I Learn To Speak Seaplane

Lightspeed Zulu 2 vs. The Bose A20

ByHank Gibson September 13, 2014

The debate about which headset is the better product will never cease.  We do know this for sure, though, Lightspeed and Bose make the best noise canceling headsets out there.  David Clark’s offering doesn’t match up with these two.  Newcomer AKG has a light (weight-wise that is, as the headset is equipped with a pair of LED lights as well) ANR headset that the jury is still out on.  For now, Lightspeed and Bose sit atop the ANR kingdom.

The comparison for this article will be between the Lightspeed Zulu 2 and the Bose A20 headsets, both of which I have used quite extensively in my flying career.  I am officially in the Lighspeed camp at this point and after reading my comparison below, you’ll see why.

ANR Functionality

Between the two, the Bose A20 cancels out more noise, no argument there.  This isn’t to say that the Lightspeed Zulu 2 doesn’t.  Quite the opposite, actually.  The Lightspeed Zulu 2 does a great job of canceling the noise.  But with the A20 on in a C172, you can barely hear the engine running.  The difference before you press the power button and after is extremely noticeable.  I had one client turn to me after turning on the noise canceling function of his new A20 headset and state, “These things are awesome!”

The other advantage Bose has is a continuation of the noise canceling.  About the only thing I don’t like about the Lightspeed is if you don’t have the headset sized just right on your head, each time you turn your head to look at something, then the suction gets broken around the ear cup and you get some ambient noise.  My glasses probably don’t help with this.  It’s not that big of a deal, you just have to readjust the size of the headset, but, since I’m a little OCD, it bugs me.  Once I get the set sized right, it’s smooth sailing.

Comfort

Far and away, the Lightspeed Zulu 2 is much more comfortable than the Bose A20.   I flew for 5 hours in the right seat with my Lightspeed set on the other day.  I switched to the left seat for the last leg and used the owner’s A20 headset since it was plugged in on that side already and I noticed quite a bit of difference.  The ear cups seemed to press against my head more.  The pad on top of my head didn’t seem to be as cushiony.  It just wasn’t overall as comfortable as the Lightspeed Zulu 2.

Bose has made a lot of progress from their original noise canceling headsets.  Those didn’t have much of a cushion on top at all.  After about 2.5 hours, the slim ear cushions began to dig in to the side of your head.  So, the A20 has made some progress, but the Lightspeed Zulu 2 takes the cake in comfort.

Weight Distribution

“Wait!”  You Bose boys scream (no pun intended).  “The A20 is lighter than the Zulu 2!”  While this is true (the Zulu 2 weighs in at 15.7 oz while the A20 is only 12 oz), the way that weight is distributed makes a massive amount of difference.  The Lightspeed Zulu 2 feels lighter on top of your noggin than the A20 because the weight of the A20 is firmly planted on the top of your head in a single point.  With the Zulu 2, the weight is distributed evenly across the top of your scalp, so even though the set is heavier, it feels lighter on your head because the weight is not all concentrated on one point.

All this adds up to why I like the Lightspeed Zulu 2 more than the Bose A20.  As for a practical example, I wore my Lightspeed Zulu 2 set for 9.1 hours one day two weeks ago.  Needless to say, it was a long day.  But, once I climbed out of the airplane, I had no pain on the top of my head and only a very little where my glasses ran along the side of my head.  Now I call that a winner.

Unusual Attitude Recoveries

ByHank Gibson April 10, 2018April 24, 2018

For a VFR or an IFR pilot, an unusual attitude can be one of the most dangerous situations to get into.  That is one reason so many new autopilots are being developed with a level button.  The concept behind the level button is if the pilot gets into a disorienting situation, press the level button and the autopilot comes on, holding the airplane in a straight and level pitch attitude.

What about all those planes without autopilots that have a level button?  That’s who this article is for.

First off, what is an unusual attitude?  The Airplane Flying Handbook on page 4-17 gives the following definition:  “An unusual attitude is commonly referenced as an unintended or unexpected attitude in instrument flight.”  The AFH also goes on to say that an unusual attitude in training has no defined bank and pitch parameters, but “for training purposes an instructor could place the airplane in a 30 degree bank with a nose up pitch attitude of 15 degrees and ask the student to recover and that would be considered an unusual attitude….”

We now have a basis from the FAA.  VFR Pilots are now saying, “Oh, instrument flight, that doesn’t apply to us.”  Not so fast.  The Private Pilot ACS (and before it, the PTS) has a requirement for Basic Attitude Instrument Flying, including unusual attitude recoveries.  Why?  Because VFR pilots still inadvertently fly into IMC conditions and can get into an unusual attitude.  Plus, a private, non-instrument rated pilot has a higher chance of not recovering from an unusual attitude since he isn’t used to relying on his instruments.

At each training event I do, whether it be private pilot training, a flight review, IFR training, transition training, or pretty much any kind of recurrent training, I like to do unusual attitude recoveries with my customers.  It’s one of those things that the recovery procedure wanes over time since it isn’t routinely practiced solo (for good reason!).

I see people have the most trouble with the nose high unusual attitude recoveries.  Let’s start with the recovery procedure, then I’ll discuss the common errors (notice that the nose high unusual attitude recovery procedure mirrors a stall recovery).  Remember, this is in IFR conditions:

• Breathe
• Pitch Down to a level pitch attitude on the Attitude Indicator (or lower if the stall warning horn continues to go off)
• Simultaneously add full power
• Roll wings level
• Flaps up and recover to a level pitch attitude if not there already

The order is important, especially the breathing part.  What happens if a pilot goes straight into a recovery and doesn’t pause for a second or two to absorb what’s going on is the recovery isn’t executed properly.

Our brains see the wings banked and set off all kinds of alarms to roll the wings level first before doing anything else.  Adding any kind of aileron input with the nose close to the critical angle of attack is a bad idea.  You are adding adverse yaw (since you probably won’t be coordinated) and load factor which increases the stall speed.  Then we all know that Stall + Yaw = Spin.  That’s something that is best avoided in IMC.

We have to teach our brains to ignore the bank angle until the pitch and power come in.  Once the airplane is far away from the critical angle of attack, then the bank can be rolled to neutral.

Let’s look at the nose low unusual attitude recovery.  The order is still important on this one too:

• Breathe
• Power Reduce (to idle if necessary)
• Roll Wings Level
• Pitch up to a level pitch attitude
• Add Power back to cruise

The theory with the nose low unusual attitude is your speed is accelerating.  By reducing the power first, that helps reduce the load factor experienced when the pitch is increased.  Same with rolling the wings level.  Neutral bank is a lower load factor than some kind of a bank angle.  We are trying to prevent overspeeding the airplane.  The lower the load factor, the less of a chance we have to rip the wings off.

The most important step in either recovery procedure is to breathe first, allowing the brain to process exactly what is happening.  That way, the proper recovery can be executed.

Garmin Perspective Missed Approaches

ByHank Gibson March 7, 2016

Are you a Cirrus pilot with a Garmin Perspective?  Still can’t figure out the use of the go around button?  Read on!

When it comes to flying an instrument approach, we as pilots are assuming we are going to land.  Most of the time, we won’t even take off if the ceilings or visibilities are below the minimums for an approach.  95% of the time, we do land.

There is the other 5% of the time when something unexpected happens, whether we get a full scale deflection, or we don’t see the runway at the published minimums, and we have to perform a missed approach.

When instructing, missed approach procedures are actually what I see the most deficiency in when instructing an instrument rated pilot.  It’s not necessarily configuring the airplane for a missed approach procedure, it’s the button pushing involved in setting up the GPS properly.  When a pilot isn’t proficient in the button pushing, that button pushing distracts the pilot from actually flying the airplane, which can lead to a dangerous situation.

I am going to spend a few articles on flying a missed approach with different GPS and different autopilot configurations.  Today, I will be addressing the Garmin Perspective with a GFC 700 Autopilot, which is what all Cirrus Aircraft after 2009 are equipped with.

The Garmin Perspective Missed Approach Procedure

Once the decision to execute a missed approach has been made, here is the step by step procedure:

• Full Mixture and Full Throttle
• Simultaneously push the Go Around button on the underside of the throttle.  This does the following:
  • Sets the Garmin Perspective Flight Director to Go Around Mode (7.5 degrees pitch up and wings level)
  • Takes the Garmin Perspective GPS out of Suspend Mode
  • Switches the CDI back to GPS mode if it is in a different mode
  • Garmin Perspective with GFC 700 Autopilot stays on
• Flaps up
• Confirm airplane is climbing
• Set altitude bug for missed approach altitude (assuming it isn’t there already)
• Set NAV mode and IAS mode on the Garmin Perspective GFC 700 Autopilot

That’s it.  When Garmin and Cirrus got together to create the Garmin Perspective with the GFC 700 Autopilot, they tried to make as simple but robust system as possible.  Once you have the procedure down for the right buttons to press, then the procedure is relatively straight forward.

Circle to Land Approaches

ByHank Gibson November 20, 2015November 21, 2015

When I was doing my instrument and multi-engine training, we did a lot of circle to land approaches.  As a student, I could never figure out why these types of approaches would ever be practical when you could an approach straight in to another runway.  But, as a good student, I never asked my instructors the purpose of them, I just did them to the best of my ability.

Now, having been flying in the IFR system for almost a decade, I’m finally beginning to fully understand the practical purpose of a circle to land approach.  I have actually elected to do an approach where I had to circle to land on several occasions in actual IMC conditions.

One important note to remember on circle to land approaches is that the minimum descent altitude (MDA) is always higher than on a straight in approach.  The reason for this is that you are basically joining the pattern for a different runway and you have to be able to visually keep yourself clear of towers and other obstacles.  So, you need a higher visibility and a higher ceiling than if you were just lining up to come straight in.

Here are a couple of practical circumstances where it would make sense to do a circle to land approach.

Airports with only 1 straight in approach

This one is easy.  There are a number of airports scattered around the US that have only 1 straight in instrument approach published for it.  Around my part of Texas, the first one that pops into my mind is the RNAV 31 at T85 in Yoakum, TX.  Most of the year, the prevailing wind is out of the south, so 13 is the favored runway at T85.  During the winter is when most of the IMC weather happens in South Texas, so that is why the approach is for 31.

Of course, especially this year during the summer, there are some IMC days where an approach to T85 would be necessary.  When there is a strong wind out of the south, landing on 31 is impractical, so a pilot would fly the approach to 31, then circle to land on 13.

Approaching from the opposite direction

Take a look at the RNAV 19 at KBMQ, Burnet, TX.  The two initial approach fixes (IAF) are IXANY and JIBAJ.  If a flight is approaching BMQ from the west or north, this is an easy approach to join.  If a flight is coming from Austin (directly the the east and a little south) or San Antonio (almost directly south), it would be a bit of extra flying to get configured properly for the approach.  Especially coming from Austin, because the degree of turn to join at JIBAJ wouldn’t make the approach practical.

Well, how about vectors?  Unfortunately, Houston Center doesn’t have this approach depicted so vectors aren’t a possibility.  Center can give you vectors north to make the angle a little easier to join at JIBAJ, but they can’t vector you onto the approach.

Direct DLORA to join is another option, but again, if you are approaching from the southeast, the angle is wrong.

Insert the RNAV 01 approach with a circle to land.  AMUSE is right on V163, so it’s really easy to join the approach there coming from the south.  Coming from Austin, joining the approach at SUBIE works out great. Fly down to the MDA, join the left downwind for 19, and everyone is happy.

VOR Circle to Land Approaches

Every instrument pilot has had an instructor “force” them to do a VOR A or VOR B approach and no one enjoys them.  I personally think they are good practice.  With the number of RNAV systems and RNAV approaches out there, though, VOR approaches are becoming a bit archaic.

They do have a place in this discussion, though.  A VOR approach is given an A or B designation when the angle of the final approach course is greater than 30 degrees to the runway (VOR A KLZZ), or the final approach course is lined up with the runway, but the MDA is too high to practically descend and land (VOR A KGRK or the VOR/DME C KASE).

So, there are practical uses for a Circle to Land approach.  The next time you do some IMC work with an instructor, ask him/her if you can include one.

3 Tips to Better Landings

ByHank Gibson December 21, 2017December 21, 2017

In my 3,000+ hours of flight training, I have developed some tips and tricks to help people fly better.  With teaching landings, I have 3 specific tips that will make smoother landings every time, guaranteed.

A Good Pattern

A wise flight instructor whom I would love to give credit to (but don’t know who it is!) once said that a good landing starts off with a good traffic pattern.  So true!  A good landing all begins with the setup.  This is true for a VFR rectangular traffic pattern or an IFR instrument approach.  Flying the proper speeds and being at the proper AGL altitudes helps immensely in making a good landing. Being at 600 feet AGL on a 1/2 mile final (or the alternative of 60 feet off the ground on a mile final!) makes it hard to make a good landing.

Proper Use & Understanding of Pitch and Power

Once flaps are used in the pattern, the plane is now on the back side of the power curve (or in the region of reverse command).  Power is now being used to control the plane’s rate of descent while pitch is being used to control airspeed.  The key is, both pitch and power work together, so if the pilot changes the power, he’ll also need to change the pitch and vice versa.

The common mistake I see here is when the airplane gets low on final, the pilot tends to (quite naturally) pitch up.  All this does is bleed off airspeed and cause the airplane to sink faster.  The proper input would be to add power, then adjust the pitch for airspeed.

Look Down the Runway

Now that we have gotten to the point of the round-out and touchdown, it’s the most important part.  The best thing the pilot can do to make the best landing possible, is to look at the trees at the end of the runway.  When I worked with college students, I told them to find the owl in the trees at the end of the runway.

The tendency is to stare at the pavement (or concrete) the whole way down to the landing.  When a pilot’s eyes are fixated on the ground, this destroys his depth perception and causes a level off too low to the runway, resulting in a 3 point landing and/or a bounce.

By looking at the trees at the end of the runway, this gives the pilot much better depth perception and allows him to properly judge where to level off the airplane.

The question now is when should the pilot start looking at the trees?  My recommendation is crossing the threshold of the runway.  For some, it works better to start looking at the trees when turning final.  Others, right before the level off.  Regardless, find that owl!

Hold Anywhere

ByHank Gibson December 21, 2016September 24, 2018

The latest Garmin software version on the Garmin G1000 and Cirrus Perspective by Garmin has a really neat feature.  It gives the pilot the ability to create a hold at any fix, VOR, NDB, or even airport.  If the point is in the GPS database, a hold can be created over it.

How does it work?  Here are the steps.

Let’s say ATC tells you to hold over an intersection on a Victor Airway that you are already on.  Since you are tracking the airway already, the airway should be in your flight plan complete with all the waypoints on it.

Bring up your flight plan and highlight the waypoint to hold at.  Press the menu key.  Using the big knob, scroll down to highlight the hold at waypoint option at the bottom of the bottom of the menu.  Press enter.

Now you can build the hold.  You select what the inbound or outbound course will be.  Select a timed hold or a distance hold.  Then select left or right hand turns.  You can even input your expect further clearance time.  Press enter and now you have a hold as a waypoint in your flight plan.  Assuming you have a WAAS unit, the autopilot will fly the hold for you.

If you are ever told to “Hold Present Position,” Garmin has you covered.  Simply press menu on the flight plan page, scroll down to Hold Present Position, then follow the prompts on the screen to build a hold at your present position.