Texas Top Aviation was at the AOPA Regional Fly-In at the San Marcos Regional Airport (KHYI). If you weren’t there, you certainly missed out spending time with 2,500 other airplane and flying enthusiasts!
The day began somewhat gloomy and windy with the threat of rain. Organizers feared that weather would keep a lot of people from coming. Boy, were they wrong!
There were many classic airplanes, many modern and pretty nicely equipped airplanes, and everything in between. There were aviation celebrities, Rod Machado and the Kings of King Schools fame, to name a few. Not to mention the fabulous BBQ!
Texas Top Aviation had several drawings for free training and 3 lucky winners. We also had a Lancair Super ES for sale, N132BB (which made the San Marcos Record newspaper!). It definitely stood out with it’s unique paint job. The flames on the tail drew many oohs and aahs.
Departing the San Marcos Airport after the fly in was like battling traffic in Austin at rush hour (though, Austin doesn’t have any air traffic controllers). The San Marcos controllers probably hadn’t seen that much traffic since the airport was an Army Air Base back during WWII. It was quite a sight to see all the exhibitor’s airplanes lined up ready to head skyward.
Thanks to all of you who stopped by the Texas Top Aviation booth! It was a pleasure meeting all of you and we look forward to working with you in the future!
Hank Gibson and Russell Moore of Texas Top Aviation
The FAA defines personal minimums “as an individual pilot’s set of procedures, rules, criteria, and guidelines for deciding whether and under what conditions to operate (or continue operating) in the National Airspace System.” Have you actually given thought as to why we choose the personal minimums we do? From the beginning of initial pilot training, weather minimums were established for day-to-day training and during solo flight. I didn’t realize it at first, but I later learned these limits were not just an insurance mandate, but these minimums were set at the time to safely operate an aircraft based on my “then” current experience.
So here’s the question: what are your personal minimums and WHY do YOU have them? Do you ever lower or raise your minimums? Are your minimums based solely on your overall experience level or do they take into account other variables such as advanced avionics? For pilots that fly multiple aircraft like I do, can and do your minimums change in regard to category or type of aircraft you are flying? It’s a judgment decision on how you chose your minimums. However, it’s important that time is taken before you strap into the cockpit for each flight to critically think about the different risk factors and variables which may affect your decision for the minimums you choose.
To guide us, let’s try briefly apply the FAA’s Personal Minimums Checklist to see how risk factors might shape what personal minimums or decisions we make for the day. Remember, just because you have been flying with a certain set of minimums one day, doesn’t mean you can’t adjust your minimums to a higher value given an ever-changing situation.
The acronym most pilots have heard is PAVE:
Pilot– We all should be familiar with the acronym IMSAFE associated with this. It addresses variables such as Illness, Medication, Stress, Alcohol, Fatigue, and Emotion. But how do you adjust your personal minimums using this guideline? Have you ever thought about raising your minimums for a training flight if you only got 4-6 hours of sleep, instead of 8? Or if you anticipate a hard IFR flight with a long day, maybe taking a safety pilot to mitigate the chance of a mistake if you’re forecasting having to shoot an approach to your weather planning minimums.
Aircraft– Personally, this is a really important factor for me when deciding what minimums to apply. I often spend a large majority of my time asking myself; is this aircraft properly equipped for the flight? This question goes beyond just looking at the logbook for a properly equipped and legal aircraft. A professional pilot should think further. Am I flying a traditional 6-pack “steam gauge” layout, non-slaved compass card, with a separate OBS gauge for course guidance? What if the aircraft doesn’t have an auto-pilot? What if I’m flying an aircraft equipped with a dual auto-pilot, dual GPS with an integrated glass cockpit? I can comfortably say my personal minimums change depending on the equipment I have available.
A pilot should also look at his/her recency with the aircraft. For example, if you are qualified to fly both airplanes and helicopters, maybe you should choose to have higher personal minimums in one particular airframe or if you haven’t flown that airframe within 30, 60 or 90 days. This is a very important factor for the owner/pilot.
EnVironment– Most of the time, when we think of environment, we ask ourselves, is the weather legal for me to take off and, more importantly, can I conduct this flight safely? Basic flight planning should have taught us to take into consideration crosswind limits, day versus night, and the type of airspace the flight is conducted in. Thought should also be given to how you set your personal minimums in regards to the particular type of environment you might rarely encounter. Flying an approach to your minimums in the flat plains of Texas during the day is one thing, but how would you adjust your weather minimums flying to a new airport, at night, with no moon illumination, in the mountains of Colorado? Could you reduce the risk and adjust your minimums in this scenario with two pilots?
External Pressures – What external pressures are affecting your flight? Passengers, the owner, “get-there-it is”, the desire to impress someone? Although external pressures should never be a factor when conducting a flight, they almost always play a role in your decision whether to conduct the flight or not. For example, a professional pilot gets hired to do a flight and the weather is below their personal minimums. The pilot could be tempted to lower their minimums by 100 feet to take the flight for a paying customer. This scenario plays out every day across the country whether it’s a professional pilot or owner/pilot. It would be foolish not to consider this type of pressure. Always make sure you have a plan if and when you encounter this situation. Planning your flight and having a plan to deal with these potential scenarios ahead of time ensures you stick to your minimums. It can be as simple as telling your passengers, or the owner, well ahead of your flight what your personal minimums are to accept the flight, and to ensure they, or you, have a back-up plan!
Most pilots will never break a hard limitation such as an airframe cross wind limitation, or engine limit, but the chances of breaking a personal minimum are realistic. Think about the last time you went on a diet and broke your plan because you were tempted by your friends or family during an outing. Self-imposed personal minimums can be hard to enforce and we need to acknowledge this as humans. Here are a few techniques that you can use to assist in making a decision using personal minimums and help reduce the influence of external pressures.
Step 1: Sit down with your CFI/CFII and fill out a personal minimums worksheet. Filling one out by yourself is a good start but having an outside objective view will help in making sure your personal minimums are realistic. Remember, it is easy to convince ourselves that we can do something even though we have set personal minimums. Talk with other pilots to see if you have set realistic expectations.
Step 2: Preflight planning must start a few days in advanced. It can be as easy as checking what the forecast might be and looking at the projected route, near-by alternate airports, and various approaches. This can be done quickly and will give you a heads up on whether the flight can be safely conducted or not. By alerting the passengers or owner early enough, alternate plans can be developed. An extra pilot can be added, the passengers can fly commercial, bring along a CFI, or cancel the trip altogether and seek alternate transportation. The main point is the decision was made well ahead of the flight when conditions didn’t look favorable. This helps in removing external pressures and ensures you don’t go below your personal minimums.
Step 3: Never be afraid to ask for a second opinion. Part 135 operators have set procedures for conducting flights which assist the pilots in making decisions. These set procedures help remove external pressures by allowing the pilot to say, “The rules don’t allow for this, or this is how we will conduct the flight!” However, under Part 91, the pilot has to take ownership for all phases of the flight. This is where talking it out with another pilot helps with mitigating external factors and the environment. Ideally, this person should have more experience and be able to talk through the situation. For instance, if I’m flying to a new destination, I often seek the advice from another pilot who’s familiar with the area. They may have key insights into weather patterns, preferred approaches, or hazards to avoid. In certain situations, asking for another pilot’s opinion might be what influences your go/no-go decision! You’ll be amazed how much you can learn just from talking to other pilots.
Step 4: Continue to build your experience and knowledge base. Building experience requires us to push our abilities, and sometimes this may be to the limit. However, this can be done in a controlled training environment or just going out and experiencing it. Get a new license, fly regularly with a CFI/CFII, and always try and take advantage of training opportunities. For example on your next flight from point A to point B, practice hand flying an approach, do a short field landing, a quick steep turn, etc. Quality flight time is always better than quantity. Continue to challenge yourself and try not to become complacent.
Personal minimums are a tool to assist in every pilot’s aeronautical decision making process. Use your personal minimums to guide your final go/no-go decision and remember to stick to the plan. I encourage you to review the FAA’s Risk Management Handbook (FAA-H-8083-2). Appendix B has Sample Risk Management Scenarios and reviewing them will give a better understanding how to apply the techniques discussed to your everyday flying.
Pedro Vargas-Lebron is a King Air 200 and uH-60 Blackhawk Instructor pilot with the Texas Army National Guard. Pedro is a CFI/CFII/MEI both in airplanes and helicopters with over 4000 hours of flight time, half as an instructor pilot.
Has it come time to buy your first airplane? Have the skies been calling your name? Or are you just tired of standing in the airport security line then getting shoved in a long metal tube with no leg room? Or, maybe you are a businessman who does business in remote areas that have local airports but are hard to get to commercially.
Wherever your need is, you have decided it’s time to make a purchase. If you are familiar with aviation, you may have an airplane in mind that you would like to have, but is that the right airplane for your mission? If you are new to aviation, you may have no idea what airplane to go for. Here are some helpful hints in narrowing down the different airplane options out there to fit your specific mission.
Flying For Enjoyment, but Not Going Far Fast
If you’re just a weekend flyer who is tired of dealing with flight school rentals, but you don’t need to carry a lot of people or go very far, your options are pretty numerous. Anything from a Cessna 152 to a Piper Cherokee, maybe a Beech Sundowner, or a Bellanca Viking, or anything in between. If you are content with taking a weekend hop for a hamburger at 100-110 knots, you have limitless options for airplanes. Tailwheels (Cubs, Citabrias, Huskies) are excellent birds for you well.
Getting Places Fast With Only You and Maybe One Passenger
Need to go 200-300 miles fast and not worried about weight? A Cirrus SR22T, a Columbia 400, or Cessna Corvalis might be just what you need. Cruise speeds on those are all around 180-190 knots at 10,000 feet. All are oxygen equipped if you want more speed higher up, as the service ceilings are 25,000 feet. Payloads run in the range of 400-500 pounds with full fuel. All these have air conditioning options, too.
Hauling More Weight, but Still Need the Speed?
A little slower (150-170 knots) but a little bit more payload options are A36 & B36 Bonanzas, Piper Saratogas, Cessna 206s, or Cessna 210s might suit your fancy. All come in turbo models if you are a high elevation dweller. The Cessna 206 has been used for many years as cargo and people haulers in remote regions like Alaska, South America, and Africa. I’ve even seen pictures of snowmobiles being carried in a 206.
Tired of Oxygen Cannulas?
The next step up from a Cirrus, Corvalis, or Saratoga is the Piper Malibu. A bigger brother to the Saratoga, the different PA-46 models offer one of the best options for a single engine piston out there. All except the Matrix (PA-46-350T) are pressurized, all the pistons cruise about 200 knots, and all are configured with club seating with plenty of leg room. Useful loads range around 1200-1400 pounds (they hold 120 gallons of fuel, so payloads range from 480-680 pounds). The original Malibu (PA-46-310P) only burns 16.5 GPH so that allows partial fuel to be carried to allow more people and bags. All have 6 seats.
Need to Carry Even More Weight?
It’s time to get into the piston twin market, then. A Cessna 414, a Cessna 421, a Cessna 340, a Beech Duke or a Beech Baron are all pretty good options here. The 421 and the 414 have the largest cabins, while the Duke has the highest useful load. Cruise speeds range from 200-220 knots, but the cabin is roomier and you get a few more pounds useful load than a piston single. If you do get into a 421, get good training as they are equipped with Continental geared engines, which can be tricky to operate if you don’t know what you are doing.
Need to Carry a Lot of People and Go Fast?
Turboprops are the way to go for you. King Airs have the most utility while the Pilatus PC-12 is the cream of the single engine turboprop crop as you can put almost anything you want in it. If you have 4-5 passengers, stay away from a Piper Meridian as you can’t carry a lot of weight. Those are better for 2-3 passengers at the most (plus a pilot). The TBM 900 is pricey, but fast (300-325 knots). The original TBM 700 can be had for under a million bucks, you get 280 knots, and a very usable useful load. You still can’t fill all 6 seats with full fuel, but you can do more with it then a Meridian.
Have a Boatload of Money Sitting Around?
A jet might be for you then. Fuel, insurance, maintenance, and hangar costs are high, but jets will get you places real fast with room for all your friends and family.
Flying a missed approach can be stressful enough. When you haven’t done one in a while and your GPS isn’t showing you how to get to the missed approach point and you can’t remember which button to press, that adds a lot more stress. Recipe for disaster? Quite possibly!
No need to fear, we are here to help. The procedure for getting a Garmin 530 or 430 to give you missed approach guidance is actually simple and straightforward, if you know what to do!
Note:Because of the variety of different autopilot configurations in different airplanes, this article will focus solely on the GPS.
What the GPS is Thinking
The way Garmin designed the Garmin 530 and Garmin 430 is to be as helpful to pilots as possible. Their thinking was, 95% of the time, a pilot will make a landing on an instrument approach. This is pretty accurate as most of the time, this is what happens. Most general aviation pilots don’t fly approaches to minimums all that often, thus negating the need for a missed approach.
Garmin designed their software with this in mind. When an airplane crosses the missed approach point, the GPS will go into what’s called suspend mode (a SUSP annunciation appears above the OBS key). It will keep the missed approach point as the active waypoint because it assumes the pilot is going to land.
This can be confusing to pilots. This is what happens when software engineers and pilots come together. Engineers often believe they are smarter than pilots! (See the Airbus fly by wire roll out)
The Procedure
In the case of a missed approach, the button pushing on the GPS is actually relatively simple. There is no SUSP key to take the GPS out of SUSP mode (thanks Garmin!). Instead, you press the OBS key. This will take the GPS out of SUSP mode, making the first waypoint on the missed approach procedure the active waypoint. Your GPS will now give you guidance on the missed approach procedure.
If you are going missed off an ILS, LOC, or VOR approach, then there is one more key you’ll have to press. Your CDI needle (whether it is digital or analog, an HSI or just a CDI gauge) will be reading off the NAV radio and your CDI indication on the GPS will be VLOC. After you press the OBS key, press the CDI key on the GPS so you will start getting course guidance from the GPS again.
That’s it. Button pressing on the different autopilots will vary, but if you are familiar with yours, you’ll be able to tell it to follow the GPS and climb to the proper altitude.
Many people ask, which set of charts is better? Should I use the FAA Aeroservices charts on Foreflight or pay extra for the Jeppesen charts? Since you have to pay for Jeppesen, they are probably better, right?
I am not here to say which one is better as a chart preference is just that, a preference for one over the other or for certain features. After a while, muscle memory and routine take over and you probably wont even notice the difference.
History
In 1934, Elroy Jeppesen began making his own charts and sold them to other pilots. His little company grew into the giant Boeing chart company we know today. Jeppesen charts are used internationally and therefore include information that might otherwise seem common knowledge, like transition altitudes. The key is, you cannot get FAA Aeroservices charts for international destinations. Jeppesen is the only option for outside the US.
National Aerospace Charting Office (NACO), or the new(er) name “Aeroservices” or FAA chart, whatever you decide to call them, are United States government issued charts. In addition to civilian use, Aeroservices charts are used by the military so there will be some terminology that does not apply to civilians. The best part about FAA Aeroservices charts are… they’re free!
If you are in the middle of a transition or trying to decide which charts to use, you have come to the right place. Here are a few key differences.
Obstacle Departure Procedure Chart KAXX (Angel Fire, New Mexico) ODP
Frequencies: FAA Chart provides the AWOS so you have all departure frequencies in once place.
Airport: Jeppesen highlight the airport, which is a nice feature so you can easily see the flow from the airport.
Notes and Remarks: Jeppesen bolds the speed restriction all over the chart so you won’t miss it. All other requirements are in the top right corner. Note the transition altitude 18,000′. Since Jeppesen is used internationally, it is published on the chart since other countries have different transition altitudes. It takes up a chunk of chart real estate, but it’s clear, easy to read, and always in the same place. The FAA charts post all the requirements and restrictions as notes off to the side. Since it’s in the same space as the chart graphic, it’s easy for the eyes to catch while studying the plate.
Take off Minimums: NOT APPLICABLE for PART 91 – however, it’s wise for all pilots to look and abide by them. Jeppesen displays the standard take off minimums table, as well as the rate of climb table, which is nice to have all in one place. The FAA chart gives the non standard information but you need to know/look up the rest in the Digital Terminal Procedures Supplemental document. (Hint: It’s in the Documents section of Foreflight)
Take Off Obstacles: About the same on both charts
Route Description: Similar on both charts, but larger font and clearer description on the FAA chart. When there are different routes from different runways, the FAA chart layout is really helpful.
Graphic Layout: Jeppesen and FAA use the same graphics for all their different charts and plates which makes it easy to read once you are familiar with the respective charts. FAA charts are easy to read and distractions are kept to a minimum. Jeppesen charts make things bold and enlarge pertinent information so you won’t miss it.
Airport altitude: This is only on the Jeppesen chart (the FAA chart doesn’t include it), but it is very helpful for situational awareness. As you brief the arrival altitudes, I think it’s important to have an idea what AGL you are at.
Approach Charts
One thing pilots love about Jeppesen approach charts is the clear set up for an approach brief. The top section is created as a “briefing strip” starting with the frequencies, then navigation frequencies, minimums, airport elevation and the missed approach. It’s very natural and user friendly.
FAA charts have a slightly bigger picture of the approach planview, but the profile view and minimums section can get a bit cluttered. It can feel a little discontinuous when briefing the approach to bounce all over the page. However, some pilots really like the small airport diagram in the corner, which I find really helpful for situational awareness (particularly for students learning circle approaches). Non- standard alternate and takeoff minimums are also clearly noted, but unfortunately we must hunt elsewhere to find them. The Jeppesen alternate minimums and takeoff minimums will both be on the airport diagram
Frequencies: Getting weather and tuning radios is easy on the Jeppesen charts – just follow the briefing strip. The frequency section on the FAA charts is still easy to read, but closer to the center of the page. It’s split up from the nav frequencies and other important briefing information. a. FAA charts are created by the government and have military specific information, which are the odd looking frequencies and channels on the chart.
Approach Navigation: On a Jeppesen chart, you will continue to the next line to verify your frequency, course and set minimums (assuming you are straight in on the ILS). On the FAA chart, you will then have to skip to the top of the chart to get the frequency and course, and then scan to the bottom of the page to input your minimums. However, since you could be flying a localizer approach or a circle to land, it’s a good reminder that not everyone using this approach chart will be using the same Decision Altitude (DA). The FAA chart also includes runway distance information so pilots can make determinations of approach speeds and stopping distance if the runway is wet or icy.
Missed Approach – Textual
Approach Lighting
Missed Approach- Graphical: The missed approach information is the same on both charts. The lighting information is key for determining a missed approach and is next to the missed approach text on the FAA chart. It’s found next to the missed approach graphic on the Jeppesen chart. Personally, I find it easier to find and read the lighting information on the Jeppesen chart. Remember, on both charts, the placement of the PAPI on the chart indicates the physical location of the lights (left or right of the runway).
Notes: Both charts have a notes box, but they use them a little differently. Once again, remember that Jeppesen charts are used internationally and include the transition altitudes and altimeter setting info. On both charts, the notes section will be where other critical information will be shared which isn’t really applicable for this airport. On the FAA chart, the tower frequency is starred to note that there are operating hours (you’ll have to check the chart supplement AF/D to find out what those hours are). There is also an L next to the frequency to indicate it is the pilot controlled lighting frequency. You will also find the note about the VGSI and the Approach Glide path next to the profile view on the FAA chart, whereas the Jeppesen chart has that note in the notes section at the top. The FAA chart also has the T and an A in black triangles to note that this airport has non- standard alternate and take off minimums. Again, those are found in separate documents when using FAA charts and on the Airport Diagram when using Jeppesen charts.
Minimum Sector Altitude: Similar on both charts, but in different locations (reminder: ATC vector altitudes may be lower. It is the pilot’s responsibility for safety of flight to maintain safe obstacle clearance, so if you are ever concerned about going below the MSA – just ask ATC).
Planview: Other then differences in size, visuals, and text, the information displayed on both is very similar.
Profile View: Again, the displays look different and pilots will have their preference, but the information is the same.
Minimums: Jeppesen charts not only note the category for each approach with its designated letter, but also displays it in knots. It is recommended that if you increase your approach speed (based on flaps or gusty winds or perhaps a faster speed for a circle to land approach) that you should use the higher category minimums. The reference guide makes that easy to look up. The other benefit of the Jeppesen charts is right the table that contains the time from the final approach fix to the missed approach point for a localizer approach, it also shows the rate of descent with the associated ground speed to maintain a 3 degree glideslope. Now there is no excuse not to set pitch and power! The minimums posted in parenthesis are for the military, but RVR in statute miles is also included.
Airport diagram: Only on the FAA charts, this particular feature is particularly useful for situational awareness. The arrow pointing to the runway shows the direction the approach is arriving from so planning a circle to land is a cinch. There is also a lot of other information that can be gathered from the airport diagram for quick reference or to help a disoriented pilot: lighting, displaced thresholds, closed taxiways, and runway placement and lengths. This is easily one of the best perks of an FAA chart.
Arrival/ Departure Charts: Sewzy 5 Arrival KAUS
The Jeppesen lay out is very attractive and draws the pilots eye in a clear way to all the important information. The colors pop out, so the required altitudes and speeds are easy to read and remember. The chart, which is the proper scale, shows MORAs , easy to find airports (and runway layouts) and is over all easy to follow. However, the texts, while very clearly laid out, are small and difficult to read and pushed to the very edges of the chart. FAA charts are simple and fairly easy to read, but the airports are not as obvious and the flow to the airport requires a good look. The table on the Jeppesen chart is a really nice format, but the text and Notes for arrivals on the FAA chart are easy to find and much easier to read quickly.
Frequency: FAA charts include the approach frequency on the arrival, which is helpful for having radios tuned. During a busy time when the controller changes your frequency, all you have to do is verify the frequency you already set, rather then totally stop what you’re doing to switch it. The Jeppesen charts add the airport elevation next to the ATIS, which really aids situational awareness.
Notes: Jeppesen notes are clearly numbered and tucked away nicely in a box, but the FAA chart notes pop out in the middle of the page and are easy to skim for pertinent information.
Planview: I think Jeppesen is the clear winner here- it is so easy to read, it only takes one glance to know where the primary airport is and how the arrival flows. The chart being at the proper scale offers the pilot important geographical information and over all is a clean look. Notice the small series of arrows after SMRFF on the the Jeppesen chart; those indicate the pilot should expect radar vectors. The FAA charts include those instructions in the text, but I find the visual reference on the chart helpful. The FAA charts are equally clean, with altitude and speed restrictions easy to read even if they don’t jump out. When there are multiple airports that the arrival serves, the airports are clearly marked, though, I think it would be nice to have a little more information surrounding the primary airport for better situational awareness.
MSA: only on the Jeppesen chart
Primary airport: The runway alignment and grey highlight on the Jeppesen chart stands out very clearly, while the FAA airports are a little more obscure.
Arrival route description: The table on the Jeppesen chart is easy to follow but the text is very small and pushed to the bottom. The route description is much easier to find and read on the FAA chart.
Airport Diagram
The Jeppesen Airport Diagram page has it all: frequencies, airport diagram, runway info, take-off minimums, departure procedures and alternate minimums. It’s a one-stop shop. It makes preflight planning easy when its all at your fingertips.
The FAA charts usually require a little more searching for different pieces of airport information. The Airport Diagram itself is just the airport layout. Above, you will see a simple FAA Airport diagram. It’s clean and simple, perfect for a knee board print out.
In the flight planning process, as you look at what approaches you will be using for the airport, you might see an A or T inside a triangle. Those indicate that you will need to look in the Alternate Minimum or Take off minimum documents for more information. The Takeoff Minimums document (see below) is also where you will find any obstacle departure procedures for that airport. Apps like Foreflight help you out by posting the take off minimums under the departure tab. Even though it’s a little more difficult to read, I didn’t crop out the airport information so you can see what it looks like in context.
FAA Alternate Minimums on the Left and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures on the Right
Technology has made our job as pilots simpler, streamlined, and safer. With all the new GPS & autopilot technology that seems to come out every month, flying an airplane is getting easier every day (and when I say flying, I mean programming!). I can’t tell you the last time I actually used a VOR for navigation, other than a practice approach. The AIM even has guidance in it now allowing pilots to use the GPS overlay on a VOR or LOC approach instead of switching to the actual NavAid on the course needle (you have to WAAS in order to legally do this).
I hear the argument already. I am young (31) and used to all the different touchscreens because I have grown up with them. Tech is nothing new to me. It’s not that easy for everyone, I do understand. There is also the argument that all the tech causes pilots to not know how to fly the airplane, which is also valid. This is why I put an emphasis on hand flying in any kind of training I do.
For the sake of argument in this article, yes, I am young and I adapt to technology pretty easily. I’m not afraid to press buttons to figure out what they do, but I usually do it while sitting on the ground with a GPU hooked up (or I go look in the manual). And yes, all the autopilot ability has caused a decrease in base pilot skills. I actually encourage every customer I have to go get a tailwheel rating so that they can actually learn how to fly better. You don’t use a rudder much in a Cirrus compared to a Super Cub or a Citabria.
What I want to focus on for a few minutes is how to alleviate the frustration that comes with getting so wrapped up in the technology when it doesn’t do something that you want it to, or the wrong button gets pressed, then you end up somewhere you had no intention of being.
The biggest thing a pilot can do when it comes to technology is NEVER to get in a hurry. Good training is first and foremost, but, after that when flying without an instructor or even in recurrent training, SLOW DOWN and think through what you are doing and what you want the system to do. This will alleviate a ton of frustration.
It can be very easy in hot, turbulent weather to get tuned in to the GPS programming, trying to do five or six different things in the span of five or six seconds, before looking up and realizing that plane is 500 feet off altitude (without an autopilot) or you blew through the course you were supposed to be intercepting (with an autopilot).
What I teach is to slow down, whether or not you have an autopilot, and do one thing at a time. Once that item is done, look up at the instruments or the horizon, check on things, make sure the airplane is still flying properly, then do the next thing. Don’t try and do a bunch of things all at once or in a hurry. It will usually get you off course and off altitude, plus it distracts the pilot from his main job: Flying the airplane.
So, next time you want to do something on your GPS, pause, take a breath, think through what you want to do, then do one item at a time. The outcome will be less frustrating and you’ll keep flying where you want to go.
Avidyne’s plug and play replacement for the Garmin 430, the Avidyne IFD 440, finally received certification from the FAA last week. The touch screen GPS unit is being marketed as a simple swap out for the Garmin 430. This release follows up Avidyne’s release last year of the IFD 540, also a plug and play replacement, but for the Garmin 530.
The features and touch screen of the GPS units sound quite nifty, but it will be hard for Avidyne to compete with the GTN 750 and 650 from Garmin. The unit prices for the IFD 540 and 440 will be less (and installation is simpler), but we will see how the company does.
The STC allows for installation in 1,000 makes and models of aircraft, according to the company, so there are a lot of possibilities for installs.
In conjunction, Avidyne also released a new version of it’s software for both GPS units. According to Avidyne, this will unlock multiple features that enhances the capabilities of both units.
To read more on the IFD 440 and it’s bigger brother, the IFD 540, check out Avidyne’s website.
Texas Top Aviation was at the AOPA Regional Fly-In at the San Marcos Regional Airport (KHYI). If you weren’t there, you certainly missed out spending time with 2,500 other airplane and flying enthusiasts!
Texas Top Aviation had several drawings for free training and 3 lucky winners. We also had a Lancair Super ES for sale, N132BB (which made the San Marcos Record newspaper!). It definitely stood out with it’s unique paint job. The flames on the tail drew many oohs and aahs.
