The Utility Myth

Not a winter goes by without someone sending me an e-mail that includes the sentence, “You aren’t really suggesting I don’t fly my airplane in IMC in the winter?” It’s usually from the pilot of a very capable piston single or light twin that is not certificated for flight in icing conditions; often the pilot includes something like, “I live in the Great Lakes and we get icing a large part of the year.” Sometimes I get a similar question about passenger and baggage loads. “The engineers at [insert airplane manufacturer name here] wouldn’t have designed the airplane with six seats if it couldn’t carry six adults, or at least four adults and two kids. Do you really mean I can’t fill the seats and the fuel tanks?” A current trend is questions about synthetic vision systems in glass cockpit panels or cutting-edge heads-up displays. “With an essentially VFR depiction of the runway, I can make a zero-zero takeoff and even a zero-zero landing ‘if I have to’, can’t I?”

Key Takeaways:

• General aviation pilots often succumb to "The Myth of Utility," expecting their aircraft to perform beyond certified limits in scenarios like flying uncertified in icing conditions, carrying maximum loads with full fuel, or making low-visibility landings using synthetic vision.
• This myth is perpetuated by aircraft sales and instruction emphasizing broad utility, personal economic justifications for ownership, and pilot ego seeking "bragging rights" about their aircraft's capabilities.
• The author, based on accident analysis, warns that exceeding an aircraft's limitations is extremely dangerous and advises pilots to strictly observe performance envelopes, make necessary trade-offs, and "fly the airplane you're flying...not the airplane you wish it to be."

Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->

See a mistake? Contact us.