News

I’m sure at this point, most pilots in Texas have heard about the Cessna 421 that went down two weeks ago in Lufkin.  The Golden Eagle suffered a dual engine failure (the pilot lost the first at 2300 feet, then the second at 1700 feet) in IMC on climb out.  He broke out at 1,000 AGL miraculously lined up with US 59, south of the Lufkin airport.  The pilot had to dodge a car as he was attempting his landing, stalled the airplane, sheared off the landing gear, then slid into the median.  No one died, but lots of bumps and bruises.  All were airlifted to Houston.

The cause was a lineman at LFK put Jet A in the 421, which is a piston airplane and takes 100LL Avgas.  The story that I saw said the pilot and two passengers were returning to Houston from Kansas City and diverted to LFK due to weather.  They landed in driving rain and spent the night.  I have not seen any reports saying whether the pilot sumped the tanks or not the following morning.

There were several factors that led to this accident.  If you take one factor out, the accident probably wouldn’t have happened.  Let’s take a look at the sequence of events.

The 421 arrived in a driving rain storm, so the pilot and passengers probably disembarked quickly to get out of the weather.  Factor number 1 presents itself here.  We don’t know whether or not the pilot told the lineman to put Avgas in it or not (he may have just said fill it up), so we’ll leave that aside.

Understandably, the pilot dashed inside to get out of the rain, but they neglected to monitor the fueling.  Whether or not the fueling took place that night or the next morning, we can’t say.  I have started to greatly encourage my customers to monitor the fueling of their airplanes, especially when it’s a fuselage that can either have Avgas piston engines or Jet A turboprops, as is the case with the Cessna 421.

Factor number 2, we already know about.  The lineman messed up and put the wrong fuel in.  If their was uncertainty about what type of fuel, he would have been prudent to await the return of the pilot to ask, even if that meant delaying the pilot’s departure.

Factor number 3 is the matter of sumping the fuel.  We don’t know if the pilot sumped the fuel or not. The tricky thing about sumping is Jet A doesn’t settle out of Avgas like water does unless it sits for a long, long time.  The two ways to determine if you have Jet A in your Avgas airplane are to smell it, as Jet A has a very strong diesel smell, or do the paper towel test.  The paper towel test consists of dumping a fuel sample onto a paper towel, then let the Avgas evaporate.  If you are left with a nasty, oily residue, you’ve got Jet A in your tanks (not to mention it will smell like diesel).

To prevent misfueling of your airplane, take the following steps:

• Be specific in telling the lineman what type of fuel you want, not just “fill ‘er up”
• Monitor the fueling and watch which truck pulls up to your airplane
  • This is especially important with fuselages that can have either Pistons or Turbo-Prop engines, like the PA-46 line or the Twin Cessna line
• Always sump your fuel, definitely smell it, and if there are any doubts, try a paper towel test

Come out to Redbird Skyport at the San Marcos Municipal Airport on Saturday, May 30th for the Bluebonnet Fly-In.  Hank Gibson from Texas Top Aviation will be giving a safety presentation at 2pm in the large conference room entitled “Is The Approach Activate?  Flying Garmin Approaches.”

Join Texas Top Aviation and Redbird Skyport as we open the summer together at the Bluebonnet Fly-In.

To Register for the Safety Seminar, please click here.

Glass panel displays, ballistic parachute aircraft recovery systems, portable tablet computers enabling paperless cockpits, and widely available three axis autopilot systems have changed the way we fly, the way we train, and the way we are expected to perform on check rides. Our training and testing paradigms have tried to stay in synch, yet always seem to be catching up to the latest levels of technology.

This is very apparent when we instructors are preparing a student for an FAA practical test. When training aircraft had no autopilots, no GPS, and certainly no parachutes, the general philosophy was that during training, the student should have the lowest level of technology available. This was also the expectation on the check ride. This theory has changed over the years and now the Practical Test Standards require that an applicant integrate all available technology while demonstrating mastery of his or her aircraft. This raises numerous questions from instructors and students about what technology will be available for each task.

One example of this dilemma is found when contemplating an instrument airplane practical test in a Cirrus SR20/SR22. The test requires the task “Instrument Approach without Primary Flight Display”, which has taken the place of what was the partial panel approach, accomplished without use of gyroscopic heading and attitude indicators. In the Cirrus, the standby attitude indicator, standby airspeed, and standby altimeter are available, as is the Multi-Function Display. Guidance from the FAA has us shooting a GPS approach using the moving map display on the MFD after disabling the PFD. Those of us who trained and tested in steam gauge aircraft think that this task should be fairly easy. With a fully functional Attitude Indicator and a nice big moving map display showing our course, a reasonably competent instrument pilot should have little trouble adapting to this setup and flying a good approach.

But, in the Cirrus specifically, and perhaps in other aircraft as well, another question comes up. Can the applicant use the autopilot (which still works just fine after a display failure) during the approach without the PFD? A rather famous DPE who writes for a national magazine says “yes”, opining that not to allow its use would be introducing simultaneous multiple systems failures, which is strictly forbidden in the minds of some. If we follow this logic, we would not test simulated engine failure emergencies in these aircraft either, because to do so would imply failure of not only the engine, but the CAPS parachute system as well. In my former role as a pilot examiner, I always said no, that the approach should be hand flown. Here is my logic.

I was amazed that flight instructors and examiners would accept the substitution of autopilot technology for the skill required to fly an approach without the PFD. I would argue that the intent and the well described emphasis of the PTS is that the applicant must demonstrate the ability to control the airplane after a loss of the primary flight display, not observe and monitor the autopilot controlling the airplane! This argument was generally unpersuasive, so I approached from a different point of view, that of a concerned family member.

“Aunt Betty” represents a future passenger flying with the soon to be rated instrument pilot. Here is the question posed to Aunt Betty: “When we train and test pilots for instrument proficiency, we require them to demonstrate the ability to safely and skillfully fly the airplane without their primary instruments. Now, Betty, in this airplane, we can test this task in one of two ways. We would like your input on which way you would prefer, seeing as you will be a frequent passenger with your nephew. We can either have the pilot (might be your son, brother, husband, or nephew) demonstrate that he can fly the airplane by hand without the PFD, which does require a little more skill and a slightly different technique, or, we can require the pilot to perform this task using the autopilot so that the pilot basically monitors the airplane flying itself on the approach.

“Now, Aunt Betty, a pilot allowed to use the autopilot system on this approach may not have the skill or technique to fly the approach by hand in the clouds should the autopilot shut down due to turbulence or mechanical failure. Should this happen to a pilot without the skill and practice normally required, the odds of a fatal accident occurring would be quite high.

“So what do you think, Aunt Betty? Would you feel more comfortable flying with this fellow if he has demonstrated mastery of the aircraft (sans PFD) without the autopilot or only with its assistance?”

This leads us to a larger discussion about the use of other technology, iPad, GPS moving map, and more. If technology is used as a replacement for pilot proficiency during training and testing, we end up with less skillful, less competent and ultimately less safe pilots. But, if we require that our students demonstrate mastery with the lowest available level of automation and technology (which, by the way, implies excellent fundamental aircraft control skills) then, when technology is added into the equation, we have a safer pilot.

Technology can be a value added safety multiplier, or it can be a crutch needed to make up for lack of fundamental and advanced skills. Crutch or Safety Multiplier, which one will you choose? I know which one Aunt Betty prefers.

Charles McDougal is a flight instructor, corporate pilot, and former DPE ‎who offers basic and advanced flight instruction in the San Antonio area.  To find out more information about Charles or to contact him, visit his website, www.flighttrainingcoalition.com.

When I was working on my instrument rating back in 2007, my instructor and I did a lot of unpublished holds.  In ground school, I heard a lot about holding for weather or holding due to a traffic delay.  At my first job, my chief flight instructor was also a Continental (now United) captain and he told me a lot about having to hold for weather going into different places.

I heard all this, but I figured it would never happen to me when I’m flying GA airplanes.

Boy was I wrong!

I was flying a Piper Malibu into Phoenix with two passengers for Super Bowl weekend and the weather was awful.  No thunderstorms, but moderate precipitation and low ceilings.  We were coming into Deer Valley (KDVT) on the north side of Phoenix and about an hour out, ATC advised me that arrivals into DVT were having to hold and to expect a delay.  The controller said the delay would be about 30 minutes, so by doing a quick calculation, I determined the delay would probably be all cleared up by the time I got in the area.  At the time, I didn’t know if the delay was due to weather or traffic congestion.

Twenty minutes later, the controller advised me that there was still a delay.  I queried what it was for and he informed me it was due to weather.  He asked me if I wanted to hold or divert.  I listened to the ATIS and heard the ceilings were variable from just below the minimums to just above.  I told him I would hold as the TAF I saw predicted the ceilings to go up.

“Malibu, hold present position, hold east, expect further clearance 2140 Zulu.”  Gulp.

At this point, my autopilot had gone out, it was turbulent and I was definitely in the soup.  This was going to be fun.

After recovering my wits, I read back the clearance, then set about setting up this hold without getting too far from my present position.  The Malibu I was flying had a Garmin 530 which I was using as my primary means of navigation.  I was on V190, but I didn’t have all the fixes in my flight plan.  What to do?  And what to do fast?

The 530 has a rarely used function called a User Waypoint.  It comes in handy in situations like these.  On the moving map, you can turn the cursor on, move the cursor to any point on the map, and, by pressing enter, create a User Waypoint.  This is what I did on V190.  After I created it, I had to go to my flight plan, find the right spot, and input the User Waypoint just like I would any fix.  Just a note here, when you create a User Waypoint, make sure you remember what you named it so you can find it again.

After I input the User Waypoint in the flight plan, I had to go back and activate the leg that the User Waypoint was the end point on.  Then, to make sure the flight plan didn’t go to the next waypoint once I crossed my User Waypoint, I had to press the OBS button on the 530 in order to put the GPS in suspend mode.

Keep in mind, my autopilot wasn’t working, so this involved a lot of multi-tasking!

That’s how to do a present position hold using the Garmin 530.  Got all that?  Here’s a concise review:

• Create a User Waypoint
  • Turn the cursor on by pressing the FMS knob
  • Move the cursor to the point where you want your User Waypoint
  • Press enter and name the User Waypoint
• Press the Flight Plan button
• Input the User Waypoint into your flight plan at the proper point
• Activate the leg that the User Waypoint is the end point on
• Finally, press the OBS button to put the GPS in suspend mode
• After you’re cleared onward, just press the OBS button again to take the GPS out of suspend mode

There are a multitude of weather products out there today to assist pilots in preparing for a flight.  Aviationweather.gov is the best source for getting all the information a pilot needs for planning a flight.  Aviationweather.gov is the National Weather Service’s source for all aviation related weather products.  When I teach about weather and weather briefings, I recommend to my students to utilize Aviationweather.gov in the planning stages, but still call the Flight Service Station to get a full fledged weather briefing before takeoff.

When preflight weather planning, one of the best ways to get a picture of what is happening over a broad area is utilizing the Low Level Significant Weather Prog charts.  The Prog chart gives a forecasted 12 and 24 hour picture of what type of weather to expect over the US.  The Prog chart gives the expected flight rules, areas of turbulence, and where the freezing level is located.  If you’re looking at the 4 panel view, the Surface Prog chart shows fronts, pressure areas, and areas of expected precipitation.  That covers just about everything, doesn’t it?

I believe the Prog charts are underutilized in planning.  Foreflight and Garmin Pilot have given easy access to radar pictures, satellite pictures, METARs, TAFs, and several other sources of weather information.  But, a lot of the easy access data you can get from those apps is current data (with the exception of the TAF) while a lot of the forecast data takes some hunting around.  So, products like Prog charts aren’t often utilized.

The other problem arises when pilots know about Prog charts, but don’t know how to read them, then don’t know how to find the legend to decipher the chart, the chart is often set aside and quickly forgotten about just because of a lack of knowledge.  Have no fear, though, as now we will use an example 4 panel Prog chart to decipher the lines and colorations.

Just looking at the Low Level Significant Weather Prog Chart above, it can be a little confusing.  That’s why they make a legend!

Coupling the legend with the chart above, we can determine some things.  First, California, parts of the Pacific Northwest, a small part of southern Arizona, and a good portion of the Midwest and East coast are going to have marginal VFR conditions in the next 12 hours.  Wisconsin, Illinois, a good portion of the Northeast, and a small portion of the Pacific Northwest will suffer IFR from IFR conditions.  There are going to be a good amount of low level turbulence in the northern and eastern parts of the country.  Finally, the freezing level starts at the surface running in a jagged line across the midwest states and curling up into the Northeast.

That’s a good bit of information, isn’t it?  If a pilot is planning a VFR flight into the Northeast tonight, it would probably be best to wait for another day, according to this chart.

Now, to see what is causing the conditions above, we need to look at the Surface Prog Chart.

The green circular areas above show that some form of precipitation is in that area.  The circular dots with the triangle located in Mexico and Baja California are depicting moderate rain showers.  If the triangle was gone, it would just be moderate rain.  In the northeast, all those symbols are showing moderate to heavy snow showers.  Across the plains, we see a lot of high pressure, meaning visibility and nice flying weather.

These charts are invaluable when it comes to flight planning, especially over long distances when the weather could be changing a lot over the period of your flight.  Put them to use the next time you are planning a trip and you’ll learn you have a much better picture of what the weather is doing.