AOPA ASI Blog: Leading Edge

It’s always an honor for me to present to the Aero Club of New England’s somewhat provocatively named “Crash Course.” Every year more than 350 pilots turn out for an evening of safety and information. Some of it’s pretty sobering and other parts are more entertaining.

FAA Regional Administrator, Amy Corbett, discussed NextGen and sequestration, which would be informative if not so maddening. We preached to the choir for about two hours, and upon return to my room I read some of the responses to last week’s blog, Beware the Windy Ides of March.

Your thoughts on what appears to be a nearly suicidal flight by a low time Mooney pilot in to a 33G47 knot crosswind at high density altitude were remarkably uniform:

• 8% thought the airport should have been closed
• 78% thought the PIC had the responsibility to make the call
• 10% thought the passengers should have been advised of the risk
• 3% thought that there would always be risk in GA

I made a bet with Amy that it would be tough—maybe impossible—to crash without having broken at least one rule and possibly more. So here goes; the most obvious is operating an aircraft outside its limitations but sometimes it’s not that simple. Demonstrated crosswind velocity is NOT a limitation but it’s a starting point. On the M20E Mooney it is somewhere around 12-14 knots if my memory serves correctly, and in the hands of a competent pilot more can be handled safely. How much? Depends on the pilot, but at some point one usually runs out of rudder and that’s your answer. Y’all be careful because mistakes are really expensive.

We don’t know the specifics yet but presumably the Mooney at Angel Fire got airborne with only limited climb capability in an area with significant downdrafts. The aircraft was outside the performance envelope, and since one usually doesn’t crash on takeoff it follows that the pilot was outside the operating limitations (unless a mechanical malfunction is found—these comments are still speculative).

Lawyers refer to that as Prima Facie or on first blush—something that is obvious. I’m sure there is legal maneuvering to work around that, but Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography is brilliant in its common sense: “I can’t describe it but I know it when I see it.”

Maybe that’s what’s needed—a rule to exercise good judgment and common sense. Oh wait, we’ve got that already: FAR 91.13 (a); Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

What do you think, should I call Amy and ask her to pay up?

March—in like a lion, out like a wildebeest, or perhaps a three toed sloth. No matter the animal of departure, March is often the windiest month. The winds can make flying much more difficult and sometimes downright dangerous. Case in point is the accident this week of a Mooney M20E that crashed shortly after takeoff. My comments are speculative because the accident is under investigation, but here are some early details.

• Depending on fuel load, the aircraft was heavily loaded with three adults and one child—not necessarily overweight, but heavy.
• Angel Fire, N.M. (KAXX), was the reported point of departure with a field elevation of 8,379 feet—there won’t be a lot of extra climb left in a normally aspirated, 200hp engine.
• The winds were reported to be gusting up to 47 knots.
• The pilot was reported to have just over 500 hours total flight time. The Associated Press interviewed the airport manager who said the pilot, “…felt comfortable with his abilities and the aircraft. And given as we are not policemen, we can’t ask him for the keys. We had all kinds of warnings posted on the front desk, plus we questioned the pilot as to whether he really wanted to go in that weather.”  The manager noted that no other flights arrived or departed that day.

This is one of those heart-breaker mishaps—I won’t call it an “accident” because this could be easily foreseen. We don’t know yet much about the pilot, but the desire to return from a family ski trip apparently was compelling.

I co-chair an FAA safety committee that is tasked with lowering the GA accident rate, and personal flights have the worst record. We recently discussed that all the usual educational efforts that the Air Safety Institute, FAA , EAA, and many of the type clubs have undertaken will work quite well for 90 percent of the pilots. The other 10 percent are just not susceptible to this approach, and the conversation then shifts to safety culture. (The percentages are made up you can use any you like.)

Changing culture is a long term effort, and the results are slow to be seen. It took two generations to get the majority of drivers to start wearing  seat belts. Driving under the influence is another area that has taken considerable effort to swing the pendulum toward safety. In all cases of potentially destructive behavior in any personal activity, there will be people who don’t understand, or have a much higher risk tolerance than is healthy.

The question comes down to whether the decision-making is taken out of the cockpit for personal flight or, as in automobiles, motorcycles, or boats, we accept that a small percentage just can’t be saved. The price of freedom is never free—education efforts should continue and they will, but the human psyche is complex and sometimes perverse.

Beware the lions and tiger and bears.

Educating pilots on improving their skills and enhancing GA safety is a core tenet of the AOPA Foundation’s Air Safety Institute and its educational programs. Your contribution funds these activities and ensures we continue to address the needs of pilots everywhere. Show your support with a donation today.

The federal government’s financial meltdown is starting. That storm has been brewing for over a year, but not being especially adept at politics, I’d rather measure the impacts on the FAA in an operational sense and get beyond what some call political theater.

Let’s be honest—there are a number of airports around the country that really don’t need a tower. We’ve all flown into them where it’s just you, the tower controller, and maybe one or a few other aircraft having a very nice discussion. Often it’s about commercial air service where a small community has a few flights a day and not much else. We’ve also been to airports that were literally buzzing with GA traffic but no tower because it doesn’t meet the non-commercial threshold. Politics, or a higher standard of safety?

In some cases the traffic density has fallen considerably from when the tower was justified. Should hours of operation be scaled back or eliminated? How about the mid-shifts where one or two controllers pull all-nighters to service a couple of cargo aircraft, often arriving around the same time?

When the Secretary of Transportation made his impassioned plea to preserve tower services, were there any questions asking Mr. LaHood, “Sir, in the case of XXX airport which you just cited, how many aircraft movements are there between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.?”

AOPA is often asked by reporters about how one can possibly operate aircraft at non-towered airports. They are usually surprised to learn that there is a complete system that works very well. When Class D reverts to Class E as the tower closes, there is also an effective transition procedure.

Safety at any price is unaffordable. There’s reasonable safety, and occasionally the safety card is played when on an operational basis, it can’t really be justified. The Supreme Court has said that safe is not the equivalent of risk-free (Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, decided in 1980). User fees are another issue, and the more unnecessary costs that are baked into the system, the stronger that pressure.

Nobody wants his ox gored, but might there be parts of the ox that might be expendable? In this fiscal environment, operational priorities need to be set and not political ones.

What do you think?

Towered or not, America’s airports are the backbone of our aviation infrastructure. Your support to the AOPA Foundation helps in the fight to keep these airports open and accessible. Consider showing your support through a tax-deductible donation to the Foundation today.