead, it has come from the very folks we've been conditioned to distrust . . . the FAA and its industry partners. Yep . .
. there is genuine hope that we may finally do something
about our flat-lined fatal accident rate. Let's all
get behind the FITS effort.
Fly safe, Bob Miller, CFII, ATP
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
month: Cameron Dunlop, Corning, NY;
Dan Maloney, Clarence, 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.
All information in
this site is provided "as is," with no guarantee of
completeness, accuracy, adequacy, timeliness of the
information contained in, or linked to, or of the
results obtained from the use of this information,
and without warranty of any kind, express or
implied, including, but not limited to warranties of
performance, merchantability and fitness for a
particular purpose. In no event will the authors,
publishers their related partnerships or
corporations, or the partners, agents or employees
thereof be liable to you or anyone else for any
decision made or action taken in reliance on the
information in this page or for any consequential,
special or similar damages, even if advised of the
possibility of such damages. Certain links in this
page connect to other Web sites maintained by third
parties over whom the authors have no control. The
authors make no representations as to the accuracy
or any other aspect of information contained in
other Web sites. ©2004-2008 Over the Airwaves [TM], Buffalo, New York, USA.
Over the Airwaves is written, prepared, and published by
Bob Miller Flight Training, Inc., Buffalo, NY, who is solely
responsible for its contents.
ISSN 1937-3848. Over the Airwaves is a registered
trademark. Any use of this name , image, or reproduction,
duplication, or replication of this electronic publication
and/or prior issues in whole or in part without the express
written permission is strictly prohibited. Forwarding,
dissemination, distribution, and/or circulation of the Over
the Airwaves Uniform Resource Locator (URL) is permitted
under the terms of this trademark and copyright. |
The
nights are now longer than the days for those of us residing
in the northern hemisphere. This, of course, means
that more of us will be flying at night. Are we ready
for increasing challenges of night flight?
It
was a dark, moonless night in February. The pilot and
his two passengers climbed aboard a Beech V35 with the
intention of picking up the pilot's son a short distance
away. Sadly, they never made it.
Any
pilot who has encountered an engine problem immediately
after takeoff has experienced that overwhelming instinct to
snap a 180 degree course reversal and return to the airport.
Sadly, following this instinct is likely to produce fatal
results.
the
airport surface.
It's
Up to You to Get Away - "Off to Manhattan."
