Aviation Safety

If your primary training experience was like mine, my instructor and I spent a lot of time coaxing a tired trainer up to altitude, only to come right back down. Much of the time, it was-hot-south-Georgia-in-the-summertime hot-and the little 150 in which I sweated out my private did okay, all things considered. It was pretty far removed from being a homesick angel, however. Spins werent in the curriculum then, but we did a bunch of stalls and slow flight. After each abrupt descent, we again explored the 150s best climb rate configuration and engine cooling capability. Of course, a 150 doesnt lose that much altitude in a stall, even if aggravated by a sweaty student pilot, himself perhaps aggravated. But, we still took the time to get at least 3000 feet between us and anything hard. Thankfully, we never came close to needing all that room. Since then, as I checked out in larger, faster and heavier airplanes-and obtained spin training-Ive taken to wanting even more air beneath me before slow-flight or stalls. The issue, of course, is what happens if the airplane enters an inadvertent spin or I screw up the stall recovery. Better to be safe (have too much altitude) than sorry (have not enough). As we will see this month, as airplane weight, performance and complexity increase, so should your minimum altitude for stalls and slow-speed work. This is especially true when neither the pilot receiving instruction nor the instructor are all that familiar with the airplane.

The pilot reported a loud “pop” just before entering the pattern. When he extended the gear, the green “gear down” light would not come on. A fly-by revealed the left main gear was in transit. A gear-up landing ensued. Inspection revealed the left main gear actuator (p/n 9882015-2) housing was cracked across the forward attach bolt hole. The cracked housing allowed the piston rack to jump gears on the pinion gear attached to the main gear leg. This area is inspected each 100 hours for cracks and defects very carefully, (using) lights and inspection mirrors. Time since last inspection: 25.0 hours.

At some point during aircraft ownership, owners are faced with the prospect of a post-maintenance flight test with a technician or shop representative riding shotgun. Depending on the level of maintenance the shop performed on the aircraft, a lot can go astray-and were not just talking about in-flight emergencies (although the odds of one are higher after heavy maintenance). And even relatively simple owner-performed maintenance chores, like oil changes or brake-pad replacement, have been known to create airborne drama. Whenever an aircraft comes out of maintenance, some sort of test flight should be conducted with the idea of verifying the work performed. In fact and perhaps unsurprisingly, the FAA has a regulation covering post-maintenance test flights, FAR 91.407. Its applicability to a specific situation hinges on the extent to which, if any, work on the aircraft “appreciably changed its flight characteristics or substantially affected its operation.” Thats a fairly broad definition, and one an owner should think about whenever some maintenance is planned. But thats not all. Areas requiring consideration and planning for a post-maintenance test flight include piloting currency, insurance coverage, crew coordination and other FAA regulations, to name a few. For example, another regulation, FAR 91.305, states flight testing must be conducted over open water, or sparsely populated areas having light air traffic.

Takeoff and initial climb accidents are 10 times more deadly than landing accidents, according to the AOPA Air Safety Foundation (ASF) presentation “Mastering Takeoffs and Landings.” And, when you think about it, the ASFs numbers make sense. After all, during a takeoff, the airplane is as heavy as it will be for that flight, youre accelerating, not slowing as when landing, and you arent accustomed to the wind or the airplanes loading, among other factors. If in fact takeoffs are so potentially fatal, its worthwhile to discover how to detect when a takeoff or “first-stage” climbout is going bad and, if needed, how to safely abort it before joining the NTSB tally. What clues do we have to a takeoff anomaly, and how can we safely abort a takeoff when things arent going right? Im in favor of letting the student do everything possible on the first lesson, but the relative ease at which we launch into the air-at least compared to what it takes to learn to land-might make us complacent about critically observing our takeoffs. After all, when turned into the wind and the powers brought up, were thinking about the flight ahead, or perhaps focused on an initial heading or altitude restriction. It takes a lot of discipline to be thinking about the takeoff itself.

At times during my training it often seemed the phrase most often uttered by the instructor was, “Watch your airspeed,” or its more-assertive variant, “Mind your speed.” If I didnt respond immediately, he continued his urgings, which usually escalating in volume and octave. That I eventually figured it out is evidenced by a piece of FAA paper in my pocket. And that was just the primary training. In talks with other many fellow aviators, we found a shared memory of instrument instructors who seemed almost sadistic in their ability to distract us with airspeed warnings when all we wanted to do was center the needles or roll out on the correct heading. We all recalled the endless grilling as our instructors drilled us on our ability to quote, hit and hold target speeds. Of course, by the time wed hit instrument training, we all understood and absorbed the message-one which remains clear as crystal years later: Managing all of the multiple, simultaneous demands of flying becomes considerably easier once I could instinctively and automatically manage power and pitch to achieve the correct airspeed for each condition.

When living in a locale with winter weather cold enough for clichs and wanting to commit aviation, there are three alternatives for coping: 1) Borrow a snowplow and drive south-when someone asks, “Whats that?” stay there and fly; 2) subdue the urge (as did 1920s barnstormers, realizing the oversupply in warmer climes would cause them to starve), secure the airplane, rent a hotel room and hibernate after contracting with a bootlegger for regular deliveries; or, 3) keep flying. While not expressing a preference, our habit has been to continue flying while modifying our behavior. Among the changes is realizing winter means more than cold: It means fewer hours of daylight, so more-risky night flying also is likely. It means everything takes longer to accomplish, be it as mundane as putting on appropriate flying attire or as complex as readying a tied-down airplane for flight. It means hurrying means radically increasing the chance of making a small mistake and, in winter, small mistakes are far more likely to have a fatal outcome than in summer.

Last month in this space, I wrote about the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and its proposed rule to expand airline-style security measures to private (i.e., Part 91) operations of aircraft weighing more than 12,500 pounds. The new proposal was formally released October 30, 2008. The proposed rule would require operators to assign a security director to oversee flight operations, obtain TSA approval for a security program addressing every operation of the aircraft, submit fingerprints of all flight-crew members and seek government approval of each passenger for each flight. A copy of the full, 67-page proposal is available in PDF format at this address: tinyurl.com/5nxn55. General aviations alphabet soup is expressing strong opposition to the proposal. Both AOPA and NBAA formally requested a comment-period extension, to 120 days, which the TSA granted. The new deadline is February 27, 2009.

Its impossible to develop suggested techniques covering all airplanes and all pilots at all times. By stating “hold the airplane neutral,” we meant in a level attitude, whether on or slightly above the runway. The key here is accelerating to the desired airspeed as quickly as possible in the least distance. Some airplanes do this best on the runway. Your 182 isnt one of them, so accelerating in ground effect is probably the best solution. As always, of course, practice various techniques with an experienced instructor to determine which works best for you and your airplane.

At approximately 1147 Mountain time, the airplane was substantially damaged upon impacting terrain. The flight instructor and student pilot were seriously injured. Visual conditions prevailed. According to eyewitnesses, the airplane was conducting pattern work when it banked left and impacted terrain.

At about 1030 Eastern time, the airplane collided with trees during takeoff. Visual conditions prevailed. The airplane was substantially damaged; the commercial pilot and sole occupant sustained minor injuries. The pilot later stated the auxiliary fuel pump was on for takeoff, and during the initial climb, the engine did not seem like it was developing full power. The flight continued past the departure end of the runway, over trees, clipped tops of them, then descended and impacted the ground.