Amy Laboda

FAA Reauthorization from a Global Perspective

June 2nd, 2015 by Amy Laboda

This year’s Regional Airline Association (RAA) Conference in Cleveland, Ohio, was a fascinating place to be if you are at all interested in how the various interested parties in the U.S. and abroad are thinking about the up and coming FAA Reauthorization. (And if you aren’t interested you should be. GA pilots have a stake in how the FAA’s limited resources are parceled out.)

FAA mission shift, delays caused by ATC inefficiencies and TSA inefficiencies, noise, environmental concerns: they talked about it all. RAA interim President Faye Malarkey Black sat stage center surrounded on both sides by association leaders that included European Regional Airlines Association Director General Simon McNamara; Airlines 4 America President Nick Calio; Airports Council International North Americas President and CEO Kevin Burke, and Cargo Airline Association President Steve Alterman. Each brought a different angle on the issue, all of it fascinating to me, a user of regional airlines, and a general aviation pilot who wants to keep using my fair share of the system that my taxes pay for.

Leading the concerns was the fear that there will be no pilots to fly regional airliners in the U.S. if an effective career pathway is not both clearly established and marketed to high school students on a national level.

Cargo Airline Association President Steve Alterman is deeply worried. “Our carriers guarantee overnight service in cargo. We depend on our regional cargo partners to get the packages to those outlying communities, and from them to our gateway hubs for transit to destination. If we don’t have the pilots we can’t guarantee service to those small communities. That changes our whole business model. We’ve got to be more creative. I think it is in all of our interests to form a partnership between the academic community, military, regionals and mainline carriers to work together to create a track for pilot training.”

On the subject of air service frequency, Airports Council International North Americas President and CEO Kevin Burke said, “We’ve seen loss of air service at smaller fields. We don’t want to hand over the business to buses and trains. These small air fields are gold for their communities.” He probably wasn’t thinking about the opportunities for Part 135 charter aircraft services that open up when the airlines pull out of a small community airport. But then, Part 135 operators don’t offer the volume of people buying tickets that airports are becoming dependent on for revenue.

Airlines 4 America President Nick Calio thinks big change is necessary. “ATC is key,” he implored. “In every other regulatory government body, they don’t have ATC and FAA under one roof. We think we should have a nonprofit commercial entity for ATC that is funded not by taxes but some other format, and has an independent body that manages it and has industry representation and a pure safety focus to its objective,” he said.

ERA Director General Simon McNamara chuckled and said, “In Europe we’ve got 28 regulatory bodies, different languages, different cultures and one safety body that sits on top of air traffic control. Yet the FAA delivers a service with a 34% less per unit cost than Europe. We’re quite jealous of how simple you have it, so consider yourself lucky.”

When he put it like that, I certainly did!

John Petersen

Converging Technologies Promise Really Different Planes

May 27th, 2015 by John Petersen

If you think aircraft in the future will look like and operate like those we now find familiar, let me try to dissuade you of that.

There are technologies converging that are clearly going to change the essentials of the flying process and experience. Consider these.

Additive manufacturing

The FAA has now cleared the first 3D printed part to fly in a commercial jet engine. GE Aviation, which is making the fuel nozzle for a new generation of jet engine. They say that the 3D-printed nozzles are five times more durable than the previous model. 3D printing allowed engineers to use a simpler design that reduced the number of brazes and welds from 25 to just five.

They have also run a 3D printed micro jet turbine up to 33,000 rpm, marking the first known test of a jet engine built using additive manufacturing.
The CMC parts help with weight and heat management. They are two-thirds lighter than the metal equivalent and can operate at temperatures 20 percent higher than their metallic counterpart, at levels where most alloys grow soft.

Image courtesy of GE Reports.

Image courtesy of GE Reports.

GE claims that it will be manufacturing 100,000 additive parts by 2020 (five years from now). Already they have over three hundred 3D printing machines currently in use throughout the company.

Do you think that that capability will find its way into GA? Of course it will.

Advanced cabin displays

Would you like a biz jet without windows? Something like this?

Image courtesy of Technicon Design

Image courtesy of Technicon Design

You might if the inside looked like this:

Image courtesy of Technicon Design

Image courtesy of Technicon Design

Technicon Design’s Paris office designed the jet to display to 360-degree views that are simulated on internal screens from external cameras that capture the surrounding environment in real time, according to the Daily Mail.

Fox News said the images displayed in the interior cabin—including the walls and even the ceiling—give passengers the feeling of flying through the air in an invisible vessel.

You will be able to project anything on these screens . . . when you get tired of the view outside!

Electric twin

The Airbus Group’s electric E-Fan experimental aircraft made its first public test flight at E-Aircraft Day in Bordeaux, France recently. The electric E-Fan training aircraft is an innovative technology experimental demonstrator based on an all-composite construction.

Airbus plans to certify the next version of its electric E-Fan as a two-place trainer, to be followed by a four-seater. Airbus Group photo.

Airbus plans to certify the next version of its electric E-Fan as a two-place trainer, to be followed by a four-seater. Airbus Group photo.

Their website says Airbus Group plans to further develop the E-Fan technology demonstrator and to produce and market two versions of the aircraft by a subsidiary named VoltAir. The two-seater version E-Fan 2.0 will be a fully electric training aircraft powered only by batteries. The four-seat version E-Fan 4.0 will be a training and general aviation aircraft which will also have a combustion engine within the fuselage to provide an extended range or endurance.

Airbus sees this as the early experience in design and industrialization of an “E-Thrust” hybrid electric regional aircraft in about the 2050 timeframe.

But those are just little “experimental” engines, you say. Well, how about this:

Big, light electric motors

Powerful Ultralight Motor for Electrically Powered Aircraft. Photo credit: www.siemens.com/press

Powerful Ultralight Motor for Electrically Powered Aircraft. Photo credit: www.siemens.com/press

Gizmag reports that “researchers at Siemens have created a new prototype electric motor specifically designed for aircraft that weighs in at just 50 kg (110 lb) and is claimed to produce about 260 kW (348 hp) at just 2,500 RPM. With a quoted power five times greater than any comparable powerplant, the new motor promises enough grunt to get aircraft with take-off weights of up to 1,800 kg (2 ton) off the ground.”

Siemens says that new simulation techniques and sophisticated lightweight construction have enabled the drive system to achieve a unique weight-to-performance ratio of five kilowatts (kW) per kilogram (kg). Comparable electric motors that are used in industrial applications deliver less than one kW per kg. The performance of the drive systems used in electric vehicles is about two kW per kg. Since the new motor delivers its record-setting performance at rotational speeds of just 2,500 revolutions per minute, it can drive propellers directly, without the use of a transmission.

So think about that a minute. How much does your Cessna weigh? (Certainly less than 4,000 pounds I’d guess.) And how many hundreds of pounds does your engine weigh? (The engine in my airplane that generated 350hp was over 800 pounds!)

This little motor will really drive your plane through the air.

Flexible geometry control surfaces

But wait! Even conventional control surfaces are going away.

NASA is doing away with ailerons and flaps! They and the Air Force Research Laboratory and FlexSys are making wings that smoothly change their shape between a range of -2 to 30 degrees to generate the directional inputs for flight. Watch the video here.

NASA photo

NASA photo

These new variable geometry control surfaces increase efficiency and decrease noise. Right now the process is mechanical, but ultimately, material science has already developed the basic materials that change their configuration based only upon electrical signals to material.

These advances are just the beginning—the leading edge—of far more breakthroughs that will dramatically change what it means to both be a pilot and to fly.

Rob Mark

Advancing an Aviation Education … The Hard Way

May 25th, 2015 by Rob Mark
Cessna 150

Cessna 150

Last month I pointed the finger at a couple of unique instructors, both of whom were key to my life of flying airplanes. A few e-mails rightly took me to task wondering about my own role in years of education experience, so this month, I decided to share an early experience from not long after I earned my private certificate. It proves, yet again, that many of us live to be old pilots certainly because of our experience, but sometimes too thanks to plain dumb luck.

I was returning home on a warm July afternoon in a Cessna 150 with maybe 125 hours penned in my logbook. Sky Harbor airport, my base back then in Chicago’s north suburbs, is long gone, but was remembered as a single north-south, hard-surfaced runway about 3,000 feet long. The approach from the north was clear, except for the Walgreen’s HQ a mile or so away, but there were trees near the approach from the south, something the local town refused to trim because they were considered a necessary element to the graveyard they shaded near the runway 36 numbers.

My FAA examiner told me a few months earlier my private was a lesson to learn, but sometimes we simply don’t know what we don’t know.

On final approach that afternoon I saw another aircraft on the runway and knew I needed to keep an eye on him in case he didn’t clear. But of course they always did so I added flaps 40 and of course a bunch of power to make up for all the drag. For those of you who fly the 152 these days, you have no feeling for just how much drag “flaps 40” on a Cessna 150 added to an approach. Let’s just say it’s a bunch and was one reason the later 152s were limited to flaps 30. In the July humidity I could feel there wasn’t much elevator room to play with as the nose pitched up and down, but it was flying.

Then the other airplane stopped dead on the runway and I knew a go-around was needed, one that meant full power and a climb to the side of the runway to keep the airplane on the runway in site.

With all that drag and full power, the 150 kept trying to pitch up and I kept pushing back to avoid a stall. So there I was pushing the nose down for safety and not climbing and now scared to death to let the nose pitch up because it might stall. I did the next best thing … I just kept flying straight ahead creeping up a few feet at a time watching the hangars pass below with people obviously staring up wondering what I was doing.

Readers are probably wondering why I didn’t raise some of the flaps to dump some of that drag. Great question. I guess I didn’t remember much from training about go-arounds or a good way to milk the flaps up while close to the ground right then. I’m sure I must have seen a go-around at least once or twice in flight training but right then and there I kept thinking I was about to fall out of the sky.

At this point, I’m maybe half a mile north of the airport still no more than about 200 feet agl. when it came to me … the flaps were still down. So if the flaps hanging down was the problem, getting rid of them was the solution I thought. I remembered about then not to bring them all up at once, but honestly I was pretty scared watching the roof of he Walgreens HQ coming up beneath me and the Interstate just beyond.

Cessna 150 flap switch

Courtesy, ken@cessna150.net

I hit the flap switch to bled off the drag and instantly felt the old burgundy colored airplane leap ahead … that is, just before it started to fall. The early Cessna 150s had a flap switch that had gotten more than their fair share of novice pilots into trouble because it used three positions … down, neutral and up. In order to milk the flaps up, I should have brought the switch to up long enough to return to flaps 30 before returning the switch to neutral.

Of course, that’s not what I did. In my haste to climb, I just flicked the switch and in about 15 seconds went from flaps 40 to 0. The part about flaps adding lift seemed to have completely escaped me too I guess.

I only avoided parking the 150 in the Walgreens’ employee lot that afternoon by yanking back on the control wheel more out of fear than anything else. With all the drag gone and me being the only passenger, the little airplane climbed just fine back to pattern altitude and around the patch for a safe landing a few minutes later.

Forgetting that flap switch was one mistake I never made again. I also made sure I reminded students about it when I became a teacher myself years later. And yes, we practiced plenty of go-arounds before I even sent them out solo.

Mike Busch

When to say “no” to maintenance

May 13th, 2015 by Mike Busch

Ken is the proud owner of a late-model high-performance single-engine airplane. It’s a gorgeous machine, with wall-to-wall glass in the cockpit, a big turbocharged engine, 500 hours on the Hobbs meter, almost no squawks, and still under factory warranty on both engine and airframe. So when Ken took it to a well-known factory-authorized service center for its annual inspection, he expected that it would be relatively painless. Imagine his shock when the shop presented him with an estimate of more than $8,500. That’s when he called me for advice.

I reviewed the shop’s estimate. It started out with a flat-rate charge for the annual inspection (performed in accordance with the manufacturer’s annual inspection checklist) of $2,850. This was 30 hours of labor at the shop’s rate of $95/hour, which in my experience was right on target for this make and model.

Probing deeper

The next item that caught my eye was a $200 estimate for cleaning the engine’s fuel injector nozzles. I used to do such prophylactic nozzle cleaning on my own airplane until about 10 years ago, when I had an illuminating discussion with George Braly (of GAMI and Tornado Alley Turbo fame), who is arguably the world’s expert on fuel nozzles. George pointed out to me that there’s no valid reason to do such periodic nozzle cleaning, because the nozzles do not get dirty in service (since they are continuously being cleaned by a very effective solvent). He told me that in his experience with many thousands of GAMIjector nozzles, virtually all clogged nozzle events occurred shortly after maintenance during which the fuel system was opened up and some foreign material got into the system. That resonated with me, because in the first 12 years I owned my Cessna T310R, I experienced two clogged-nozzle episodes, and both occurred right after maintenance due to grease getting into the fuel system. So I stopped cleaning my nozzles 10 years ago, and haven’t had a clogged nozzle since. I advised Ken to decline the nozzle cleaning.

There was a $300 estimate to replace the O-rings on the brake calipers. I asked Ken whether he had spongy brakes or had any evidence of brake fluid leakage at the calipers. He said no. I suggested he decline the O-ring replacement.

Continental S-20 magnetoThere was a $1,700 estimate for “4-year overhaul of pressurized mags”—$700 for each magneto plus 3 hours to remove and reinstall. The aircraft is equipped with Continental S-20 mags, and the Continental Ignition System Master Service Manual X40000 calls for a 500-hour IRAN (inspect and repair as necessary), not an overhaul. The IRAN typically costs $300 to $400 per mag, depending on what parts need to be replaced. I suggested that Ken instruct the shop to do the 500-hour IRAN instead of the overhaul exchange, which would knock about $700 off the invoice.

There was a $400 estimate to replace the magneto pressurization filter. The filter is clear plastic (actually tinted green) so you can inspect it and see if it needs to be changed. It was clean as a whistle. I suggested that Ken decline the filter change.

Teledyne-Gill G-243 batteryNext was a $800 estimate to replace the battery. The aircraft manufacturer’s checklist recommends replacing it every two years, and Ken’s was two years old. But the battery manufacturer (Teledyne-Gill) recommends doing an annual capacity test and replacing the battery only when its capacity falls below 80% of specs. Using the capacity-test method, these batteries typically last 3 to 5 years before flunking the test. Another thing that bothered me was that the battery—a Gill G-243—cost $395 at Aircraft Spruce, but was listed on the estimate as costing $774. Now I don’t have a problem with shops making a fair profit on the parts they install, but marking up a $395 battery to $774 struck me as a bit much. So I suggested that Ken decline the battery change, wait until the battery flunks its capacity check, and then consider buying the battery and installing it himself.

Then there was a $320 estimate to change the filter in his TKS anti-icing system. The manufacturer recommends changing this filter every 2 years (and his was 2 years old), but in hundreds of filters changed we’ve never seen one that wasn’t spotlessly clean. The shop agreed with this observation. I advised Ken that unless he had some reason to believe someone dumped a Diet Coke into his TKS tank, he should decline the TKS filter change.

Bottom line

Ken called the service center and politely declined the various items that I’d recommended. Ken reported that the shop’s Director of Maintenance had no problem complying with Ken’s instructions, and the invoice wound up some $3,000 lower than it would have been otherwise. That’s enough to buy a fair amount of 100LL, even at today’s prices.

Now many of you are probably thinking that this service center was trying to rip Ken off, and he should never take his airplane back there again. I disagree.

Gavel + wrenchIn today’s litigious world, any mechanic or shop that doesn’t recommend following the manufacturer’s guidance to the letter risks being sued and taken to the cleaners if anything goes wrong. Therefore, in my view, Ken’s service center was almost compelled to present Ken with the estimate that they did. Call it “defensive maintenance” or “CYA” if you wish, but it’s the way things are in today’s post-GARA, non-tort-reform world.

The way I see it, the responsibility for “just saying no” to these over-the-top maintenance recommendations lies with the aircraft owner, not the shop. If the aircraft owner instructs the shop (in writing) that he declines some manufacturer-recommended maintenance task, that takes the shop off the liability hook and allows them to do things the way the owner wants them done without fear of being sued.

Therefore, if an owner wants to avoid paying through the nose for such defensive maintenance, he needs to learn when to say no.

When to say no

Learning when to say no takes a good deal of knowledge and experience, but there are some basic rules. The most important rule is that you never say no to any maintenance procedure that is required by regulation. For example, FAR Part 43 Appendix D requires that every annual inspection on a piston aircraft must include a compression test of the cylinders, cutting open the oil filter to inspect for metal, and running up the engine to check that critical engine operating parameters (oil pressure, static RPM, etc.) are within normal limits. Mechanics are also required to comply with any “Airworthiness Limitations” contained in the manufacturer’s service manual or ICAs. Any applicable Airworthiness Directives must be complied with. All these things are non-negotiable.

Airworthiness definedIt’s also best to avoid saying no to proposed repairs that the inspecting A&P/IA considers to be “airworthiness items.” Those are generally discrepancies that he considers to be safety-of-flight items, and will not be comfortable approving the aircraft for return to service until they are corrected. But don’t be fooled. Many of the items that I suggested Ken decline were listed on the shop’s estimate as “Airworthy Item,” yet when Ken instructed the shop not to do them, they accepted his direction without argument. So just because an item is listed on the estimate as an airworthiness item doesn’t necessarily mean that it really is one. When in doubt, say no and see how the IA responds. If he tells you he’s not comfortable signing off the annual unless you approve the repair, then it’s time to re-think your position.

Good candidates for saying no to include time-directed maintenance recommendations for things that can be readily done on-condition instead. Ken’s battery, pressurization filter, brake O-rings and TKS filter are good examples. (So are most engine and propeller TBOs in my opinion, but not everyone agrees with me.) Consider ignoring the time recommendations and replace or repair these items only when inspection shows that they need to be replaced or repaired. We should only be maintaining things on time (like the 500-hour magneto IRAN) if there’s no practical way to maintain them on-condition.

Also consider saying no to preventive maintenance items intended to prevent failures whose consequences you consider acceptable. For example, replacing your vacuum pump every 500 hours (per the manufacturer’s recommendation) is silly if you have dual vacuum pumps or a standby vacuum system or a backup electric attitude indicator. If a vacuum pump failure doesn’t affect safety of flight, why not simply run it to failure and then replace it? Ditto if you have dual alternators.

Finally, consider saying no to an overhaul if an IRAN will do the job (as with Ken’s mags), and consider saying no to replacing anything that can be repaired instead.

The art of saying no is definitely an acquired skill, but one that can save you a small fortune in reduced maintenance costs once you get the hang of it. Like any acquired skill, practice makes perfect.

Jolie Lucas

Two Mooneys, Eight Paws, Three Pilots and Love

May 6th, 2015 by Jolie Lucas

Two Mooneys, Eight Paws, Three Pilots and Love

Three Mooneys Ready to Go

Three Mooneys Ready to Go

A few weeks ago, I was able to fly my first Pilots N Paws [PNP] mission. The day was a testament to what our General Aviation airplanes can accomplish to give back in service as well as install a permanent smile on our faces.

Gary, the Rescue Pup

Gary, the Rescue Pup

The mission was to help Gary, the twelve-pound Shih Tzu get from the temporary shelter in Long Beach to the San Francisco Bay Area. If you were driving that route, it would take eight and a half hours. But luckily for Gary it was #FlyFast Saturday. His total flight time was under two hours.

The first leg was flown by veteran PNP Mooney pilot, John Baker in his 1993 Bravo. John has flown over 100 dogs and cats on their “freedom flights.” His enthusiasm and zeal for the charity flights for dogs and cats is quite contagious.

Mooney 1, John Baker

Mooney 1, John Baker

After John landed we agreed to meet outside Art Craft Paint. We completed some paperwork and unloaded Gary.

My co-pilot for the day is a great friend, fellow pilot and Mooney Girl, Cat. I thought it was very appropriate that Cat was helping us with the dogs.

Cat and Jolie en route

Cat and Jolie en route

 

 

My four-legged Ambassador was Mooney Lucas Aviation Puppy who is in training to become a therapy dog. Mooney and Gary had a great time getting to know each other while John briefed me on the procedure for the receiving party.

We took a bunch of photos, loaded Mooney-dog in the back seat, got Gary in his crate in the back and departed Santa Maria airport for Livermore. Gary did a super job in flight, he only cried a little bit. One hour and twenty minutes later we touched down in Livermore.

Happy pilots and doggy

Happy pilots and doggy

I cannot begin to express what the flight did for ME. I had so much fun seeing John again, albeit for a brief time. Cat and I jib jabbed all the way up and back. She flies a cute little C152. She could not get over the 150kts over the ground on the way up and 160 kts. on the way home. The satisfaction of bringing Gary to his forever home was wonderful.

I want to encourage my fellow Mooniacs  and all pilots to use their aircraft in service to others. We have these beautiful airplanes. Let’s use them to make our world a better place. I am still grinning about Gary, a fun name for a dog. Then again, mine is named Mooney!

 

Ron Rapp

Those Lousy Checklists

May 1st, 2015 by Ron Rapp

Ah, the checklist. If Shakespeare was a pilot, he’d have written an ode to it.

Once confined to the world of aviation, formal checklist discipline is now common in hospitals, assembly lines, product design, maintenance, and just about any other instance where loss of essential time, money, or bodily function can result from improper procedures or forgotten items.

Some pilots can’t imagine flying without one. Like a child wandering the yard without their favorite blanket, they’d quite literally be lost without that laminated piece of paper guiding them through each phase of flight. I’ve seen pilots who seemed to enjoy using the checklist more than the actual flying.

Others have a difficult time understanding why a written list is needed at all, especially in simple or familiar aircraft. “Use a flow or mnemonic and let’s get going!”, they’d say. While I disagree with that attitude, I understand where it comes from: too many badly-designed checklists.

As anyone who’s operated a wide variety of aircraft types (I’ve flown over 60) can tell you, poor checklists are more often the rule than the exception, and the worst of them will leave a long-lasting bad taste in your mouth. They disrupt the flow of a flight much the way an actor with poor timing can disrupt a scene.

One of the great aviation mysteries is why so many lousy checklists continue to exist. They’re not limited to small aircraft, either. The manufacturer-provided checklist for the Gulfstream IV, for example, is comically long. I don’t know who designs these things, but I highly doubt it’s the line pilot who’s going to be using it day in and day out.

The answer to such cosmic riddles is far above my pay grade. What I can say for sure is that it’s vital for aviators to understand both the purpose for a checklist and the proper way to use one.

The purpose should be self-evident: to ensure that nothing important gets missed. Lowering the landing gear, setting the pressurization controller, those sorts of items. The key word is important, and I think that’s where many checklists fall apart because once the document gets too long, human nature dictates that pilots will either skip items inadvertently or leave the entire thing stowed.

Proper checklist usage? Now that’s something a bit more complex. When an aviator is new to an aircraft, the checklist serves as a “do” list. In other words, each item is read and then the action is performed. Even if a cockpit flow exists and is being taught, the list will have to be read and performed one step at a time because the pilot is simply unfamiliar with the location of switches and controls.

As time goes by, the flow and/or checklist is slowly memorized. Eventually the pilot reaches the point where they’re actually faster and more comfortable performing the items from memory. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact, it’s a good thing, because it allows the checklist to serve as a CHECK list. Once everything is done, you quickly read through the items on the page to ensure you haven’t forgotten anything.

In my experience, it’s not the neophyte who is at greatest risk for missing something, it’s the grizzled veteran who whips through the flows at lightning speed and then neglects to use the checklist at all. It’s overconfidence. They’re so sure they haven’t forgotten anything of life-altering consequence. And to be honest, they’re usually right — but that’s not the point.

I see this kind of failure quite frequently when flying glass panel aircraft with pilots who are computer-centric Type-A personalities. They’re literally too fast with the flows and need to slow down a bit.

Caution is also warranted when circumstances force a pilot to perform tasks out of their normal order. Often this happens due to interruption from ATC, line personnel, passengers, weather, or even another pilot.

Speaking of weather, here’s a case in point: I was in New Jersey getting a jet ready for departure during a strong rainstorm. We had started up the airplane to taxi to a place on the ramp where it was somewhat protected from the weather so our passengers wouldn’t get quite as soaked when they arrived. That simple action broke up the usual preflight exterior flow and as a result I neglected to remove the three landing gear pins. Thankfully the other pilot caught it during his walk-around, but it shows how easily that sort of thing can happen.

The best checklists, the ones that are truly effective, share some common traits. For one thing, they’re short and sweet. They hit the critical items in a logical order and leave the rest out.

In an aerobatic aircraft, a pre-takeoff check would cover the fuel selector, canopy, fuel mixture, flight controls, etc. In a swept-wing business jet, on the other hand, the critical items are different. Flaps become a vital item, because unlike other aircraft, if those aren’t set right the airplane can use far more runway than you’ve got available. It may not even fly at all.

Checklist design and usage is an under-appreciated skill. As with many things in aviation, when it’s done right it’s a thing of elegance. Art, almost. So next time you’re flying, take a critical look at your checklist and the way you use it. How do you — and it — measure up?

Amy Laboda

A Tale of Two Air Shows: Aero Friedrichshafen and Sun ‘n Fun

April 24th, 2015 by Amy Laboda

Springtime after the longest winters are often times the most special, and spring 2015 is no different. Both the flowers and the dormant fliers, particularly of light aircraft, bloom anew. Two April-based air show / fly-ins fire up what may prove to be a most interesting season: Aero Friedrichshafen, in Germany, and Sun ‘n Fun, in Lakeland, Florida. And the two shows could not be more different.

Aero’s highlights this year were electric—literally! The show focused on electric propulsion and capturing power from the sun to fly. Why? In Europe pilots have suffered through decades of unnaturally high fuel costs that have effectively tamped down their enthusiasm for general aviation. Green fuel initiatives, from bio-diesel to electric are offering thousands of pilots and would-be pilots hope that general aviation can thrive again by bypassing fossil fuels completely.

Meanwhile, in the U.S. we are celebrating a winter of lower fuel pricing, and a springtime that has those prices holding steady. New legislation eliminating the need for a Third Class medical for some GA pilots is in committee and could help keep older pilots flying while encouraging more recreational fliers to join the flock. On the professional side of the aviation industry labor shortages are beginning to sting. A dearth of both airline-ready pilots and mechanics are putting the stops on growth at regional airlines around the U.S.

As I write this Sun ‘n Fun’s Fly-in is in full swing and vendors at the event are excited that real buyers are on the Lakeland Linder Airport with money in their pockets ready to spend. To spur them on Piper Aircraft and Mooney Aircraft are both offering new airframes, at the top for Piper (the M600 single-engine turboprop) and at the bottom for Mooney (a diesel-powered trainer). Superior Aviation set forth a three-cylinder, 100 hp diesel engine replacement for the Rotax 912 piston-engine, and revealed plans to scale up to larger diesel powerplants.

Interestingly, several airlines, both regional and national, and a dozen aviation training centers (universities to FBOs) were recruiting onsite, too. Where to find more commercial pilots, A&P mechanics, and certified dispatch professionals was a big topic of conversation there. The good news is that the Sun ‘n Fun charitable arm and its funding partners are working hard on the problem, reaching out to youth through educational projects and scholarships in high school and colleges around Central Florida (and beyond) to teach them the wonders of aviation, and all of its potential.

The best news, though, is that even with their differences, both Aero Friedrichshafen and Sun ‘n Fun are revealing the upbeat, optimistic sentiment prevailing among general aviation pilots this spring. Hey, it’s getting warmer, the sun is shining a little longer every day, and the skies are showing their blue. There is no time like the present to start working on the future. Get up and get flying!

Rob Mark

Instructors to Remember … and Forget

April 21st, 2015 by Rob Mark

After 40 years in both the flying and communicating side of the aviation business, it’s almost impossible for me to remember that I almost allowed my first flight instructor to drive me completely away from the business many years ago. Although he’s long gone – I hope – the lessons still seem significant enough to pass on today at a time when the industry’s hunting and pecking for every possible student pilot. Lucky for me, another CFI entered my life years later and completely turned my world around.

7FC TriChamp

Photo courtesy Chris Houston

In 1966 I was a 17-year old freshman at the University of Illinois’ Institute of Aviation and anxious to learn to fly. I never doubted my goal … to be an airline pilot.

In those days, student pilots and instructors at the school were randomly paired and I drew a guy named Tom. We flew the mighty 90-hp 7FC Tri-Champ with the student in front and the instructor behind.

School began in late September with ground school and the “Box,” a name we’d all attached to the Link trainer we were expected to master before we took to the air. I never realized I was a bit claustrophobic until the first time Tom sat me in the box, closed the door and pulled the cover down on top of me leaving me in nearly total darkness. We didn’t brief much before we began so not surprisingly, the sessions didn’t go well since I never really understood the point of moving a control stick inside a dark little room as dials and gauges spun like mad before my eyes. Looking back on it today, I realize Tom talked a lot, asked few questions and simply assumed I was following. Another was that I hadn’t yet flown the airplane. Finally one day I did.Link_Trainer

I clearly loved every moment in the air despite being nearly clueless about what I was supposed to be doing, except for reminders from the back seat like … “what are you doing that for?” It was at about the five-hour mark that things started to get really ugly because I just didn’t seem to be coming together. I remember landing practice. Right near the pavement on the first few, Tom started yelling … “Flare, flare, flare.” Crunch! The Tri-Champ was pretty forgiving despite hitting hard enough to knock the headset off my head a few times. After an hour of that we taxied in and shut down. Tom grabbed my shoulders and shook me hard from the back seat. “Why didn’t you flare when I told you too?” Somewhat worn out I just stared out the windshield and asked, “What’s a flare?”

I actually managed to solo the next week and was cleared to the pattern alone which helped my confidence enormously. But soon I was back in the Tri-Champ and the Link with Tom and the yelling never ended. To make matters worse, he began slapping me along side the head and yelling when I screwed up. With 15 hours total time, I finally broke. At 17 I knew I would never learn to fly. I quit school AND flying and never touched the controls of another airplane.

Until …

Jump ahead five years as I arrived to my last Air Force duty station. How I got there is too long a story right now. It’s what happened next that’s important.

Within a few days of arrival I located the base flying club. Outside the main door near the aircraft parking area sat a small set of stadium seats near the fence. I’d spend time there watching the Piper Cherokees come and go, some with two people inside, some with just one. I didn’t go into the clubhouse though.

One day, as one of the airplanes pulled up near the fence where I was eating my lunch, the engine didn’t shut down. The guy in the right seat seemed to be engaged in a conversation with the pilot. Finally the door opened, the guy in the right seat hopped out and shut the door patting it a few times after he did. As the airplane pulled away the right seat guy came over to the seats saying hi as he did. Half an hour later the Cherokee returned and the guy next to me left to greet him. Later I learned the pilot was on his second supervised solo and the fellow who’d waved to me was his instructor.

Maybe aRob in a 605 copy week or so later I’m back out on the seats just watching the airplanes when that same instructor comes out of the clubhouse door. He looks around and happens to see me so he walks over to the fence. “Why aren’t you out there flying on such a beautiful day,” he asks. “I’m not a pilot.” “Really?” he says. “You sure hang around here a lot for a guy who doesn’t fly. My name’s Ray. Stop in one of these days,” he said before turning away toward one of the airplanes. The challenge glove had been thrown down.

I didn’t go back to the viewing stand the rest of that week. It was simply too scary to think of being close to something I really loved but had already failed at.

The next week though, I did go back, but only back to the seats. To this day I think Ray was watching for me because he came out of the clubhouse door and waved … “Well, are you coming in?” I sighed deeply but got up and walked over and in the clubhouse door. And that, as they say, was that. Over some coffee, I told Ray my story of failure. Didn’t even slow him down because an hour later we went out flying … and I never stopped again. I went on to earn my ATP and my own flight instructor ratings, fly for a couple of airlines, a charter company and a couple of Part 91 corporate flight departments. As an aviation writer, I even managed to grab a couple of hours in an Airbus A-380. It has all been just so sweet.

My instructor Tom nearly ended my aviation career, but luckily there was another fabulous instructor like Ray out there waiting to offer me a hand up with a little encouragement, which is all I apparently needed.

Today I wonder how many instructors like Tom are still out there. Trust me, one like him is one too many.

So do us all in the industry a favor and offer a ride to that kid sitting outside the fence if you have the chance. You might just change their life.

Ron Rapp

The Weakest Link

April 16th, 2015 by Ron Rapp

If one particular component of an aircraft was determined to be the root cause of 90% of all accidents, wouldn’t we have an Airworthiness Directive out on it? Wouldn’t it be replaced completely? Well we do have such a component: the pilot.

We’re at the point where this isn’t just an academic exercise. A pilot-free airliner or business aircraft is well within the realm of today’s technology. NASA has been researching single-pilot airline cockpits; that gets us halfway there. Corporate aircraft ranging from King Airs to Citations have been certified and operated by a single pilot for decades.

On the other hand, after the Germanwings disaster virtually every airline now has a policy ensuring there are never less than two people on the flight deck — the exact opposite. So which way should we be heading?

Your average pilot probably doesn’t think of him or herself as the weakest link. I certainly don’t. But those pesky statistics…

It brings to mind the illusory superiority bias, that statistically improbably belief of being above average. The most famous example concerns drivers:

According to a study published in a Swedish Psychology journal (Acta Psychologica) a whopping 93% of Americans consider themselves above average drivers. The sample consisted of students, and while the study was conducted in multiple countries, it because obvious that Americans saw themselves as even better drivers than their Swedish counterparts. The Swedish came in at a much lower 69%.

In another similar study by McCormick, Walkey and Green (1986) drivers rated them 80% above average.

Despite extensive training on hazardous attitudes and ADM, pilots aren’t immune to this phenomenon. We’re still human. In fact, the successful, driven type of personality our avocation attracts probably make it more common than in the automotive world. If 93% of drivers feel they’re above average, one wonders how high the needle swings on the pilot population. Who among us wants to admit that despite the massive investment of time, effort, and money we are still subpar?

Are we the weakest link?

Are we the weakest link?

That sort of acknowledgement can be pretty hard on a person’s self-image, but aviators should care about this phenomenon because nine out of 10 accidents are attributed to pilot error. In other words, we literally are the weakest link.

I certainly include myself in that statement. If I had a dime for every mistake I’ve made over the years! Sometimes I think I’ve made them all. In fact a friend of mine — a professional pilot who is known as an excellent aviator — once said that in reviewing the NASA-style safety reports made by line pilots at his company, “I find I’ve made every one of those mistakes myself. Every single one.”

To err may be human, but it’s grating to find myself making the same mistake multiple times; doing so runs a little too close to Einstein’s definition of insanity. For example, I’ve flown while suffering from active food poisoning on two occasions. The circumstances were not identical, but you’d think I’d have learned enough from one episode to have avoided the other.

The first case hit me during a picnic at the Santa Ynez Airport. I had two choices: stay in town or fly home. I chose the latter, and while I made it back without incident, it was a lousy decision to takeoff when feeling so bad.

The second incident occurred at an aerobatic contest in Delano, California. These contests take place in areas where it’s hot and windy. Pilots assist with contest operation when they’re not flying, meaning we’re busy and spend most of the day out in the sun. It’s common to end up dehydrated even while drinking plenty of water. I ate something which didn’t agree with me, and by the time I realized how bad the poisoning was, I’d already flown a hard aerobatic sequence.

This is why I’ve come to be a big believer in the IMSAFE checklist. Amy Laboda just wrote about the importance of this checklist a few days ago. If we can ensure the biological component of our flying is in airworthy shape, the odds of a safe flight rise considerably. IMSAFE isn’t even a complete checklist. It doesn’t mention nutrituion, for example — something my wife will tell you I sometimes ignore.

Pilots may be the cause of most accidents, but in my experience they’re also the cause of many “saves”. Quantas 32, Apollo 13, United 232, Air Canada 143, and USAir 1549 are just a few famous examples of human ingenuity keeping what should have been an unrecoverable mechanical failure at bay. I know of several general aviation incidents which turned out well due to the creative efforts of the pilots. These typically don’t make the evening news, and I imagine there are countless more we’ll never hear about, because when a flight lands without incident it doesn’t generate much attention or publicity. Accident statistics do us a disservice in that regard.

This is why I feel removing humans from the cockpit is not the answer. Commercial flying already holds claim as the safest form of transportation. Light general aviation is a different story, but that’s the price we pay for the incredible freedom and diversity offered by Part 91. No, we would be better served by focusing on improved aeronautical decision making, self-assessment, and training. As I’ve found through bitter experience, it’s a constant battle. Just because you’ve made a thousand flights without incident doesn’t mean your next one will be safe. It’s up to each of us to maintain vigilance throughout every single one of our airborne days.

Statistically speaking, we are the weakest link. But we don’t have to be.

Mike Busch

How to destroy your engine in one minute

April 13th, 2015 by Mike Busch

At least once a year for as long as I can remember, I have been contacted by an aircraft owner whose piston aircraft engine was destroyed or severely damaged by a destructive detonation or pre-ignition event. In one recent 12-month period, I encountered three such incidents.

One incident involved British Cirrus SR-20 powered by a 200 horsepower Continental IO-360-ES engine. The plane was equipped with an Avidyne Entegra MFD with an integrated engine monitoring system called “EMAX.”

The CHT data downloaded from the EMAX system tells the short story of this engine’s demise:

SR-20 pre-ignition event

Click on image to open a higher-resolution version.

Everything looked fine until about two minutes after the pilot applied takeoff power, at which point the #1 cylinder’s CHT began to climb rapidly compared to the other five cylinders. At the three-minute mark after brake release—with the aircraft at roughly 2,000’ AGL—CHT #1 rose above 400°F and set off a high-CHT alarm on the MFD.

CHT #1 continued its rapid rise—nearly 1°F per second—that continued unabated until the piston and cylinder head were destroyed approximately five minutes after takeoff power was applied and two minutes after the CHT alarm was displayed. At that point, since the cylinder was no longer capable of combustion, CHT #1 started plummeting.

We can’t be sure just how hot CHT #1 got because the Avidyne EMAX system “pegs” at 500°F. A reasonable guess is that the CHT peaked somewhere between 550°F and 600°F. No cylinder or piston can tolerate such conditions for very long, and this one obviously didn’t.

Aftermath

Not long after CHT #1 went off-scale on the MFD, the pilot realized something was very wrong, and pulled the power way back. But he was a couple of minutes late, and the engine was already toast. Here’s what the #1 piston looked like after the event:

Piston with corner melting

Click on image for higher-resolution version.

Note the melted corners of the piston crown, the destruction of the top compression ring lands, and the severe metal erosion above the piston pin. (Much of this molten metal wound up inside the crankcase and contaminated the bearings and oil passages.) Also note the severely hammered appearance of the piston crown, the classic signature of heavy detonation. The cylinder head was found to have a big chunk of metal missing from it. Both spark plugs were destroyed by the event as well.

This engine was a low-time Continental factory engine, so the owner figured that the severe engine damage would be covered under Continental’s warranty. I advised him not to bother filing a warranty claim, because I’ve never known Continental to give warranty consideration for a destructive detonation or pre-ignition event. Continental considers this to be operational abuse, not a defect in materials or workmanship, and therefore not covered by warranty. (For what it’s worth, I agree with Continental’s position on this.) The owner didn’t believe me and filed a warranty claim anyway. Continental promptly and unequivocally denied the claim, just as I predicted.

The moral of the story is that it is important for aircraft owners to have a good digital engine monitor installed, to know the telltale symptoms of destructive detonation and pre-ignition, and to act fast when those symptoms appear. You may have less than one minute to react if you want to save your engine.

Another incident

Here’s another similar case that occurred to a Beech Bonanza very shortly after takeoff. The annotated JPI data for this event is courtesy of General Aviation Modifications Inc. (GAMI):

Preignition event

Click on image for a higher-resolution version.

This time, it was the #5 cylinder that experienced thermal runaway and pre-ignition. It was an even more severe event than the one suffered by the Cirrus, and took only two minutes from the application of takeoff power to the complete destruction of the #5 piston, which wound up with a large hole melted through the piston crown:

Holed Piston

Click on image for a higher-resolution version.

Now that’s ugly!

In yet another case (for which I unfortunately have no photos), a drop-dead gorgeous Lancair IV-P kitplane powered by a fire-breathing 350-hp TCM TSIO-550 engine went up for its first test flight after 10 years of laborious building time by the owner. Within minutes, the airplane was back on the ground with an engine that was totally destroyed. A forensic post-flight evaluation revealed that the magnetos had been timed approximately 10 degrees advanced from the proper timing. That turned out to be a $50,000 mistake.

The Lancair’s instrument panel was wall-to-wall glass, including an ultra-sophisticated digital engine monitoring system. The engine monitor was literally crying out for attention throughout the short test flight, but the test pilot never noticed its warnings until the engine cratered.

What causes this?

There are a number of things that can cause or contribute destructive events like these. I’ve already mentioned one: advanced ignition timing. It’s astonishing how often we see engines with the magneto timing advanced several degrees from spec. (E.g., 25° BTDC when the engine data plate calls for 22° BTDC.) Even a couple of degrees is enough to significantly reduce the detonation margin of the engine. Add a hot day and perhaps a cooling baffle that isn’t quite up to snuff, and BOOM!

Owners should be particularly alert for mis-timed magnetos whenever maintenance is done that involves magneto removal or adjusting magneto timing. (More often than not, these occur during the annual inspection.) If mag timing is advanced, you’ll notice that your EGTs are lower and your CHTs are higher than what you were seeing prior to maintenance. (Retarded timing results in the opposite: higher EGTs and lower CHTs.) If you notice this after the airplane comes out of maintenance, take it back to the shop and have the mag timing re-checked. It’s a quick check and could save your engine (not to mention your gluteus maximus). Magnetos are required to be timed within one degree of the timing specified on the engine’s data plate, and any error should be in the retarded direction.

MP and FF guage comboAnother common culprit is inadequate fuel flow on takeoff. When taking off from a near-sea-level airport—or from any elevation if you’re flying a turbocharged airplane—you need to see fuel flow that’s right up against the red-line on the gauge (or the maximum fuel flow shown in the POH). Unlike most other gauges on your panel, hitting red-line on the fuel-flow gauge (or even going a smidgen over) is a good thing, not a bad thing. Takeoff fuel flow is a lot like tire pressure—a bit too much is a whole lot better than a bit too little. Anything less than red-line fuel flow on takeoff reduces the engine’s detonation margin, and significantly less can reduce it enough to cause a catastrophic event.

Not long ago, a client of my maintenance-management firm had a prop-strike incident that required a teardown inspection of the engine. When the inspection was complete and the engine was reinstalled in the airplane, the owner picked up the airplane from the engine shop and flew it back to his home base airport. Upon arriving there, he informed us that the fuel flow was 3 GPH below red-line on takeoff, and asked that we schedule a service appointment to have the fuel flow adjusted.

I was flabbergasted. What was this owner thinking? Why didn’t he abort the takeoff immediately when he noticed that the fuel flow was 3 GPH short, and ask the engine shop to adjust it? Why would he fly the airplane home in that condition? What part of “inadequate detonation margin” didn’t he understand?

Yet another cause is a partially clogged fuel injector nozzle. This can occur anytime, but most frequently occurs shortly after the aircraft comes out of maintenance because that’s the most likely time for foreign material to get into the fuel system. (I’ve had two serious clogged-nozzle episodes in my airplane over the past 25 years, and both occurred shortly after an annual inspection.)

Save your engine!

ThrottleRegardless of the cause, the solution is not rocket science. There are two simple rules that will almost always prevent these sorts of destructive events from occurring:

First, check your fuel flow gauge early on every takeoff roll. If the fuel flow is not at red-line or very close to it, reject the takeoff and sort things out on the ground. (The exception is takeoffs at high density altitudes in normally-aspirated airplanes, and detonation is quite unlikely under those conditions.)

Second, set your engine monitor CHT alarm to 400°F or less for Continental engines and 420°F or less for Lycoming engines. (On my own Continental-powered airplane, I have my alarm set to 390°F.) When the alarm goes off, do whatever it takes right now to bring the CHT back down below 400°F. Verify that the mixture is full-rich. Turn on the boost pump if it isn’t already on. Open the cowl flaps if you have them. And if CHT triggers the alarm and appears to be rising rapidly, throttle back aggressively to stop the thermal runaway. Don’t be shy about doing these things immediately, because you may only have a minute or two to act before your engine craters.

(Oh, and if your airplane isn’t equipped with a digital engine monitor with CHT alarm capability, do yourself a favor and install one. Trust me, it’ll pay for itself quickly.)

When you get on the ground, put the airplane in the shop and have the spark plugs removed and inspected for damage, the cylinders borescoped, and the magneto timing checked. If takeoff fuel flow was short of red-line, have it adjusted before further flight.