Earlier this year, Cirrus debuted it’s new Learning Management System (LMS), Cirrus Approach. For several years, Cirrus has led the way in online systems training while using several different platforms for it’s LMS. Cirrus Approach is the culmination of lots of sampling and tinkering, and boy, did Cirrus knock it out of the park.
For those of you unfamiliar with the Cirrus training program, here is the quick rundown. When a pilot who has no Cirrus time buys a Cirrus aircraft, initial transition training is required to familiarize the pilot with the aircraft systems, speeds to fly, power settings, etc. The Cirrus Transition Course is a 3 day that gets a VFR pilot up to speed in the airplane. Under the Cirrus Embark program, those 3 days of training are covered by Cirrus and free to the new owner.
If the pilot is an IFR pilot, then the 5 day Cirrus Advanced Transition Training Course is required. If the pilot has Cirrus experience, but with a different engine or avionics configuration, there are courses for that too. The Cirrus Embark program covers 3 days of training for most courses for a new Cirrus owner.
As part of the aforementioned courses, there are systems to learn about and procedures to understand. This is where the Cirrus Approach LMS excels. Cirrus has done a great job of putting together lots of good videos (that are actually interesting but not annoying) on the airplane, systems, how to fly it, etc. for each course. It cuts down greatly on the time that the training instructor has to spend on the ground with the pilot since the pilot has already compiled knowledge through Cirrus Approach.
Cirrus Approach is accessible online at learning.cirrusapproach.com. To get access to the courses, create an account, then select the Learning Catalog. The courses are categorized based on the type of training (Transition, Advanced Transition, Avionics Differences, Airframe & Powerplant Differences, Recurrent, and Specialty), then further broken down into the type of airplane, engine and avionics (eg. SR22T G6 Perspective+). Make sure the correct engine and avionics configuration is selected! Notice, there is a difference between the SR22T and SR22 (Turbo & Non-Turbo).
Anyone can do the specialty courses. I would highly recommend for everyone to take the Engine Management course as well as the Icing Awareness Course for you TKS and FIKI operators. The Takeoff & Landing course is a good refresher course for a pilot who hasn’t done any training in a while.
The Recurrent Training courses are encouraged for all Cirrus pilots. There is an IFR Refresher, a VFR Refresher, and a Skills Refresher. These are recommended to rotate through with a CSIP (Cirrus Standardized Instructor Pilot) on a yearly basis. With a little extra ground, a Flight Review and an IPC can be accomplished yearly using these courses.
L-3 has jumped into the ADS-B transponder game with their Lynx line of products. Aircraft owners have a myriad of options with the Lynx line, from simply becoming ADS-B compliant with the NGT-1000 ($2,100, with ADS-B out that works with the GTX 327 and GTX 330), or going all in with the NGT-9000 touch screen transponder complete with ADS-B In, a traffic screen and NEXRAD ($6,800).
The NGT 1000/2000/2500 line works with the existing transponder in the airplane (as long as it’s a Garmin GTX 327 or 330). The 2000 gives ADS-B In capability, allowing the pilot to access NEXRAD and traffic, plus has a Wifi source to broadcast all the information to an iPad. The 2500 includes all of that, plus gives the pilot MFD capability as well. An optional control panel is available if the airplane is not equipped with one of the aforementioned Garmin transponders.
The L-3 Lynx NGT-9000 is an actual transponder replacement. It is a touch screen device that has a multitude of ADS-B features that, quite frankly, are really cool on a transponder. The ADS-B traffic is displayed on the unit itself and can also be sent, via the optional Wifi connection, to an iPad on the WingXPro or SkyRadar apps. The optional L-3 NextGen Active Traffic can also be installed to receive traffic callouts (this does not include resolution advisories). Already have SkyWatch? The L-3 Lynx can use the equipment.
The L-3 Lynx NGT-9000 is also capable of displaying NEXRAD as well as METARs, TAFs, NOTAMs, and TFRs and a myriad of other weather products, all on it’s moving map. It seems that L-3 has taken the transponder and turned it into something awesome.
To read more about the L-3 Lynx line of transponders, you can visit their website.
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.
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.
It was a rainy Thursday afternoon and I was eating lunch with my family when my phone rang. My wife and I had just been discussing how miserable the weather was, so it was only natural that about 30 minutes later I was soaking wet and sitting in one of our Aerostars getting ready to take off for Ohio. I didn’t have much information about who I would be flying, or why, but I knew that I was going to pick someone up to fly them home; something about a missing airplane. So off I went into the muck. My biggest concern at that point being whether or not my clothes would ever dry out.
I arrived uneventfully and walked happily into the FBO, but found myself quickly in a very different atmosphere. It turned out I had two passengers to pick up, a husband and wife, and they had arrived at the FBO before me. As I walked in the door, the wife received a phone call. The person on the phone told her that search teams had found her father’s airplane crashed in the woods and that he was dead. I learned the rest of the details quickly and it was hard to stomach.
She was travelling home that day to be with family until they were able to locate her father. She was pregnant with her first baby and was in her third trimester. The baby was to be her dad’s first grandchild. He’d owned a Lake Amphibian for years and had stayed at home to work while his wife was out of town. He was last seen leaving work on Tuesday of that week and was reported missing on Thursday by his co-workers. Airport security footage showed him pulling the airplane out and taking off at 20:48 (after sunset) on Tuesday night.
After a few minutes we loaded the Aerostar and took off. It was the saddest flight I’ve ever done. Understandably, my passanger sobbed on and off from the time she got off the phone until we landed a couple of hours later. The weather seemed appropriate as we flew along through the rain and were greeted at our destination by a grief stricken family and a few reporters.
I said a sad goodbye and left, but I couldn’t help but think about their situation. It really hit close to home with me as it was easy to draw parallels between my family and theirs: she was very close in age to me and pregnant with her first child. My wife and I were new parents. Her dad had owned his airplane for about the same length of time that my dad has owned his Bonanza. Additionally, it isn’t uncommon for my parents to go a couple days without being able to reach each other because they both travel.
A Lake 250, the same type of aircraft involved in the accident.
But what happened..?
In the time since the accident, the NTSB has published their findings and unfortunately, it makes the situation sadder. It was completely avoidable.
Airport security cameras showed that after removing the airplane from the hangar, the pilot did not complete a preflight inspection or even a walkaround of any kind. He simply climbed in and left. The investigators were unable to find any traces or odor of fuel in the wreckage, nor any mechanical abnormalities with the airplane. In fact, according to the report, the engine was put on a test stand and ran perfectly. It would seem that the pilot simply never checked the fuel quantity and took off. The airport cameras captured the take off and a bright flash about 30 seconds after the aircraft departed.
Here is an excerpt from the report:
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot’s attempted 180-degree return to the runway immediately after takeoff in dark night conditions, which resulted in collision with trees and terrain. Also causal was the pilot’s inadequate preflight inspection, which resulted in a takeoff with little-to-no fuel on board the airplane.
Interestingly, the report also details their ability to use logbook information and fuel receipts to show the airplane was taken on a long cross country on its last flight and likely not fueled again.
Another thing which stuck out in my mind upon learning the details of the crash was how important it is to let someone know when you’re going flying. Having another person know roughly when a flight is leaving, where it’s going and and when to expect it back could potentially save the lives of the people on board. In the case of this accident, the pilot didn’t alert anyone that he was going flying and therefore, no one realized he was missing for 2 days.
From reading the NTSB report I don’t get the impression that he survived the crash, but I can’t help thinking about the possibility that he, or others in similar circumstances, could survive a crash and then die from their injuries because no one knew to look for them. When I flew charter, we weren’t legally allowed to take off VFR without letting someone at the company know the details of the flight. I’ve adopted this as my personal policy as well. One text message could be the difference between being rescued or not.
Finally, every pilot should ensure that a proper walk around is completed! It’s easy to assume everything is okay with an airplane, especially one that no one else has access too. In addition to a thorough preflight, I like to walk all the way around the airplane and visual check fuel caps, doors, chocks, ropes, etc., immediately before getting in to ensure that everything is ready. I know a couple of pilots who have taken off with various panels and compartments open simply because they got distracted during their walk around and never closed them. (A good policy is to never walk away and leave something open). Perhaps even more mind boggling is that he apparently didn’t look at the fuel gauges after start up and before take off. I also have to wonder how much fuel he had remaining upon completion of the previous flight.
“Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect” is likely a familiar quote to just about every pilot. It is often written on a poster with a picture of an old timey bi-plane hanging out of a tree, but I think that it is absolutely on point. Carelessness in the preflight and neglecting basic pilot responsibilities (in this case fuel planning) cost this father his life and his opportunity to meet his first grandchild.
I know this article is a real downer, but it’s supposed to be. Its tragic that accidents take place which are completely avoidable. Obviously this case was beyond the normal realm of carelessness and neglect, but, we as pilots need to be extremely careful not to get so comfortable with an airplane that we stop doing the things which are so basic and important to safety. One of my professors in school used to say “aviation is fun, but it plays for keeps,” which is an effective way to remind myself how important it is to do it right.
*Out of respect to the family, I have not included any specific names, tail numbers or airports in this article.
MMOPA announced the location for the 2022 MMOPA Convention. The 2022 Convention will be in Tucson, Arizona and will take place September 29th-October 2nd, 2022. The JW Marriott Starr Pass will be the host resort.
Thursday, September 29th will kick off the convention with a safety event for pilots and companions, lunch with exhibitors, and the return of the charity golf tournament.
Friday, September 30th and Saturday, October 1st will be when all the classes and seminars that make the MMOPA convention great are held. The Friday dinner will be at an aviation themed spot in Tucson while the annual auction and black tie affair will be Saturday night.
Stay tuned to the event details page on the MMOPA website to see when registration is opened.
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.
Hank Gibson from Texas Top Aviation will be presenting a seminar on flying Garmin instrument approaches with the different Garmin GPS units. Whether you have a Garmin 530/430 unit, a Garmin GTN 750/650 unit, or a Garmin G1000, all will be discussed. You’ll walk away with some tips and tricks, plus a better understanding of your Garmin unit.
WINGs credit will be given for attending. The seminar is hosted by Redbird Skyport at the San Marcos Airport (KHYI) in Redbird’s large conference room. The seminar will begin at 10am on Saturday, June 30th, 2018.
It’s always quicker to fly than drive and Redbird has plenty of ramp space to accommodate seminar attendees.
Registration is required. Please visit the registration page on FAASafety.gov. Space is limited to 20 individuals, so please make sure you register if you want to attend.
