FLYING LESSONS for January 5, 2017

Transcription

1 FLYING LESSONS for January 5, 2017 FLYING LESSONS uses recent 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 airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents but knowing how your airplane s systems respond can make the difference as a scenario unfolds. So apply these FLYING LESSONS to the specific 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: Just One Thing Pursue Mastery of Flight Well-known flight instructor and aviation educator (and FLYING LESSONS reader) Rod Machado wrote an excellent, thought-provoking article in the September 2016 issue of AOPA Pilot magazine. Rod has since posted his essay on his own website blog. In it, Rod asks what he calls the forbidden question: What is the lowest level of general aviation accidents we re capable of achieving without depriving pilots of the flying liberties they now enjoy? I encourage you to go read Rod s article, then come back for a LESSON it suggested to me. See: Usually without coming out and saying it, most of the career instructors and aviation safety advocates I know have asked that same question (or one very much like it) at least once, often more frequently and occasionally publicly and in print, as we try to find a balance between our passion for flying and the feeling we seem to share that we have a personal responsibility to make aviation an enjoyable event for all. Most of my mentors and peers and aero-padawans still take it personally when we hear or read about an airplane crash especially when it s the same situations again and again that end lives of pilots, their trusting passengers and (increasingly, it seems) persons on the ground beneath them. Rod makes an important distinction: The idealist s response to the question is that he or she is not willing to accept anything other than a perfect safety record. OK, fine. Me, too. What I m willing to accept, however, has nothing to do with the safety record we are actually capable of achieving. He also notes: who doesn t want zero accidents? The pragmatist in me realizes this is only possible if we confiscate the keys to every flying machine along with the pilot certificates of those who operate them. If the airlines don t have a perfect safety record after all these years, how would such a thing be possible in general aviation? It can t. and Rod ponders: The possibility exists that GA has reached a static safety to liberty ratio. It s possible that our personal flying liberties are balanced by the inevitable accidents that result from this freedom Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 1

2 It s not my intention to steal any more of Rod s thunder here; you should have read his article by now. He makes some excellent points and with his unique talents uses humor to inspire a great deal of serious thought. As is usually the case in FLYING LESSONS Weekly, what I read there reminded me of other expressions of the same thought, that flying may be almost as safe as it can possibly be without being regulated and restricted out of existence. Almost as safe. Before we go further it s very important to note that the rate of fatal crashes in personal flying is very low. It s not nearly as low as that of professionally flown corporate airplanes, and certainly not as safe as the airlines. But it is statistically more hazardous than driving (read John King s seminal interview The Big Lie, from the March 2001 FLYING magazine). The rate of fatal crashes in general aviation has remained nearly constant for more than a decade. And to the point of can flying get any safer without limiting aviation s freedoms?, fatal general aviation accidents result from the same predictable, knowable and (even without new rules) preventable circumstances. We can reduce the fatal crash rate without limiting the freedom of flight. See But if you ever doubt whether there is risk in flying, ask a room full of pilots to raise their hand if they personally know someone who was killed at the controls of a light airplane. Usually the vast majority will raise their hand. Then ask the same crowd to raise their hand if they personally know someone who was killed in a car crash. The number is always far fewer. Now, virtually everyone you know drives a car. Very few of the people you know fly airplanes. That s why we have to have this type of conversation. Part of the problem of trying to take on the whole issue of accident prevention is that as an industry we try to take on too much at a time. Take for example the enormous press and effort given to preventing of Loss of Control Inflight (LOC-I) over the past few years LOC-I encompasses so many things, so many different scenarios, and reaches so deeply into pilot certification, aircraft certification, and flight instructor training and qualification, that despite the best efforts of people throughout the industry it s hard to make quick progress. I believe the effort is working, but it s a complicated, long-term process that may take years to show any results. Instead, I propose we pick one specific, easily identified issue Just One Thing and focus on mastering that One Thing ourselves, promoting it with our flying friends and (for the instructors out there) teaching it in every instructional contact we make for a two-year Flight Review cycle. The One Thing I propose as our focus: preventing fuel exhaustion. B-36 Peacemaker flight engineer s panel six [propellers] turnin and four [jets] burnin. You don t master complex problems all at once. You focus on the smaller details, tackling just one thing at a time until you have mastered them all Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

3 There is precedent that shows that this is indeed possible. Dipping back into Rod Machado s article, he writes: In 1964, the FAA decided to do something about the appalling flight instruction accident rate. In response, my friend and FAA inspector, Pete Campbell, created the flight instructor refresher course (a means of renewing a CFI certificate every 24 months). The result? During the next seven years, after 200 seminars attended by over 16,000 CFIs, the flight instruction accident rate decreased by 67%. And in a recent FLYING LESSONS Debrief reader David Kenny of the AOPA Air Safety Institute wrote: 2013 saw 67 fuel-mismanagement accidents on non-commercial fixed-wing flights, the lowest number in decades. This represented just 7% of all NCFW accidents that year, and less than 10% of the 709 we considered pilot-related is the most recent year that for which full NTSB data are available, as analyzed in the recently published, 25 th edition of the Joseph T. Nall Report. See We are making progress on reducing the number of fuel-related crashes, according to NTSB data analyzed by AOPA. Focused education can make a difference, as reported by Rod Machado. If we focus on one narrow aspect of one significant contributors to air crashes single out fuel exhaustion prevention from even the topic of fuel mismanagement crashes we may just be able to change the culture enough to eradicate just one thing. How many ways can you verify your airplane s fuel level before flight? Visually check the fuel level by opening the fuel caps and looking into each tank Amount of fuel known to be in the tanks plus the amount of fuel observed to be added to the tanks at fueling Fuel receipt from the Fixed Base Operator or what you put in yourself (I highly recommend personally overseeing the fueling of your aircraft as a crosscheck) Cockpit fuel gauges External fuel sight gauges, if installed Fuel totalizer, if pilot input is accurate If at least three of these methods confirm the fuel load, and none of the available means of detecting fuel load show a discrepancy from the others (in other words, everything you have agrees, and nothing disagrees), then you can confidently depart with the fuel in the tanks if your calculations determine that load is sufficient for the flight including a generous reserve. How many ways can you calculate the fuel required for a flight? Methodical calculations using available performance, time/distance/groundspeed and fuel burn rate charts and data. Conservative estimates of fuel burn expressed as time aloft For example, the A36 Bonanza I fly burns between U.S. gallons per hour in climb and typically about gallons per hour in cruise. For purposes of estimate I figure the first hour of flight requires 20 gallons and each subsequent hour of flight requires 15 gallons. With 74 gallons of usable fuel capacity, and assuming my personal limit of one hour (15 gallons) of fuel remaining at destination as a minimum reserve, I have: 74 gallons 15 (the reserve) 20 (the first hour) = 39 gallons (2.6 hours@ 15 gph) remaining Therefore, I conservatively have 3.6 hours endurance with a one-hour reserve, if I depart with full tanks. No matter how far I ve gone, I need to be in the circuit to land at 3.5 hours after takeoff Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

4 How many ways can you monitor fuel burn in flight? Compare actual to expected fuel burn rate Fuel totalizer indicating fuel remaining on board (expressed as time and quantity) Fuel totalizer indicating fuel remaining at destination (always at least 1 hour or one hour of conservative fuel burn rate) Cockpit fuel gauges agreeing with totalizer indications (if available), and time-based calculations Estimated time of arrival (ETA) and fuel remaining (on gauges and/or totalizer) at computed before flight (and recorded for reference in flight) Fuel flow and time remaining computed regularly in flight Use all of the available fuel status data on every flight. If any of the available data points disagree from the others, suspect a data input error, an actual fuel input error (not as much gas was loaded as you thought), a change in the conditions (for example, a stronger than forecast headwind), and/or an inflight fuel leak. The only way to resolve such a discrepancy is to land the airplane and add fuel until you can positively determine the amount of fuel actually on board and that it is sufficient to get you to your destination with adequate reserves. This does not directly address fuel starvation, that is, not properly selecting from multiple tanks to ensure available fuel is delivered to the engine(s). That s another brand of fuel mismanagement mishap, a second thing to be addressed another day. It costs nothing more, and it puts no limitation on the freedom of flight, to ensure there s enough fuel on board before taking off, monitoring the fuel state continually in flight, and landing early to gas up if at any time it appears you will not have an adequate fuel reserve remaining at your destination. Safety as a goal is a misnomer safety is a result of meeting your goals. We measure safety in terms of a number of accidents, when we all know there are many times unsafe acts do not result in crashes all you have to do is read all the never again and I ll never do that again stories in the aviation journals. Simply not crashing does not mean a flight was conducted safely. Instead, we need to strive to master our aircraft, ourselves, and the environment in which we permit ourselves to fly. If we fly with mastery, true safety not only the absence of crashes, but the absence of situations that might lead to crashes is the result. As Dr. Tony Kern writes, Excellence first, safety follows. See Every time you fly: Confirm the fuel load before engine start by at least three independent methods unless you can positively determine the fuel load by visual means alone. If any method disagrees with the others, resolve the discrepancy before flight by adding fuel until you can visually check if at all practical. Set a personal minimum that ll you ll have at least one hour of fuel on board upon arrival at your destination, including climb and diversion to an alternate if necessary. Commit to landing for fuel early any time you compute you will have anything less than that minimum available upon landing even if that means landing 10 or 20 miles from your destination for fuel. Reserve fuel is there for the event you did everything right and still need some extra gas, such as a last-minute go-around or an undetected 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

5 miscalculation of fuel en route. There is no prize for arriving with the least amount of fuel on board. Conservatively estimate fuel burn for the first hour of flight and ever hour thereafter. In turbocharged airplanes especially, there will be a big difference between climb and cruise fuel burn. Before you board the airplane, determine how much time (not distance) you can conservatively fly with the fuel on board. Make a conscious decision to be in the pattern or visual on final approach by five minutes before that time from takeoff. Predict the fuel remaining at several decision points along your route of flight. At each point, compare indicated fuel to your estimates to crosscheck whether you are getting the performance you expected, as well as to detect anomalies such as inflight fuel leaks. In addition to the major decision points, frequently crosscheck fuel flows and fuel remaining to expectations. Always be able to answer: How much fuel is remaining on board? How much fuel will I use to reach destination? How much fuel will be remaining on board when I get there? How much time do I have left before I need to be visual on final approach? Lean the mixture precisely for cruising flight and use this as a crosscheck to expectations. If you compute you will be getting into your fuel reserve for landing, make the decision early to adjust power and mixture to get better endurance, or to find a place to stop for fuel so you will not be tempted to try to stretch those last few miles to your original destination. It s amazing how many fuel exhaustion accidents occur within a few miles of the destination airport. If there s any doubt, add fuel (consistent with weight and balance limitations). Do these things every time even for local flights. We can make flying safer without putting any limitation on personal freedom. Let s work on eliminating just one thing fuel exhaustion crashes. Comments? Questions? Let us learn from you, at mastery.flight.training@cox.net See Debrief: Readers write about recent FLYING LESSONS: Reader Tim Schryer wrote about last week s LESSON that cited the Rule for when to file an alternate on an instrument flight plan. From Tim: I believe your reference to FAR could be misinterpreted. You indicated that the time frame was plus one hour, but more correctly it should have been, 1 hour before to one hour after the ETA. Additionally you indicated that you are required to have a 2000 foot ceiling and/or 3 miles visibility. Actually both ceiling and visibility are required. Thank you very much for an outstanding newsletter. I never fail to learn each and every time I read it. Thanks, Tim. I see what happened. I had underlined the "+" in my original, for "plus or minus," but the MailChimp didn't carry the format and I missed it before it went out. The PDF version on 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 5

6 my website had (and has) the correct notation, as shown here. Thanks for catching this; I'm embarrassed I did not. It also states (correctly) that if ceiling and/or visibility are less than the minimum values an alternate is required. I apologize for any confusion. A couple of readers had trouble with the link to my highlights and notes on the first chapter of Wolfgang Langewieshe s classic flying text Stick and Rudder. The link worked for me on several platforms, but just in case here is the link again. It is also posted right about the center of my home page at I ll be adding additional chapter notes incrementally as the weeks go on. See Next week s LESSONS will visit a large cache of additional reader s from the past few weeks. I read FLYING LESSONS without fail, and appreciate all I have learned. supporter Larry Peck Please help me cover the costs of providing FLYING LESSONS through the secure PayPal donations button at See Or send a check to Mastery Flight Training, Inc. to 247 Tiffany Street, Rose Hill, Kansas USA Thank you, generous supporters. Remember, half of all pilots are below average. Do what you can to help the next guy or gal so the average pilot is even better. Forward FLYING LESSONS to a friend Pursue Mastery of Flight. Thomas P. Turner, M.S. Aviation Safety Flight Instructor Hall of Fame 2010 National FAA Safety Team Representative of the Year 2008 FAA Central Region CFI of the Year Three-time Master CFI FLYING LESSONS is 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. For more information see or contact mastery.flight.training@cox.net Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 6