PIREP: Austin Bergstrom Recovering After Flood Damage

The massive storms that rolled through the Austin Bergstrom and San Antonio areas last Friday not only put a dent in the landscape, they put a dent in the skies too.

The Austin Bergstrom (KAUS) control tower suffered significant flood damage Friday.  6 inches of rainfall in an hour caused water to come pouring into the first floor of the tower, flooding the radar room and knocking out the power.  This led to transmission outages for the tower, ground control, clearance delivery and the ATIS.  Similar to the Chicago Center fire last year (though this was a much smaller section of airspace), the area normally controlled by Austin Approach was replaced by a big, gaping radar hole.

By 8:45am on Friday morning, the Austin Bergstrom airport actually closed.  One runway eventually opened back up Friday afternoon, but massive delays and cancellations had already taken place.  All the ILS approaches were down and Houston Center had taken over the airspace normally occupied by Austin Approach control.

Austin Temprorary Tower

A temporary, emergency tower vehicle was brought in by the FAA (it’s essentially an RV with communications and a giant window) by the end of the weekend.  All arrivals and departures were restricted to 17L and 35R.

Due to the radar outage, I heard there was as much as a 4 hour delay even for planes coming into Austin Bergstrom from Dallas, and that was in VMC conditions on Sunday and Monday.  Tuesday and Wednesday brought IMC conditions which only enhanced the delays.

The latest news is that Austin Approach will be opening back up, but in a satellite base in San Antonio.  The Austin controllers will be using the SAT radar room and will be receiving their radar picture via satellite.  The approach frequencies should be up and running today or tomorrow.  The Austin Bergstrom tower is up and running and most of the ILS approaches are operational at this point.

In the meantime, expect delays going in and out of Austin.  If you don’t have to get to AUS, EDC, or GTU, you’re better off delaying a day or two until Austin Approach is back up and running.

Similar Posts

  • Learning From Other’s Mistakes:  An Overview of the 2024 Piper PA-46 Accidents

    The Piper PA-46 series, which includes models like the piston engine Piper Malibu and Piper Mirage, and the turboprops Piper Meridian, M500, and M600, is a popular choice for private pilots and business aviation. Known for its impressive speed, range, and pressurization, the PA-46 is a very capable single pilot aircraft. However, like all high-performance aircraft, it presents its own set of challenges and risks, especially when pilot error or adverse conditions come into play.

    The 2024 PMOPA (Piper M-Class Owner’s and Pilot’s Association) Convention was the first weekend in November and one of the sessions every year is the PA-46 Safety Review.  Sadly, in 2024, the accidents involving various PA-46 models pointed out several areas related to decision making that all pilots need to put be aware of. These accidents highlight critical issues in weather awareness, pilot training, and decision-making, and they provide valuable lessons for other pilots in any type of aircraft.

    Overview of the 2024 Piper PA-46 Accidents

    The Piper PA-46 is generally regarded as a reliable and capable aircraft, but the safe outcome of a flight often times depends on the pilot’s decision making.  There always can be mechanical malfunctions, but those still require good pilot decision making to be able to walk away from the accident.

    In 2024, multiple accidents occurred involving different variants of the PA-46, with many of the accidents occurring during critical phases of flight like takeoff or landing. Some of the key factors contributing to these accidents included:

    1. Weather Challenges: In several cases, adverse weather conditions, such as low visibility, thunderstorms, or high winds, contributed to accidents. Despite most PA-46’s being equipped with NexRad and weather radar, pilots sometimes underestimated or misjudged the weather risks.
    2. Pilot Decision-Making: A recurring theme in these accidents was pilot error—specifically, poor decision-making when faced with challenging conditions. In some cases, pilots continued flights despite deteriorating weather or failed to react appropriately to emergency situations.
    3. Mechanical Failures: As with every airplane, systems fail on a Piper PA-46.  Several accidents were due to engine power loss.  Proper training teaches pilots how to have the right mindset and skills to handle those engine power loss situations, taking a bad situation and having the best possible outcome due to good decision making and gliding skills.

    Three Key Lessons for Pilots

    The Piper PA-46 accidents of 2024 serve as valuable reminders about the importance of pilot preparation, decision-making, and risk management. Here are three critical lessons pilots can take away from these accidents:

    1. Prioritize Pre-Flight Weather Planning

    Poor weather conditions were a significant factor in some of the crashes in 2024. Pilots of high-performance aircraft must place a strong emphasis on weather pre-flight planning, especially when flying into regions prone to rapidly changing weather or severe conditions and across frontal systems. Pilots should:

    • Stay up-to-date with weather briefings before and during the flight, including calls to Flight Service Station if there is serious weather along the route.
    • Be proactive in altering flight plans or delaying departures when weather conditions become unfavorable.
    • Utilize onboard weather radar and other tools to monitor changing conditions in real time and avoid nasty looking weather systems.  ADS-B and XM Weather are delayed information.  They are not meant to be used to find holes through storm systems.
    • Finally, don’t try to shoot through holes!  They are called sucker holes for a reason.

    2. Master Emergency Procedures

    Pilots of all aircraft, not just PA-46 models, need to practice engine-out procedures multiple times a year with an instructor, not just at recurrent training.  The goal is to make emergency procedures second nature which creates the right mindset to handle the emergency, creating a much better outcome. Training should focus on:

    • Engine-out procedures immediately after takeoff, climbing out at low altitude, and at cruise.
    • Performance with the propeller feathered and unfeathered, recognizing how the feathered prop increases glide range.
    • Practicing forced landings and other emergency scenarios regularly to build confidence and competence.

    3. Always Plan for an Emergency Landing

    It is very important to know your options in the event of an emergency. When flying over mountainous or remote areas, pilots should always have a contingency plan for where to land if something goes wrong.  An emergency engine out brief should be a part of every pre-takeoff briefing to put the pilot in the right mindset. Pilots should:

    • Brief an engine failure on the runway, low altitude, and at an altitude that allows for a safe return to the airport in the event of an engine failure as part of every pre-takeoff briefing.
    • Study the flight route in detail and identify suitable emergency landing sites along the way, especially when flying in areas with limited options.
    • Consider the terrain, weather conditions, and available options in the event of an engine failure or other emergency.
    • Use terrain awareness and other onboard tools to help identify suitable landing areas in real-time, including the ForeFlight Glide Advisor.

    Conclusion

    The Piper PA-46 series, while a capable and reliable aircraft, demands a high level of skill and preparation from its pilots. The accidents in 2024 serve as a sobering reminder of the critical importance of weather awareness, emergency training, and proper flight planning. By learning from these accidents, pilots can make better decisions, have the right mindset, and reduce the risk of similar accidents in the future.

    By prioritizing weather awareness, mastering emergency procedures, and always having a contingency plan for forced landings, pilots of the Piper PA-46 can improve their ability to handle the challenges posed by these high-performance aircraft. These lessons are not just for PA-46 pilots, but for all pilots striving to fly safely and confidently.

  • VFR Flight Plans in the Modern Age

    Raise your hand if, after you have officially become a pilot by passing your private pilot check ride, you consistently file VFR flight plans with Flight Service.

    Anybody?

    Okay, let’s revise the question.  Raise your hand if you have filed VFR flight plans at least 5 times in the last year.

    Okay, one or two hands go up.

    That’s it?

    To be perfectly honest, I have filed VFR Flight Plans twice (I think) in the last year.  The only reason I did was because I was flying in an area that had poor radar/radio communications and I wanted someone to know where I was (I was ferrying an airplane through southern Oregon and northern Nevada which is mountainous and is hard to get coverage into at lower altitudes).  I was so unaccustomed to doing it that I nearly forgot to call and close my flight plan.

    FlightPlanForm

    This is a common complaint amongst pilots concerning VFR flight plans.  It’s extremely easy to get to your destination, hop in the car and completely forget to close your VFR flight plans.  Thankfully, now a days, the Flight Service Station will typically call the number you put in your VFR flight plans (your cell phone number most of the time) to make sure you are on the ground before initiating search and rescue services.

    Another complaint is that it is cumbersome to call the Flight Service Station after departing to open the VFR flight plans.  This is especially true in a busy airspace area or if the pilot is getting a VFR Flight Following and talking to ATC on a different frequency.

    I still think it is a great idea to file and utilize VFR flight plans.  If you don’t show up at your destination, someone will come looking for you which could mean the difference between getting stranded after an off airport landing and getting a warm cup of coffee at the end of the day.  Even if the you get flight following from ATC, it’s still good to file a flight plan.

    Lockheed Martin, who runs all the Flight Service Stations across the US, heard these complaints from pilots and decided to come into the modern age and make it easier to open and close flight plans.  They developed EasyActivate and EasyClose.

    These services are very simple.  Just go to Lockheed Martin’s Flight Service Station website, set up a new account, then file VFR flight plans to see the services in action.

    File your VFR flight plans first, through calling the FSS or on your favorite iPad app.  Then, for EasyActivate, you’ll receive an email 30 minutes prior to your ETD with a link in it.  Simply click/tap on the link and your flight plan is activated.  No having to call FSS in the air, no having to try to get them on the ground.  Just tap the link and you’re good to go.

    For EasyClose, you’ll receive an email 30 minutes prior to your ETA at your destination.  When you get on the ground, you’ll see the email in your phone or iPad and you just tap the link and your flight plan is closed.  Since we all have our phones and iPads with us constantly, there will be no more forgetting to close the flight plan and getting that angry call from the FSS.

    Sign up is quick and easy.  All Lockheed Martin needs is your email address, last name and phone number. They’ll send you the password to set up your account.  Log in (they will have you change your password immediately), then just click on EasyActivate/EasyClose up at the top.  You have to register the email address you want (you can also put in a phone number to receive a text message, and you can put multiple email addresses and phone numbers if you’d like), then you are all set to go.

  • Drones: A Brief History

    Drones; these technological wonders have, seemingly, come out of nowhere over the course of a few years. Although they bring with them the promise of convenience and fun, they have also brought problems and uncertainty for the government, general public, and, specifically, the aviation community. But, where did drones come from and are they really something to be worried about? Let’s take a look at Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and hopefully put to bed some of the concerns which seem to be following them around.

    It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone when I say that drones have recently become overwhelmingly popular. The military, businesses, and hobbyists are increasingly utilizing them for all kinds of purposes, which range from enemy surveillance to package delivery. Drone pilots are in high demand and several aviation universities are even offering majors designed to produce graduates which specialize in UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles).

    Drones are relatively new to the landscape of unmanned flying machines. Although model airplanes have been popular since the dawn of aviation, the first “drones” didn’t start becoming commercially available until a few years ago. As electronic technology advanced, so did model aviation. Models became more and more sophisticated and could be flown remotely as long as they remained within sight of the person flying it.

    It wasn’t until about 3 or 4 years ago that the technology became available to develop drones. This is due to the need for very small and light electric motors, batteries, and stabilization systems. Once these started to become popular, it didn’t take long for drones to become bigger, cheaper, and completely automated.

    It is important to note that there is a difference between drones and conventional model airplanes and helicopters. Drones are defined most simply as an unmanned vehicle which can be operated without user input from the ground. Conventional model aircraft can take all shapes and sizes, but must be operated within line of sight from the operator; as they have no ability to fly, takeoff, land, or navigate without input via a radio transmitter. So, if you happen to see a model aircraft flying, don’t assume automatically that it is a drone. Most of the time, model airplanes, helicopters and even drones are being flown safely and legally.

    Generally, a drone is designed with several arms which come off of a central body. Each of the “arms” typically has a motor with a rotor mounted on it to provide lift while the main body is home to the radio equipment, landing skids and camera gear. If you see a model flying that looks like a conventional airplane or helicopter, odds are it isn’t a drone. Most likely it is being flown recreationally by someone nearby.

    Historically, model airplanes and helicopters have been difficult to learn to fly. Before the times of pre-built foam airplanes and ready to fly drones, a modeler had to build their flying machine and find someone to teach them how to fly it. (Otherwise, they would likely only get one short flight). New modelers would be directed toward the local model flying club and would get plugged in with a group of established fliers who could outline the rules for model aircraft as well as get them up in the air safely.

     

    However, because most everything is purchased online in today’s market, drones are bought and flown by enthusiasts who have not been taught the rules, safety protocols, and procedures necessary to safely operate their new kits. In addition, the drones incredible stability and ability to be flown without any skill means that anyone with great enough funds and an equally great lack of common sense can buy a model and program it to fly over any location they choose. Unfortunately, sometimes that includes places which cause problems.

    Andrew Robinson is a 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor who lives with his wife and 2 daughters in Pennsylvania.  He flies Pilatus PC-12s and instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.

  • MMOPA Spring Safety Standdown

    MMOPA will be hosting it’s second Safety Standdown event at many locations across the country for Piper PA46 owners and pilots. The first iteration of MMOPA Safety Standdown in the fall of 2019 was a big hit. Each event was very well attended by MMOPA members.

    What is Safety Standdown you ask? Safety Standdown was put together as a mid-year training event as part of the MMOPA Master Aviator program. It’s goal is to allow PA46 owners and pilots to fly in to a location at a reasonable time (the event starts at 10am local time), received some good quality ground training over relevant safety topics by highly experienced PA46 instructors, have a free lunch, then depart mid-afternoon to arrive back home before dark.

    The event is free to all attendees. Lunch will be provided at each location. This event is not exclusive to MMOPA members, either. Any PA46 owner or pilot, or just anyone interested in the PA46 world, are invited to attend.

    Texas Top Aviation is hosting the South Central Region Spring Safety Standdown at the Henrickson Jet Center at the Austin Executive Airport (KEDC). Hank Gibson and Pedro Vargas-Lebron will be presenting on the following topics:

    • MMOPA Operational Practices review and importance of stabilized approaches
    • Crosswind Takeoffs and Landings
    • High Density Altitude Operations
    • A discussion of thunderstorms, resources in the cockpit for weather avoidance, and accidents that have occurred involving thunderstorms

    The MMOPA Spring Safety Standdown will take place on Saturday, April 18th, 2020. Registration is required for the event. The link for registration can be found here.

    Come on out for some high quality training and free BBQ with 50 of your closest PA46 buddies!

  • Epic E1000 Gets the GFC 700

    When the Epic E1000 was finally certified in the spring of 2020, there was much celebrating across the aviation world. Epic Aircraft expended a lot of time and energy getting the E1000 certified and into production (more information on that journey here and in Flying Magazine here).

    The airplane is amazing. In the single engine, 6 seat turboprop market, it easily blows away the competition. With it’s 1,200 SHP PT6-67A, it has double the horsepower of the M600 (600 SHP), and 350 more horsepower than the TBM 940 (850 SHP). It’s 60 KTAS faster than the M600 and, even though the TBM can keep up (both airplanes have equal top cruise speeds of 330 KTAS), the Epic E1000 can carry a payload of 1,024 pounds with full fuel, while the 940 can only carry 584 pounds with full fuel. The TBM carries about 15 minutes more of fuel, but to me, that’s pretty negligible.

    Did I mention climb rates? The E1000 climbs at an average of 1500 FPM at Vy (it’s capable of 4,000 FPM), making it to 25,000 feet in 10 minutes. The TBM climbs at 1000 FPM, taking 13 minutes to climb to the same altitude, while the M600 settles in at about 800 FPM, reaching FL250 in 21 minutes.

    If you expand the comparison to include the Pilatus PC-12, the two airplanes have 1,200 SHP, but the Epic is 50 KTAS faster and they both have about the same weight carrying ability.

    In the most important arena, price, the E1000 is around a million dollars cheaper than the TBM 940.

    The one drawback to the Epic E1000 that immediately was noticeable was the autopilot. Epic originally installed the STEC 2100 autopilot to pair with the G1000 (and later the G1000 NXi). Epic decided to stick with the STEC 2100 through certification for the plane since that autopilot was on all of the E1000s paperwork going through all the levels of FAA approval. To change to the GFC 700 during the certification process would have been a massive undertaking that probably would have delayed certification.

    The STEC 2100 is a good autopilot, but, as any G1000 pilot can tell you, the lack of integration between any STEC autopilot and Garmin panel leaves some to be desired. Not all the bugs talk, which often requires dual data entry, which can lead to forgetting to do both the bug and the autopilot when things get busy. Hello, altitude deviation.

    The goal for Epic was never to leave the STEC autopilot in the airplane. The first E1000s were rolled off the line with the STEC, but Epic didn’t take long to change the autopilot to the much more integrated Garmin GFC 700. That took place this winter (2020), and the E1000 received it’s first upgrade, with Epic dubbing the airplane the Epic E1000 GX.

    I expect the innovators in Bend, OR, where Epic is based and where tons of innovation in aviation happens (Lancair/Columbia started in Bend while RDD is based there as well), to quickly come out with more avionics upgrades for the airplane. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a G3000 version at some point, complete with auto throttles and the new Garmin Autoland. Epic would be smart to follow in the steps of Daher and offer two models, one with the G1000 and one with the G3000 (the TBM 910 has the G1000 NXi while the TBM 940 has the G3000).

    I have yet to fly in an Epic E1000, but I would certainly jump at the chance to do so. Someone asked me yesterday what airplane I would buy if I had a blank check. With the GFC 700 now in the Epic, it would absolutely be the E1000 GX.

  • Mooney Enters the Training Market with the Mooney M10

    Earlier this week, Mooney announced they would be following competitors Piper (with their Archer DX) and Redbird (with their retrofitted 172 known as the Redhawk) into the training market with the Mooney M10 T and Mooney M10 J.  Mooney, which hasn’t manufactured a primary trainer since the Mooney M10 Cadet in 1970, is planning on putting Jet A burning Continental Engines in the new aircraft.  The mockup was unveiled at Airshow China.

    The Mooney M10 T is a 3 seat, fixed gear trainer sporting a Continental CD-135 engine.  At 135 HP, the initial design data claims the Mooney M10 T will be able to cruise at 140 KTAS at 75% power, allowing the Jet A engine to burn between 4-5 gallons per hour while holding 42 gallons of fuel.  As with other Jet A piston powered airplanes, the Mooney M10 T will have a Fully Automated Digital Engine Control (or FADEC) system.  This leaves just a single power lever in the cockpit, allowing the pilot to set a percent power and the FADEC computer will set the manifold pressure, prop speed, and mixture.

    The Mooney M10 J has a slightly bigger engine, the 155 HP Continental CD-155.  It also is equipped with retractable gear.  Initially, Mooney is predicting 160 KTAS at 75% power for the Mooney  M10 J.  The airplane will come as a two-seater, but will have a third seat as an option.  Mooney says that the Mooney M10 J will allow pilots to make an easy transition to the bigger and faster M20J that has been popular for many years amongst “Mooniacs.”

    Mooney M10 Interior

    In a new direction for Mooney, the Mooney M10 T Mooney M10 J will both be composite airplanes with side sticks, instead of the traditional sheet metal exterior with a yoke as Mooney aircraft have been in the past. Also venturing from the more powerful Mooney aircraft is the fact that the Mooney M10 T and Mooney M10 J will have two doors.  Remaining, though, is the swept tail that Mooney aircraft are known for.  Both airplanes will be equipped with Garmin G1000 panels, while the Mooney M10 J will also have the GFC 700 autopilot, marketing more toward aircraft owners rather than students.

    The only downside that I read about was the time between replacements for the engines.  For the CD-135 engine in the Mooney M10 T, time between replacement is 1,500 hours, whereas the CD-155 only has a 1,200 hour replacement time.

    Mooney expects certification and deliveries to begin for the Mooney M10 T and Mooney M10 J in 2017.

    Mooney M10T and M10J

    Information courtesy of AOPA and Mooney International.  Images courtesy of Mooney International.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *