Some of a pilot’s favorite words are heard on the ATIS: “Winds, Calm.” These words set off all sorts of happy bells and hallelujah choruses. Most pilots spend their lives fighting the winds. On those rare days when the winds are calm, great happiness ensues.
But, are calm wind landings more complicated then everyone thinks? Well, they can be if the proper planning doesn’t go into them.
Let’s think about wind. We have surface wind and we have winds aloft. Sometimes the surface winds are calm. When this happens, certain airports have preferred calm wind runways which are supposed to be used in these conditions. Winds aloft are almost never calm. 95% of the time, there is some kind of wind even 100-200 feet above the surface.
Here is the question pilot’s face when coming into an airport with calm winds: which runway do I use? Do I use the calm wind runway? Do I use the runway that is easiest to enter the pattern for? Do I use the one with the shortest taxi?
A lot of technologically advanced aircraft have a wind indicator on the PFD. This tool is often forgotten in calm surface wind conditions. On the contrary, this is probably the most important tool a pilot can have when figuring out which runway to use when the winds are reported calm.
Here’s why. That wind indicator is showing the pilot what the winds aloft are. The winds aloft should determine what runway is going to be used. If the wind indicator is depicting a south wind, then a south runway should be used. Even if it is a 5 knot wind at pattern altitude, it’ll still be a headwind coming in on final approach. If the north facing runway is used, that same 5 knot headwind can blow an airplane halfway down the runway before the ground speed drops off enough for it to land.
So, the next time you are coming into an airport and the winds are reported calm, take a look at your wind indicator on your PFD when deciding which runway to use. It’ll probably save a few go arounds!
The closer we get to 2020, the more innovative companies are getting with ADS-B out solutions. There are a myriad of transponders out there that have been released in to meet the ADS-B out requirement and to offer ADS-B in options. L3 has the Lynx transponder line (and hardware to upgrade an already installed GTX 327 or GTX 330), Garmin has the GTX 345 and offers upgrades to the GTX 330, Appareo has it’s Stratus ESGi ADS-B out transponder, and Avidyne offers it’s AXP340 transponder, among others.
Most of the ADS-B solutions require some kind of panel work, whether it’s pulling out the Garmin GTX 330 to send off, or making panel modifications to fit the L3 Lynx in. Very few are actual slide in replacements, so there is some labor involved in swapping transponders.
Want a simpler and more innovative solution? uAvionix, a Montana based company that makes the recently released Scout portable ADS-B In solution, has a product for you. Meet the SkyBeacon.
What is it? The uAvionix SkyBeacon is simply a navigation light replacement that bolts on your wing with a fin that hangs down. All the ADS-B out transmitting equipment is placed behind the nav light on the device. It has an integrated WAAS GPS unit, can work with any Mode C or Mode S transponder wirelessly, and it mounts directly in to where the original nav light was, same screws and everything. No additional hardware needed. uAvionix claims installation should take 10 minutes.
Configuration is super easy too, as it is all done on a smart phone on the uAvionix app.
Right now, the uAvionix SkyBeacon is only approved for experimental aircraft, but, according to their website, uAvionix expects FAA certification in early spring. With a price tag of only $1,500 and a strobe light to be added as well, this is your simplest and easiest ADS-B compliance solution.
I got a call today from a friend asking me about oxygen requirements. That got my brain pondering about the different items the FAA would like all pilots to know. I did a little refreshing and found several other tidbits directly from the FAA that I thought worth sharing. No matter what you’re flying, I think these apply to all of us.
First off, what are our general oxygen requirements? If you jump on over to the FAR’s and take a look at 91.211 you’ll see:
1. At cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500ft MSL to 14,000ft MSL, pilots
required to use oxygen unless the segment is less than 30 minutes of flight.
2. At cabin pressure altitudes above 14,000ft MSL, the crew is required to use
oxygen.
3. At cabin pressure altitudes above 15,000ft MSL, each occupant must be provided the use of oxygen. This doesn’t necessarily mean they have to use it.
Things get a little more in depth when you get to pressurized aircraft.
These requirements are also listed in 91.211:
1. If you’re flying above Flight Level 250, a 10 minute supply of oxygen is
required for each person onboard.
2. If you’re flying above Flight Level 350-410, and one pilot leaves their seat, the other pilot will be required to wear an oxygen mask, unless both seats are equipped with quick-donning oxygen masks.
There are three basic components to any oxygen system in an aircraft: the storage system, the delivery system, and the mask or cannula. First, there are several types of storage systems.
Gaseous aviators breathing oxygen is the first. This is the standard green tank that everyone is familiar with. There are two types of tanks. Either the high- pressure with 1800-2200 psi or the low pressure tank with 400-450 psi. The major issue with these and General Aviation aircraft is weight. Some of these tanks can get bulky and heavy and therefore don’t work for everyone.
Liquid aviators breathing oxygen or LOX is another form of storage. The major advantage of LOX is that it has a 900 to 1 expansion ratio, meaning that 1 liter of liquid oxygen can be expanded into 900 gaseous liters of Aviators Breathing Oxygen. The disadvantages of LOX are they are extremely volatile and have to be stored at -197F. If it comes in contact with exposed skin, severe frost bite can occur.
Sodium chlorate candles or oxygen generators have a weight advantage like LOX. They’re essentially a canister that when activated mix sodium chloride and iron powder and produce oxygen. They general have a 600 to 1 expansion ratio, which goes back to the weight savings. However, once these are started they are very hard to stop. Another disadvantage is these devices produce a fair amount of heat, so proper precautions need to be taken.
Next are the delivery systems. The main systems are Continuous Flow, Diluter Demand, and Pressure Demand. Continuous Flow, is exactly as it sounds. The oxygen is allowed to flow continuously from the tank to the user. The benefits of continuous flow are you don’t need a complicated mask or regulator. The downside to this system is since it continuously pumps oxygen, you’re wasting oxygen when you exhale. Most of continuous flow systems are used on aircraft that generally fly below 28,000 feet.
Diluter Demand was designed to fix the negative of the Continuous Flow systems. Diluter Demand only sends oxygen to the user when the user inhales. The system also allows cabin air to be introduced in, sending the perfect mixture of oxygen to the user when needed. These systems are very efficient and generally tend to be used up to 40,000 feet.
Pressure Demand is designed to essentially “over inflate” the users lungs. This will basically pressurize the the users lugs and allow the user to fly above 40,000 feet. This is needed at flights above FL400 because 100% oxygen without positive pressure will not suffice.
The final portion of the oxygen system is the mask or cannula. Nasal cannulas generally are more comfortable and are regulated to 18,000 feet service altitude. Masks come in a couple different variants. From re-breathers to quick-donning, most masks accomplish the same task with a few small differences. Quick-donning must be able to be put on within five seconds and are rated up to FL400.
Since that was a lot of information, what does all of it mean to you? Most fair weather flyers will never run into any of this. However, the high performance owner/operator will run into oxygen use situations a fair amount. Taking the family up to Colorado on a ski trip, jumping up to 12,500 feet to get above some weather, or flying above 5,000 feet at night on a long xc are all situations where you may want to have oxygen on board.
If you are planning on doing any of this type of flying or are currently doing these types of flights, training is a must. If you’ve never been in an altitude chamber, I would highly recommend it. In college, I went with a group to Oklahoma City to the FAA’s headquarters where they hold a class on Hypoxia and High Altitude flying. It’s very informative to be in the chamber as it simulates being oxygen deprived. You get to see how you’ll react and what kind of symptoms you’ll have when in a loss of oxygen situation. Each person has different symptoms, so it’s important to see how you will react.
It’s also good to fly with an experienced instructor. Finding an instructor who will allow you to learn in a safe environment is worth its weight in gold.
Ryne Bergren is currently a First Officer with Mesa Airlines in the CRJ 900. Ryne has experience in many different areas of aviation, from corporate to airlines to teaching to ferrying across the Atlantic Ocean. His passion is for all things that travel across the big blue sky.
April 18th, 2020 was supposed to mark the MMOPA Spring Safety Stand Down, an event held around the country for PA46 owners which counted toward the Master Aviator program. Sadly, due to the COVID-19 repercussions, the in person event had to be canceled.
Thankfully, due to modern technology, the event has been rescheduled to a nationwide webcast. The date for the Online MMOPA Safety Standdown in Saturday, August 8th. Joe Casey and Travis Holland will be hosting the MMOPA Safety Standdown.
I am on a mission in flying for my head to be as comfortable as possible. I’m currently going through the process of experimenting with different ANR headsets to see which ones squeeze my head the least (which I’ll be writing a future article about). In the meantime, I decided to focus on sunglasses.
I wear glasses (can’t do contacts anymore since they irritate my eyes), so anytime I have a headset on, I have frames running underneath my ear cups. I had a pair of prescription sunglasses for years that were okay, but still caused soreness above my ears after more than 3 hours of flying. I routinely fly 4-5 hours a day in training folks, so I had to find a better solution.
I saw an ad in Flying Magazine one month for Flying Eyes sunglasses. It was a relatively new company with a cool concept. A pilot started the company with the goal to create as thin a pair of sunglasses frames as possible to increase the comfort and decrease the ANR loss when wearing sunglasses. What the company came up with is pretty cool.
The ultra-thin frames on the all the different Flying Eyes models are made out of Resilamide. The material is so strong that the frames can be bent back and forth while not breaking. The company even brags that the frames are virtually unbreakable. I had to try these out.
I ordered a pair of the Golden Eagle Sport sunglasses. The process of getting prescription lenses in them was no big deal and took about a week. The eyeglasses shop initially thought the shape of the lens could be an issue, but it proved no problem at all. The lens manufacturer even managed to chip the frames, but Flying Eyes sent a new set of frames for free, even though it was not at all their fault.
In about a month and a half of flying with them, they are very comfortable. Some squeeze on the side of my head after extended periods of wear underneath a headset, but I’m exploring headset options currently (see above). Much improved over my last set of sunglasses.
Flying Eyes offers several different frame models, some of which are prescription compatible and some which aren’t. The Golden Eagle Sport frames run about $180. Orders can be placed on the Flying Eyes website.
Ordering new sunglasses from Flying Eyes? Use this link to receive 10% off your order.
The Bluebonnet Fly-In at Redbird Skyport has been rescheduled due to weather and the recent flooding in San Marcos. The new date for the Bluebonnet Fly-In will be Saturday, June 6th from 10am-4pm.
Hank Gibson of Texas Top Aviation will still be presenting on Garmin 430/530 Approaches this Saturday at 2pm in the large conference room at Redbird.
For years, there has been clamoring for airplanes to get rid of lead in piston engine Avgas. In the early 2000s, Thielert created a Jet A burning piston engine for Diamond Aircraft that gained some traction, but Thielert had internal issues and ended up declaring bankruptcy. Several other Jet A piston engines have come down the line since then to some success (Diamond is currently using 2 Austro manufactured Jet A piston engines on it’s DA62 and a Continental manufactured Jet piston on the new DA50).
The problem with a Jet A burning piston engine, though, is that those engines would be very expensive to put on existing airplanes, not to mention the cost of the STC alone.
Insert GAMI (General Aviation Modifications, Inc.), the famed Ada, Oklahoma company that championed turbo normalization, balanced injectors, and lean of peak operations. For those that have been to GAMI’s engine class, you know that these guys are at the very top of their game in engine knowledge.
In 2010, GAMI started the process of creating an Unleaded form of Avgas, terming it G100UL (the irony of traditional Avgas, 100LL, is the LL starts for low lead, but the lead levels in 100LL are actually quite high. UL stands for UnLeaded). Just before Osh Kosh in 2021, GAMI revealed that it’s work has come to fruition, gaining an STC for G100UL for Lycoming powered Cessna 172s.
The amazing thing about GAMI’s product is that it is able to mix with 100LL and not cause any issues. This means fuel trucks, fuel lines, fuel pumps, and aircraft fuel tanks don’t have to have any modifications to them to use G100UL. Plus, pilots will see longer engine life using G100UL because of the simple elimination of the lead. In tests, combustion chambers in cylinders burned cleaner, so theoretically, cylinders and engines will last a lot longer.
According to the company, GAMI has a few more tests to run and, assuming those go well, G100UL will be available for a whole lot more airplanes. An STC will still be required for the use of G100UL in a specific airplane, but the hope is, eventually, 100LL will be completely replaced by G100UL. The only downside is that G100UL is expected to cost about $1/gallon more than 100LL.
GAMI has partnered with Avfuel, so expect to see 100UL showing up at all Avfuel FBOs in the next year or two.
To read more, check out the press release on AOPA’s website.
One Comment
I remember this one well! 5 go arounds!
Lesson well learned, no harm just a little ego bruising
I remember this one well! 5 go arounds!
Lesson well learned, no harm just a little ego bruising