FLYING LESSONS for May 7, 2015 suggested by this week s aircraft mishap reports

Transcription

1 FLYING LESSONS for May 7, 2015 suggested by this week s aircraft mishap reports FLYING LESSONS uses the past week s mishap reports to consider what might have contributed to accidents, so you can make better decisions if you face similar circumstances. In almost all cases design characteristics of a specific make and model airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents, so apply these FLYING LESSONS to any airplane you fly. Verify all technical information before applying it to your aircraft or operation, with manufacturers data and recommendations taking precedence. You are pilot in command, and are ultimately responsible for the decisions you make. FLYING LESSONS is an independent product of MASTERY FLIGHT TRAINING, INC. This week s lessons: We have lots of great member Debrief input this week, and (hopefully) equally insightful commentary in response. Let s get right to it. Let us learn from you, at mastery.flight.training@cox.net. Welcome and thanks to Pilot Workshops for its second year sponsoring FLYING LESSONS Weekly! See Debrief: Readers write about recent FLYING LESSONS: Several readers commented about last week s LESSON, The War is Over. Career flight instructor Edgar Bassingthwaighte writes: I think you are quite right about the war pilot factor. Our training teaches the technical requirements for pilotage but never mentions that in our sector of civil aviation what we are doing is transportation. Instead we are largely fed a diet of old war stories and superlative air show flying, etc. But transportation is our job as private pilots, whether it is family, friends or work colleagues. And once we shut that cabin door our responsibility reduces down to just one thing : the safety and welfare of our passengers. If we are flying solo that responsibility extends to those we leave on the ground. I believe that if we are to make progress in reducing that "acceptable level" of accidents then our arguments must be based on Ethics. The US Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) says exactly that by putting pilots responsibility to passengers at the head of its Code of Ethics. In aviation we live by boundaries that have been established after the most exhaustive and detailed investigations by the technical experts of our profession. If we personally decide to go beyond the boundaries, for example VFR or IFR minima, can we defend our action either technically or ethically? I don't think so. The safe way is not always the easy way. As pilots we create pressure in our mind to "complete the mission" as you say; to be the hero of our own story. We need to carry with us our own strong Code of Ethics to resist that impulse. You re correct, Edgar. The ALPA Code of Ethics in fact begins with this proclamation: 2015 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 1

2 An Air Line Pilot will keep uppermost in his mind that the safety, comfort, and well-being of the passengers who entrust their lives to him are his first and greatest responsibility. The full ALPA Code of Ethics is worth review and consideration by all pilots. Taking it a step further, specifically for personal and business pilots, is the Aviators Model Code of Conduct (AMCC). The AMCC was developed by a panel of experts (full disclosure: I m a member of the AMCC Permanent Editorial Board) with Subject Matter Expert industry review and input. Several versions of the Code exist for various branches of general aviation, including a special Code for flight instructors. This relates back to past FLYING LESSONS in which I encourage pilots even recreational pilots to promote yourself to captain, that is, accept and embrace the pilot-in-command responsibility you accept when you plan and conduct a flight and live up to the trust your passengers put into you, a trust that, as far as they are concerned, you operate on the same level of professionalism they expect from the captain of a jet airliner. Thank you, Edgar Frequent Debriefer/airline and recreational pilot David Heberling says: This makes me think back to when I started to learn how to fly, when I was 13 years old. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the war is over. However, when I learned how to fly, I had no fear. I did not know there was anything to fear in flying. I loved every aspect of it, including stalls, slow flight, short and soft field take offs and landings. It was not until I started instructing pilots in the art of flying that I encountered fears and learned what they were. It took me awhile to incorporate those fears into my flying. I would not exactly call it fear, but healthy respect instead. Things like thunderstorms, icing, the importance of weight and balance and aircraft performance. The wisdom of not having anything to prove came much later. I did not do much private flying once I got into the airlines. In the airlines, we fly in the cocoon of safety that the two-man crew strives for. It was not until I owned my own airplane that all of what I have read and experienced came home to roost now that I was flying single pilot. With precious passengers on board totally reliant on me to safely conduct the flight, I felt that responsibility acutely. As for having reached the safety floor of acceptable losses, I have a question for you: When you are out on the highway, how many cars are actually going the posted speed? True, if drivers obeyed the rules of the road then highway deaths would decrease as well. David continues: A fellow pilot told me about when he and his dad got their first airplane. It was the airplane they both learned how to fly in. He told me that his dad tried to kill himself several times in that airplane over the years. I do not think he was exaggerating. When I think of how little many pilots are flying now due to the cost of avgas, I am amazed that more airplanes are not falling out of the sky. The atrophying of skills is steep as airline pilots are finding out with less hands on flying with the rise of automation. It is one of the reasons I own an airplane. That s true too, David. FLYING LESSONS focused on the question of the cost of flying vs. safety factor in a multi-part series late last year. And like many aviation media, we ve devoted a lot of space to the need for hand-flying/stick and rudder currency among air carrier pilots as well. Even automated-aircraft poster child Airbus has recently issued one of the most forceful warnings to date about the dangers of undue reliance on aircraft automation and the urged revamping pilot training worldwide to address this threat to flying safety. Any reduction in flying results in reduced proficiency whether we are talking about hand-flying stick-and-rudder skills or adeptness with avionics and/or automation. A prudent risk management strategy, as we discussed in previous LESSONS, is to establish wider safety margins in the form of personal limitations across the board: IFR minima, crosswind limits, whether or not you ll fly at night and/or in IMC, length of duty day, increased frequency of flight instruction, whether or not you ll fly with passengers, etc. A second strategy is to combine elements of the Practical Test Standards (or your country s regulatory requirements) for the pilot certificates and ratings you hold into the flying that you are able to do, for example, practice a 2015 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

3 short field takeoff and short field landing on your next cross-country trip, regardless of the runway length. Every flight provides the opportunity to refresh your skills on the basics, so why not take advantage of that opportunity every time? As always, David, thank you for your insights. See Corporate flight department business consultant Jim Lara, chairman of the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) Safety Committee s Single-Pilot Working Group (a Group on which I m proud to serve) adds: [I] just read your latest post. Thanks very much for keeping me on your mailing list. I read each issue from start to finish and always takeaway a Golden Nugget. [In The War is Over ] your passion came through loud and clear! This was the best-written FLYING LESSONS article that I have read yet! Absolutely SUPER!!! Thank you also, Jim. See Reader and veteran US Air Force pilot John Scherer drills down into one possible factor in the Piper Aerostar scrape and go that was the inspiration for last week s The War is Over LESSON. John writes: Tom, great issue about the Aerostar high jinks. I think I saw that the pilot was 87 [years old]. Maybe a factor? Your "the war is over" was great. I always told my crew when I flew C-5s "our job is to make this trip boring". Now when flying our [Beech] Bonanza, my primary goal is the center of the envelope. You have hit a home run with this one. Keep up the good work and congrats on your Hall of Fame induction. Thank you as well, John. Reader Glen Keen also looks at the age factor: First let me preface that this is not a slight towards older pilots. I absolutely believe there are great pilots in every age category. This elder bird-man is not one (has been, is, ever was) and is a case where his wings need to be clipped. At 87 years of age, there is a strong likelihood that his mental acuity and ability to process information in a timely basis required to fly an airplane, especially a complex twin high performance twin like the Aerostar, has been compromised. If there ever was doubt before, the video removes all question. From this article [FLYING LESSONS] and other publications, his recollection and explanation of the incident and his plan to rehabilitate the aircraft to flying and selling status, it is clear that this individual is suffering from cognitive dysfunction and understanding of the incident and its ramifications, realized or not. Not only is he confused about the actual facts of the incident, he has yet to see the error in his actions and how extremely fortunate he is to have survived the ordeal. One small technical issue. The video link of the Aerostar cleaning its belly in the takes readers to a "page not found" on a Facebook page. I m told the link used in last week s report was later taken down over a copyright issue involving the video in question. I found it linked here for those who wish greater understanding of the genesis of last week s LESSON. See Reader Woodie Diamond looks deeper into the pilot s decision-making process of flying out of the crash: I enjoyed the latest FLYING LESSONS and particularly the reactions of other pilots who viewed the viral video of the Piper Aerostar. I would like to first say that I was not flying that plane; when I saw the video my first reaction was "he's nuts." I'll also point out that every time I see Sean Tucker fly I have the same reaction. However, the difference between the pilot of the Aerostar and Sean Tucker is not their flying skills but rather the condition of their aircraft. I ve had the honor of meeting Red Bull Air Racer and former Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18 pilot Matt Hall on a couple of occasions. Recently I attended a presentation he made to the Australian Bonanza Society and one thing Matt said struck me. Throughout his Air Force career including combat operations over Iraq as an exchange officer flying USAF F-15E Strike Eagles, and in his current career as a low-altitude aerobatics pilot and air racer, Matt has often been called an adrenalin junkie and a thrill seeker. Matt say that honestly he does not feel an adrenalin rush when he flew fighters and does not now when he flies in Red Bull Air Races and 2015 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

4 other air show routines. Adrenalin is a physical reaction to fear and surprise, Matt explained, and a properly planned flight even in combat and low-altitude aerobatics will only very rarely present something unexpected for which the pilot had not already planned and considered his options and actions. An adrenalin rush, Matt concludes, is a sign of poor flight planning. Woodie continues: I submit that once the Aerostar touched the ground it was no longer airworthy and the pilot violated regulations: 91.7 Civil aircraft airworthiness. (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. (b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur Careless or reckless operation. (a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another. Understanding and acting upon the regulations, most of which are designed to prevent actions with an historically high risk of fatal outcome, is a vital part of pilot-in-command responsibility. Thank you, Woodie. Flight instructor/reader Alan Davis refers to Mastery Flight Training Scenario #3: Coming in Hot (about the frequent event of ipad overheat and the necessity for backups to a single ipad for charts and other in-flight necessities). He notes the recent American Airlines experience in which a few dozen flights were delayed or canceled on a single day because of ipad failures affecting EFB (Electronic Flight Bag) functions for which the flight crews had no back-up. Alan writes: This is a pretty expensive way to learn the lesson about going only electronic! I rest my case. I appreciate your input, Alan. Reader Jackie Gavin asked about my Sun n Fun presentation The Truth About Stalls : I was wondering if you could please include some more information on stalls and spins in your newsletter, as unfortunately I m unable to attend your seminars. Some time back you wrote an article on stalls with diagrams, and for the first I had a better understanding on the subject. I was taught that the aircraft will always stall with the nose in the sky. The problem now is I m flying a new aircraft and I don t understand what they are saying regarding stalls in turns leading up to spins, and I'd like to try better my understanding. Hi, Jackie. The slides from my presentation are posted here. The key point addressing your question is addressed in slides 10 through 13. All basic flying texts I ve ever seen, dating back to the 1930s, include a description of the concept of critical angle of attack that looks like Slide 10 (this is from the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook). The slide correctly illustrates the growing airflow separation with increases in angle of attack (AoA). But it also reinforces inadvertently the incorrect notion that the nose of the airplane must be high above the horizon in order for the wing to stall. We all know intellectually (because we ve been told to know it) that a wing may stall at any pitch attitude. But the standard illustration doesn t convince us. Nor does the way most of us practice 2015 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

5 stalls in actual flight. To better show how a stall can occur even at nose-low attitudes, I took the standard FAA picture (slide 10) and, in slides 11-13, rotated the image. Then, using my awesome PowerPoint illustration skills, I drew an airplane around the FAA wing illustrations. The results show how the wing may reach its critical angle of attack in the early stages of a balked landing (go-around) or missed approach, and also during a takeoff when taking off at a high weight and/or at a high density altitude, if the pilot attempts to force the airplane to climb at too low an indicated airspeed. It s possible, in fact, to demonstrate how an airplane will stall at a normal climb attitude, especially in a power-on stall, if you emulate the conditions under which real-world power on stalls occur at the beginning of a go-around when the airplane is in the landing configuration with full flaps and (in retractable gear airplanes) gear down and locked. The truth about stalls is that the way we are taught, practice and are evaluated on stalls inadvertently reinforces the erroneous assumption that the attitude must be radically nose high. Real-world stalls, including the most common fatal scenario, stalls during takeoff, go around or missed approach, can happen at a much power pitch attitude a sight picture that, according to our training and evaluation, makes stall the furthest thing from our minds when control is about to be lost. Yes, that is the truth about stalls. Comments? Let us learn from you, at mastery.flight.training@cox.net Please be a FLYING LESSONS supporter through the secure PayPal donations button at Thank you, generous supporters. Share safer skies. Forward FLYING LESSONS to a friend Personal Aviation: Freedom. Choices. Responsibility. Thomas P. Turner, M.S. Aviation Safety, MCFI Flight Instructor Hall of Fame 2015 Inductee 2010 National FAA Safety Team Representative of the Year 2008 FAA Central Region CFI of the Year FLYING LESSONS is 2015 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. For more information see or contact mastery.flight.training@cox.net Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 5