FLYING LESSONS for May 18, 2017

FLYING LESSONS for May 18, 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. www.mastery-flight-training.com This week s LESSONS: Pursue Mastery of Flight A high-performance airplane force landed in a field four miles from the airport. The two pilots aboard were not injured and airplane damage was minor. Success was the result of good aircraft control through and including the off-airport landing...and, good preflight decision making. A third pilot posted this on a public social media site: My friend was copilot in this plane yesterday. In my humble opinion, this is an example of great teamwork and piloting skill when their engine failed [shortly after] takeoff. He says they had plenty of fuel, everything seemed normal, but over 1800RPM the engine fuel metering system was failing. [The] only way it could run is if you pulled mixture to idle cutoff, but there was not enough time to try. The most interesting part of the story is that he said the pilot (owner) made a decision that ultimately saved their lives (in his opinion). Departing from Runway 27 on a direct course to their destination about 17nm miles away (heading 282º), the owner requested and was given a course south around the city and the University stadium. My friend asked him why. The owner said, "If I lose an engine I don't want to take out anyone with us." About 30 seconds later the engine quit. My friend spotted two fields and a road to land on, and they landed in the first field. I am so thankful both they and the airplane were completely unscathed. Now - I've been to this airport many times and NEVER have considered asking for a southern route "just in case." Pilots often debate the merits of flying around mountains or large bodies of water. This is often the locus of discussions on the relative merits of single- vs. multiengine airplanes spurred by concern about overflight of hazardous landing zones in airplanes dependent upon a single engine. But pilots rarely talk about flight over urban areas in the same way. Yet in many cases cities can be more hazardous for overflight than the lakes, mountains and other types of inhospitable terrain we usually consider. There is also the possibility you will injure people on the ground as they go about their lives oblivious to the threat you suddenly present. It s not always practical or even practicable to avoid flying over urban areas, just as it is not always possible to completely avoid flight over water or rugged terrain. The social media poster has a point, however most of us never even consider flying around (and not over) populated areas when it s always possible to do so albeit with limitations on the airports we use and some of the things we do in our aircraft. But it is no less valid to consider the risks of city overflight in exactly the same ways we evaluate the risks of flight over water, mountains, or remote terrain. As you approach any of these hazards (including towns and cities): 1. Watch your engine indications and the resulting aircraft performance closely look for 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 1

direct evidence that the airplane/powerplant combination is performing as expected, and avoid overflying the hazard if there is any indication it is not. 2. Plan your flights to avoid overflying urban areas unless your destination or operation requires you fly directly over the built-up area. Just as you flight plan to stay out of restricted airspace, add a couple of miles to avoid cities if needed to significantly improve your chances in the unlikely event of an engine power loss. 3. Constantly consider where you ll go in the event of power loss over a densely populated area. You will have very few good options over cities perhaps all you have is the least-objectionable option. You won t have time to make this decision after the engine fails. Have a landing zone in mind at all times over a populated area. Power loss over urban areas is at least as hazardous as over mountains or large bodies of water. Know where you ll go in the event of partial or total power loss. Better yet, avoid overflying cities unless absolutely necessary. 4. Know the direction that takes you away from the populated area most quickly in the event of partial power loss. Unless there s a nearby airport you can reach with the power remaining, in a partial-power condition you want to turn immediately toward an area with more landing options if the airplane can t hold altitude with the power remaining, or the power loss becomes total. 5. Honestly answer this question: Are you flying over the city because you have to, or just because it s convenient? You may have never considered city overflight in the same light you think about mountains or large bodies of water. But there are very few options for power loss over urban areas. It s a risk you can and must manage. Comments? Questions? Let us learn from you, at mastery.flight.training@cox.net See www.pilotworkshop.com/blog/lost-comm?ad-tracking=lost-comm-turn 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

Debrief: Readers write about recent FLYING LESSONS: Reader Pau Searles writes about the suggested Taxi Instrument Check and Flight Controls: Free and Correct checklists in the April 27, 2017 FLYING LESSONS: I discovered that if you print pages 3 and 4 of [the] April 27 [report] double-sided, you'll end up with both of the excellent checklists on one card that can be laminated. I'm sure you must have formatted for that. Wild coincidence, Paul, but I m glad it worked out that way. Thank you for your regulation donations to help me pay the costs of delivering FLYING LESSONS Weekly. See http://www.mastery-flight-training.com/20170427-flying-lessons.pdf Reader Alan Bassani adds: For some odd reason I often do the box check you taught me with the engine off. Special sounds and feels as stated by the wonderful contributors [to last week s Debrief section]. I just got lucky I guess. I clearly recall my reason was to get it done at a quiet, no distraction, non-taxi time, not fully realizing the other benefits stated by your contributors. Thanks to the two engine-off advocates, I will endeavor to ALWAYS do that in the future and shared just those two letters to my close group of three other pilots, followed by the whole May 11 issue. We had already been discussing this control free AND correct during recent lunches thanks to you. I think this Friday I will bring up the engine-off [control] check in case anyone missed it. The following is already covered by inference for lack of a better term, but an added reason the engine-off [controls] check is so good is the elevators are not getting pounded by "propwash" which certainly masks any nuances in feel. Thanks for the great work on this definitely overlooked subject. That s another good point, Alan: without propeller blast over the elevator in particular, you may be able to notice resistance to flight control movement more easily. Thank you. See http://www.mastery-flight-training.com/20170511-flying-lessons.pdf Reader Mark Sletten continues the discussion of reversed flight controls with an interesting video: Yes, you can fly an aircraft with reversed controls. But, like everything else having to do with piloting a plane, you won't be successful unless you practice. How much practice? This video will give you an idea. See https://youtu.be/mfzdabzbll0 Reader Glenn Yeldezian responds to another reader s experience, related last week, when a little voice convinced the reader to ask his instructor to cancel a glider flight. Glenn Yeldezian writes: I continue to read FLYING LESSONS every week. The glider item caught my attention. My initial reaction was "what, no positive control check?" At our club we teach that at a minimum, a positive control check be performed before the first flight of the day. What is a positive control check? It takes two people. One moving the controls, and another adding resistance to each control surface to ensure they are connected and connected properly. I also drum into my students "free, clear and correct" before each flight and make them look at the ailerons while doing this - stick right, right aileron up and left aileron down and vice versa. See http://www.mastery-flight-training.com/20170511-flying-lessons.pdf Going farther back in time, reader John McMurray had written about the March 23 LESSON on downwind takeoffs: In your "Crash of Convenience, Part II" issue, [reader] David Abrams responded: "Once the aircraft reached flying speed and departed the runway it should not matter if it is upwind or downwind (except for gusts). I would still expect the airplane to accelerate with full power." Not quite true. After liftoff, the aircraft's track over the ground is still affected by the wind. The rate of climb is the same as no-wind conditions but the ground speed is faster. The aircraft is going up at the same speed but going forward faster so the climb angle is shallower. This shallower climb angle is readily apparent to the pilot and, in fact, is more apparent than the climb rate. At 80 KTAS and 500 fpm climb, an aircraft will climb 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

at about 330 ft/nm with a 10 knot tailwind, and about 430 ft/nm with a 10 knot headwind, a 30% difference. At high density altitudes, the climb angle of a turbocharged aircraft is already shallower than normal due to the higher true airspeed. (Normally aspirated aircraft get a double whammy on climb angle since they have a higher true airspeed AND a lower climb rate at high DA). If the pilot attempts to make the climb angle look normal, he will raise the nose causing the aircraft to slow and reduce the climb rate..causing the climb angle to deteriorate even further. If the pilot is not aware of this effect, he can easily fly the aircraft into a slow, nose high climb with little or no acceleration. See http://www.mastery-flight-training.com/20170323-flying-lessons.pdf Reader William Eilberg carries this forward to the topic of tailwind landings: Years ago, I was flying into Texarkana, on an IFR flight plan, on a day when there was a CWA [Center Weather Advisory] for low IFR conditions. As we neared the airport, we heard on the radio that at least one airplane had had to miss the approach. Fortunately, when flying the ILS, we saw the runway, at or slightly above decision altitude. Apparently, there was a small tailwind, certainly in the single digits. The tower controller asked if I wanted to circle to the opposite runway. As I recall, the controller's call came after we had broken out and had the runway in sight. Without hesitation, I told him no, I would land straight ahead, even with the small tailwind. There was certainly plenty of runway, and the landing was uneventful. I am convinced that I made the right call. I even believe that the controller was at fault for suggesting that I circle to land. Under conditions near minimums, it would be dangerous to do a circling maneuver. I would have likely lost sight of the airport. I had read enough aviation safety magazine articles to know that the correct answer, in these circumstances, was to land straight ahead. Perhaps the controller was required, by rule or regulation, to offer me the option of circling. If so, this is one more example of the futility of enacting rules that work for every situation. I don t know whether the controller was required to mention the option of circling, but regardless he probably thought he was doing you a favor by asking if you wanted to circle in order to land into the wind. I agree that when the controller offered you a choice, you took the option that worked best for you under the circumstances. Instructor, air crash investigator and aviation safety researcher Jeff Edwards takes us back to The Second Controls Check, the preflight test of autopilot and trim functionality addressed in the March 30 report: Great article on a very important subject. Failure to follow checklist procedures and be familiar with aircraft systems is a big problem in general aviation. Flight instructors and DPEs [Designated Pilot Examiners] must emphasize both. Last year we performed a global analysis of all Lancair accidents and incidents since the first Lancair was lost. Failure to follow procedures was the number one cause. See http://www.mastery-flight-training.com/20170330-flying-lessons.pdf Thank you, everone! Comments? Questions? Let us learn from you, at mastery.flight.training@cox.net. Please help me cover the costs of providing FLYING LESSONS through the secure PayPal donations button at www.mastery-flight-training.com. See https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&session=jmckfaymmh_ud6kqj8vxxtfj53cp9zrbhs8cfhhj24jzsqif9atoisrjgui&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8d333dc9aadeed3fe0b5b299d55fd35542 Or send a check to Mastery Flight Training, Inc. to 247 Tiffany Street, Rose Hill, Kansas USA 67133. Thank you, generous supporters. Seminars Down Under Australia s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has published locations and dates of June AvSafety Seminars for Pilots. This mid-winter seminar covers a wide variety of topics surrounding the themes Starved and Exhausted Understanding Fuel Management and Handling Partial Power Loss in Single-Engine Aircraft. See the schedule and register on the CASA AvSafety Seminars site. See https://www.casa.gov.au/education/standard-page/avsafety-seminars 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

FLYING LESSONS reader Ron Koyich has attended this seminar and writes: There is a reported fuel management problem every 10 days in Australia. It s three times more likely to be a fuel starvation issue [fuel is available but the pilot has not assured it flows to the engine] than an exhaustion issues [ running out of gas ]. Data (from the U.S., I believe) shows flight crews do not catch 60% of [the] errors [they] made. [It is a] good presentation from Terry Horsam, an Aviation Safety Officer. It sounds like this is a great presentation to attend if you are able. Manual Flight Operations Proficiency The vital necessity of retaining superior hand-flying skills even in highly automated modern cockpits is a constant theme in FLYING LESSONS and elsewhere. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published Safety Alert For Operators (SAFO) 17007, which encourages the development of training and line-operations policies which will ensure that proficiency in manual flight operations is developed and maintained for air carrier pilots. Although SAFO 17007 is aimed squarely at airline plots, we have seen time and again how the LESSONS about technology learned through operational error and accidents among professional flight crews can also apply directly to personal, business and corporate pilots flying Technologically Advanced Airplanes (TAAs) without the benefit of a second pilot to monitor the pilot and act as an aerial Quality Control check. Specifically, the SAFO suggests regular practice hand-flying specific tasks to retain a high level of proficiency, and to develop and enhance what used to be called air sense, or airmanship. The suggested manually-flown recurrent maneuvers are: 1. Slow flight 2. Loss of reliable airspeed indication 3. Instrument departure procedures (takeoff into IMC and Standard Instrument Departures, or SIDs) 4. Instrument arrival procedures (approaches in IMC and Standard Terminal Arrivals, or STARs) 5. Upset recovery 6. Stall prevention and stall recovery 7. Recovery from a bounced landing 8. Recovery from out-of-trim conditions 9. Visual approaches in various weather and lighting conditions 10. Go-arounds initiated at other than [below] instrument approach minimum altitudes There s a lot more in the SAFO, so take a look. Any flight training provider, and any instructional organization that promotes professionalism in personal, business and corporate flight operations, should develop scenarios and a syllabus to include SAFO 17007 s recommendations, at a minimum, in Flight Reviews and Instrument Proficiency Checks (IPCs). See https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/usafaa/2017/05/11/file_attachments/815236/safo17007.pdf That should give you plenty to think about this week. Thanks for reading! Pursue Mastery of Flight. Share safer skies. Forward FLYING LESSONS to a friend 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 www.mastery-flight-training.com, or contact mastery.flight.training@cox.net. 2017 Mastery Flight Training, Inc. All rights reserved. 5