Aviation Safety

The primary flight training experience doesn’t adequately prepare most students for the real world of getting from Point A to Point B. Conventional wisdom, often conferred upon us during that primary training phase, teaches us to make an either/or decision about launching on a proposed flight. Unfortunately, the “go/no-go” decision is more complex than that, and the question must be answered using risk management techniques. The answers will be different for departures, while en route and when conducting an approach to the destination.

I remember my first flight as left-seater in a TAA (technically advanced aircraft). Too. Many. Buttons. And each switch, knob and button had multiple roles, depending on my stage of flight and the information I wanted to pull up or program into it. And harmony? Well, other than the integrated glass panels available on then-new Cirrii and Cessnas, those first TAAs were hybrids of systems from Avidyne, Bendix/King, Chelton, Dynon and Garmin. The logic of pulling up information or programming them was just different enough between the companies to make you cross-eyed trying to remember it all.

One of the keys to safe and successful instrument flight is paying attention to details. Often the difference between arriving at your destination uneventfully and not arriving there at all after diverting is hidden in the notes and symbols on an approach chart. What does it mean when a procedure is marked as “not authorized”? Doesn’t ATC protect you by refusing to clear you for an unauthorized procedure?

In their older years, my parents were cheapskates. When I visited them in their Southern Texas retirement community, they always were delighted to share their favorite places, those with senior discounts, dollar-breakfast specials and cheap all-you-can-eat buffets. The same proved true when buying unleaded: I thought it odd they would drive six miles round-trip to save $0.05 a gallon. After my father filled his tank, I asked how much he had put in. Twelve gallons, he answered; he just saved 60 cents. I pointed out it took us 15 minutes to save 60 cents, so he was paying himself about $2.40 an hour…just a little observation. His answer was: 1) he’s retired, so he likes saving money, 2) polite people keep their math to themselves, and, 3) nobody likes a smart ass.

One of the most dramatic demonstrations of the ways in which airplanes handle differently as speed drops came several years ago at the hands of a Bellanca Super Decathlon. I was getting some dual, but was having trouble adjusting to its lack of wing flaps. Normally, when I want to slow down, I throw out the landing gear and then the flaps. Since none of that was working with the Super-D, my landing approaches were all over the place as I wrestled with how it managed energy.

My only real experience with of helicopters results from serving as self-loading freight on a handful of occasions. I know rotorcraft flying involves many similarities to fixed-wing operations: The basic FARs applying to rotorcraft pilots are the same ones governing fixed-wing drivers, for example. The charts often are the same; so are airport operations.

In February’s issue, I used this space to discuss efforts to deregulate FAA requirements for some pilots to hold a medical certificate while serving as pilot in command. After the FAA failed to act on a 2012 petition from AOPA and EAA, the two organizations began working with interested members of Congress to develop appropriate legislation. That bill, H.R. 3708, was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in December, and presently enjoys 93 cosponsors. On March 11, 2014, companion bill S. 2103, was introduced in the U.S. Senate. It has nine cosponsors.

It was great to see Jeb Burnside’s February article, “Doing It Yourself,” on owner-performed preventative maintenance (PM) tasks allowed by the FARs. Beside the economic benefits such effort, an aircraft owner will be much more in tune with his or her aircraft and its operating condition. Having been fortunate to have A&P/IAs willing to allow me to help and learn the aircraft during annual inspections and other maintenance endeavors, I am much more informed on issues that arise with continued aircraft operation, and I can give an A&P a heads up on something that may or may not need attention, and I have greater understanding and confidence in the aircraft systems. As Jeb stated, “…it can be a natural extension of your ownership experience,” and I will add rewarding as well.

February 2, 2014, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. Gates Learjet Corp. 35AAt about 2230 Eastern time, the airplane was involved in a ground crew injury during engine start and taxi in preparation for a Part 135 medical transport flight. The pilot, co-pilot and two cabin crewmembers were not injured, and the airplane was not damaged, but a ground […]

We all have been there. You’re on a certificate or rating checkride and you make one little mistake—nothing huge, nothing that puts the outcome of the flight or the practical test in jeopardy—yet. The examiner, who has been discreetly scribbling away on a notepad throughout your performance, ticks something off, but shows only a carefully schooled poker-face. You don’t hear, “Stop the flight.” So you continue. But you get a little rattled. Come on, everyone does! The examiner doesn’t care, though. What you do next is the important part: Can you stop the fault-chain you triggered with your first error?