Features

Weve been doing this long enough to remember when the extent of new avionics upgrades included a couple of flip-flop nav/coms and an audio panel. Even back then, some owners stumbled with otherwise simple switchology. Worse case was missing a radio call. Things have changed. Todays avionics upgrades, however, usually involve tightly integrated glass and advanced automation. Just learning how to power up all those neat toys usually requires more thought and planning than the nav/coms of 20 years ago. The safety implications are obvious; the operational ones perhaps somewhat less.

We admit it: The modern autopilot is a marvelous technological innovation, capable of smoothly flying even antique airplanes better than most of us on our best days. Especially when operating in the en route environment, its usually on, and doing its thing so we can concentrate on the scenery. Its also useful in other flight modes, of course, especially in the clag. Letting George do it frees our mental bandwidth for chart folding, communicating with ATC and planning the upcoming approach to minimums.

Its no great secret that nearly all new-production aircraft now have glass cockpits and advanced devices such as weather data link. Even technologies such as synthetic vision have become the new norm. In a way, the term technically advanced aircraft (TAA) has become a misnomer but it is still widely recognized as a tag line for a variety of related issues-including TAA training.

I once counted as many as 10 pitch pumps between a jet transport arriving at 50 feet above the runway and touchdown. As the power came to idle (a bit further down the runway than necessary), the copilot planked it down with a predictable, rather heavy kerplunk. All survived. And they could use the airplane again. But theres got to be a better way. Its the last couple hundred feet where many pilots lose the finesse, presuming they had any to begin with. Its the case whether operating VFR or IFR, since most operations this close to a runway are visual.

Before we can get to the runway-or the FBO-we have to taxi. Its easy to conceive of the taxi portion of our flight operations to be akin to driving a car, but the only things they have in common is their two-dimensional nature. Instead, taxiing is an operation requiring a skill and experience level similar to landings. Especially since were often closer to other objects than at any other time. How to taxi depends on several variables, including time of day, visibility, aircraft type, the pavement (or lack of it) and its condition, plus surface traffic, among others. But if we focus on a few elements of the taxi operation and pay attention, we should be fine.

When it comes to botched landings, Ive certainly had my share. In perhaps my worst one, I vividly remember plonking a 182 down on a paved, beachside runway many moons ago. About halfway through a series of six or so times the airplanes nosewheel contacted the runway, I managed to inform my passengers, “This is the worst landing Ive ever made.” Lucky them. Still, we survived the ordeal, and were able to fly the airplane home later that day.

A Cathay Pacific Airways Airbus A330-342, powered by two Rolls-Royce Trent 777-60 engines, experienced a loss of thrust in both engines during approach. The airplane landed at 230 knots with its two engines producing about 20- and 70-percent power respectively. The pilots apparently had no control over engine power. The airplane was landed safely and no injuries were reported.

New motorcyclists often ask how much they should spend for a helmet. The flippant answer is, “How much is your head worth?” While not very satisfying, its true to a great extent: The helmets offering the best protection and comfort are typically the most expensive. This is largely true for ELTs; the solution most likely to enable a timely rescue under adverse conditions is probably going to cost a lot. As pilots, we constantly balance cost, risk, safety, practicality and utility. There are always trade-offs to weigh in making just about any decision. Now, we can add ELTs to the list of items whose cost we must balance against the risks well encounter and the degree of safety we want to achieve.

If youve flown much in front of a Garmin G1000 or Avidyne system equipped with datalinked weather, you know they can deliver nearly as much information as an FSS briefing or a Duat session. While datalink weather was never intended to substitute for a full weather briefing, the reality is many pilots use it that way. But does it substitute for a full-up weather briefing, practically or legally? The answer to the first question is “maybe,” but to the second, its a fuzzy “no.” Still, getting your weather brief literally “on the fly” in the cockpit can save a bunch of time. If the route is familiar and conditions relatively mild, the only thing youll miss is the FSS briefers closing plea for Pireps.

Its all but settled wisdom that a good landing is always preceded by a good approach. But define good? Does “good” mean you had the numbers nailed from the point you turned into the downwind? Or can you call an approach good if you sailed over the numbers on speed and kissed the pavement to make the first turnoff, even though you started too high and too fast and got behind on flap and gear extension? The second answer is the best one, in our view, because it implies two things: airmanship and judgment. The airmanship part means you have the skill to coax the airplane toward the right speed and attitude to land safely if not prettily. Judgment means you know when youre too far outside the envelope to even try to salvage an approach.