News

Have You Got Your FAA WINGS?

ByHank Gibson November 17, 2014July 14, 2026

The FAA started their Pilot Proficiency Award Program (commonly known as FAA WINGS) in 1996. It is run by the FAA Safety Team, or the FAASTeam. The intent of the program was, and is, to “improve the nation’s accident rate by conveying safety principles and practices through training, outreach, and education” (taken from faasafety.gov). The FAA WINGS program, free of charge, encourages pilots to pursue recurrent training to enhance their overall knowledge of all the aspects of aviation.

The FAA WINGS program has evolved over the years, but with the current structure, pilot’s accomplish tasks, both knowledge and flying, for credit that adds up to the equivalent of a flight review. Pilot’s must accrue three knowledge credits and three flight credits to complete a phase, and each phase acts as a flight review.

FAA WINGS has three levels, the basic, advanced, and master level. Under each level, you accomplish different phases. The basic level is “designed for pilot’s [desiring] a higher level of proficiency than … a normal flight review” (faasafety.gov). The flying tasks in the basic phase are based on the private or commercial pilot PTS, depending on the airman’s certificate level. The knowledge courses revolve around many different areas, all of which can be viewed on the FAASafety Team’s website. Most are free, but there are some courses that have a cost associated with them. In the advanced and master phases of the FAA WINGS program, the tasks have higher standards, challenging pilots to hold themselves to those higher standards.

One unique aspect of the FAA WINGS program is the opportunity to attend a safety seminar for credit. Throughout the year, there are many different safety seminars that take place in the different FSDO areas. The FAA WINGS seminars range from a study of accidents, to GPS usage and anything in between. You can even get FAA WINGS credit for attending the Bonanza BPPP or the Cirrus CPPP programs.

As an instructor, I highly recommend to all my customers to enroll in the FAA WINGS program and use it. This keeps pilot proficiency at a high level, which in turn keeps safety at a high level as well. Plus, you get to learn a lot too!

If you’d like to enroll in the FAA WINGS program, visit faasafety.gov to create an account. Then, find a good instructor and start working on those phases!

Air Traffic Control Privatization
ByHank Gibson January 25, 2016

There was a bill introduced in Congress recently to take control of Air Traffic Control away from the FAA and give it to a private, for profit, corporation. The initial reaction of pilots is “Ahhh! User fees!” which we are all adamantly opposed to. There are a myriad of reasons why this is a bad idea (the “Flying” article makes a comparison to giving NASA to Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos) and we as pilots should be against it.

Read the “Flying” Magazine full article here.
L-3 Lynx Transponder Line
ByHank Gibson July 25, 2015August 1, 2015

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.
Oh, Deer (Part 1)
ByAndrew Robinson March 7, 2017April 5, 2017

As far as I knew when I woke up, October 26, 2016 would be an ordinary day for me. It was a Wednesday, and I was scheduled to fly our Company’s BE58 Baron on a charter from Wings Field (KLOM), a non-towered airport just north of Philadelphia, to Pittsburgh International Airport (KPIT) and spend the day there waiting for my 3 passengers to finish up their meetings. The plan was to fly them back to Wings that evening and then make the short hop back to home base at Lancaster, PA. (KLNS).

It was a flight that I had done countless times, and I was comfortable with the airports, the passengers, and the airplane. Everything went smoothly that morning and my short flight from Lancaster to Wings was uneventful. I even made it there in time to spill coffee all down the front of my pants before my passengers arrived. The weather was clear, calm and beautiful as we loaded into the Baron and the sun was just starting to come up as I taxied toward runway 24 for departure. I was departing VFR and had an IFR plan on file which I intended to pick up with Harrisburg Approach once we were airborne. According to my calculations, I was on schedule to be drinking my coffee at the Pittsburgh FBO right around 8:30.

At 7:05, I advanced the throttles for departure. A few moments later, I received a very unpleasant surprise. I was quickly approaching rotation speed when 2 deer ran onto the runway directly in front of the aircraft. It was still dark enough that I was relying on my landing/ taxi lights to illuminate the runway for take-off. As a result, I was unable to see the animals before it was too late. I don’t remember making a conscious decision to pull back on the yoke, but it was that or plow directly into them at about 85 knots. I pulled up as quickly as I could and the airplane rotated immediately. A fraction of a second later I heard and felt a sickening THUD.

There was no doubt that I had hit one of them, but, somewhat unbelievably, the airplane was climbing as though nothing had happened. I put the nose down to get the airspeed back up and began to try and piece together what damage the airplane had sustained. Based on the noise and the feeling of the impact, my suspicion was that I had hit the deer with the left main landing gear. A review of the instrumentation showed no abnormalities and the airplane was behaving normally, so I didn’t suspect any damage to the airframe/ flight controls. I couldn’t see anything out the windows that looked unusual, and somewhat unbelievably I still had 3 green lights.

After gaining a safe amount of speed and altitude, I turned around and told the passengers that we had hit a deer. It was obvious that we had hit something and I was sure that they wanted to know what was going on. Then, I checked all my indications again and satisfied with what I was seeing, tried to bring up the landing gear. No dice. When I pulled the gear lever to the up position, the master “GEAR UP” warning light came on and I got a horn. There was never any change in the 3-green indication and the gear motor never came to life at all.

At this point it was obvious that, minimally I was going to have to divert to Lancaster and have the maintenance guys look at the airplane to see if anything was broken. I figured that they would either give me the green light to continue or I would just jump into one of our PC12s and complete the trip while they worked on the Baron.

The landing gear’s refusal to come up was my first indication that there was substantial damage. I set course for Lancaster and called our Chief Pilot. After explaining the situation to him, we agreed that KLNS was the best option and that he would let the maintenance guys know that I was coming.

The logic was that proceeding to Lancaster would allow a visual check of the landing gear by maintenance people as well as the tower and result in the safest outcome if an emergency landing were required. Lancaster would likely have better services available in terms of emergency responders and, not to mention, I was fairly certain that there was a dead deer on the only runway at Wings that I didn’t feel like hitting for a second time. In addition, the relatively long runway at Lancaster combined with light traffic at that time of day made it the ideal option to divert to.

I again turned around to brief the passengers. I told them that we were going to have to make precautionary landing before continuing to our intended destination and that I would be performing a few low passes for the tower.

Due to the drag from the landing gear, the flight to Lancaster seemed to take forever. The long cruise home, however, gave me time to try and reach someone on the ground at Wings in hope of having the runway inspected and cleaned off before other traffic tried to use it. After several attempts to raise anyone on the Unicom/ CTAF frequency, I called Philadelphia Approach for help instead. Philly answered right away and I explained to them what had happened. I requested that they call over to Wings on the phone or send someone out to check the runway. They told me that they would get it done and asked if there was any other way that they could assist me. I told them I was headed to Lancaster and that I appreciated their offer, but didn’t require any further assistance. I then switched over to Lancaster Tower and let them know that I was about 15-20 minutes out, but I would need to perform a couple of passes to have them check my gear. The tower cleared me for a low approach over runway 26.

I arrived at LNS at about 7:30. I performed my first low pass by the tower, not really expecting anything to appear out of place. I figured I had bent something or damaged the squat switch, but not much more. I climbed to pattern altitude and awaited the good word. Shortly after the fly-by, Tower reported that the left main gear didn’t appear to be down and locked. They suggested that I make another pass. The airport maintenance personnel chimed in, reporting the same. We had just started discussing whether cranking the gear a little by hand might help when Philly approach called the Lancaster tower on the phone.

Philly informed Lancaster that someone had inspected the runway at Wings and found the left main strut and wheel in the grass. I quickly concluded that cranking the gear down probably wouldn’t help!

This was found in the grass by the runway at Wings Field

The gear door and strut after the accident.

If you think about the fact that I hit the deer with the wheel, but it didn’t hit the gear door, it becomes apparent just how close the airplane was to clearing the animal completely.

To Be Continued…

(Read Part 2 Here)

Andrew Robinson is an airline pilot for Piedmont Airlines. He is a former 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor who lives with his wife and 2 daughters in Pennsylvania. He instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.
Breathing…It’s The Difference in Engine Performance
ByJoe Casey November 27, 2018November 27, 2018

The PT6 engine that’s found on the Jetprop and Meridian is designated a -21, -34,-35, or a -42A. The Continental engine on a Malibu is either a TSIO 520 or a 550. What’s the difference? Why should I care? Most pilots don’t understand the difference, but it’s pretty easy to understand…and it’s all about breathing.

Whether a piston or a turbine, the engine has a ratio of fuel/air that works best. For a piston model, we can make adjustments to this ratio by adjusting the mixture. In climb we use a richer ratio to help cool the engine, and in cruise we lean the mixture to save fuel since we don’t need the extra fuel for cooling (due to higher speeds which cools the engine). In the turbine, the ratio is set and there’s nothing that can be done about it…except climb to a higher altitude. But, more about that in a second..let’s go back to the piston discussion…

Piston: A Continental 520 engine and the 550 engine are flown exactly the same. On takeoff, both will develop 310HP (38″MP with the 520, 35.5″MP with the 550). So, why would a pilot want a 550 in his airplane as opposed to a 520? The answer is breathing.

A 520 is named appropriately because the engine displaces 520 cubic inches of air with each complete cycle of all 6 cylinders. To determine the displacement, just figure the bore (diameter of the cylinder) and the Stroke (how far the piston travels in the cylinder) and plug the numbers into this formula:

CID = Bore X Bore X 0.8754 X Stroke X # of Cyl.

Here’s the bore and stroke of the Continental 520 and 550 engine:

TSIO 520: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4″
TSIO 550: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4.25″

So, you can see the two engines are exactly the same except the 550 has a little longer stroke, and therefore displaces a little more air. Said another way…it the sucks the air into the engine a little better.

So, with this knowledge, the ability for the engine to breathe becomes a little more clear. Both a 520 and a 550 will perform exactly the same until the point that a 520 simply cannot suck enough air and begins to develop less MP as a result. For most 520 engines, this will happen somewhere around 18,000 ft. But, it is dependent upon a myriad of factors including: health of the engine, altitude, temperature, and atmospheric pressure. When the 520 hits this point, the throttle can be full-forward, but the engine will not develop full MP, but some number that is less. I’ve seen a max MP at FL250 in a 520 Malibu to be about 31″MP. So, you can probably guess that the rate of climb will correspondingly suffer as the engine develops less MP. How do we fix this problem? Enter the 550…

Since the 550 displaces more air, the engine will maintain max MP to a higher altitude. When the 520 begins to develop less power at about FL180, the 550 engine will be able to continue to maintain 35″ at a higher altitude. Make no mistake…the 550 will also hit an altitude where is cannot develop 35″MP, but this altitude will probably be nearly FL220. So, the 550-powered Malibu will reach cruising altitude faster than the 520.

But, at cruise both engines are pulled back to 30″MP. So, either engine will deliver the same cruise speed because they are both able to develop 30″MP at any altitude. Does it really matter if you’ve got a 520 or a 550 engine? Answer: not much. Both are excellent engines and both will deliver the airplane to the destination, but if the chosen altitude is above FL180, the 550-powered airframe will probably arrive a few minutes earlier. Which would I want if I were purchasing an airplane? It’s not a big enough deal, IMHO. I’d select the best airframe/engine/prop combination and not put much weight into the 520 vs. the 550.

Turbine world: So, how about the -21, -34/35, and -42A compare? Here, there’s big difference, but it’s still all about the breathing. A -21, -34/35, and -42A are all derivatives of the famous PT6 family of engines, and all are designed to be 1000+SHP engines de-rated to fit the airframe. For instance, the -42A engine is 750SHP when mounted on a King Air 200, but the same engine is derated to 500SHP when mounted on the Meridian. Ditto with the -21 and -34/35 engines…all are de-rated. So what’s the difference? Breathing…

At the lower altitudes all will develop their maximum rated SHP, meaning they will all develop maximum torque. And, down low there’s plenty of air to breathe so the engine has no problem developing that torque at a low ITT. But, as altitude is gained, the engine must suck more air to develop the same torque, and the ITT goes up. At some point in the climb (depending upon altitude, temperature, pressure, and IAS) the engine will not be able to produce max torque without exceeding Max ITT. At this point, the engine cannot breathe any more (suck in anymore air), and the power (torque) developed falls off. With the -21 engine, the power falls off quite dramatically because the engine simply cannot breathe well. It is a smaller engine and more air cannot be forced into the compressor section. For the rest of the climb the engine is “ITT limited” and the performance will suffer.

The -34/35 engine is a little bigger and will develop maximum power (torque) to a higher altitude. And, when the torque does drop off (as altitude is increased), the rate of decrease is less because it can breathe easier due to it’s larger size. Guess what? The -42A will beat out the others and develop max torque to an even higher altitude. With this decrease in torque available also comes a welcome friend…less fuel burn. Altitude is the friend of any turbine pilot, and he/she will climb to the highest altitude possible to save on fuel.

The end result is the -21 powered Jetprop will cruise at 238 KTAS (in the summer) with a fuel burn of only 28gph. The -34 will have higher torque than the -21 and will develop more SHP and will have a higher cruise (260 KTAS in the summer) with a correspondingly higher fuel burn (32gph). The -42A will be breathing easily at higher altitudes, and will develop the most torque, but with a fuel flow of 39gph. The Meridian (with the -42A) will not out-perform the -34/35 Jetprop in cruise purely because the Meridian is much heavier.

Just remember…fuel flow in a turbine is always commensurate with its ability to breathe and a turbine’s ability to breathe is a function of the engine’s ability to breathe.

With this knowledge…let’s check your understanding. Answer this question: Will a Jetprop cruise faster in the summer or winter? Remember, cold air is more dense than warm air, and an engine will develop power according to it’s ability to suck in air. More air available, more power available. Answer: Winter.

A good analogy: I’m a Cross-fitter (meaning I do crossfit workouts a lot). In the gym we have various workouts that test a person’s ability to perform. Guess who usually does the best? Right…the guy who can breathe the best. A person is nothing more than an engine…we intake air and combine it fuel and burn it to develop energy. In Crossfit, the person with the biggest engine (muscles that can develop power) that can sustain power (good aerobic capability) will win almost every time. The only variables then are genetics (how well-made is the engine), flexibility (you’ve got to be able to get into the position), and skills (there are more efficient movements). A good Crossfitter will work hard on mobility, skill, and try to increase the bodies ability to increase capacity through a tough workout.

To get maximum performance, the pilot cannot change the engines skill or mobility (at least not without an engine change!), but a thorough understanding of the how the engine breathes will help him/her use the power that is available to the fullest.

Joe Casey’s aviation story began in 1990 with his first flight near Nacogdoches, TX in a Cessna 172. From lift-off, Joe knew he would have a lifetime passion flying just about anything that will leave the ground…He was completely hooked.

Along with being an FAA Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE), Joe is an ATP/CFI-AHMG and Commercial Rotorcraft/Glider Pilot in the civilian world and also a UH-60/AH-64 Pilot-in-Command/Instructor/Examiner Pilot in the US Army Reserves. His passion for the last 19 years, however, has been the PA-46 Malibu/Mirage/Matrix/Jetprop/Meridian. Has has amassed over 6,500 hours in various PA-46 airframes and believe it to be one of the finest flying machines available for the serious cross-country pilot with an eye for efficiency.

Now, Joe has flown more than 12,200 hours in just about every imaginable environment. Whether providing initial/recurrent training in the PA-46’s, TBM’s, instructing in NVG’s in a UH-60 Blackhawk, flying the King Air series of airplanes, giving tailwheel endorsements, or taking kids flying for the first time, he simply loves flying machines and the people who fly them.
Conroe, TX CPPP
ByHank Gibson August 31, 2016September 15, 2016

The Cirrus Pilot Proficiency Program (CPPP) will be coming to the Galaxy FBO at the Lone Star Executive Airport in Conroe, TX again this year. The dates of the event will be October 14th-16th.

Wondering what the CPPP program is?

“CPPP offers a weekend event for Cirrus owners and their partners that focuses on Cirrus-specific knowledge and flying proficiency. We bring some of the most experienced flight instructors who regularly teach in all kinds of Cirrus airplanes flown for all kinds of missions. We have prepared an extensive syllabus of ground courses that complement the transition training and delve into areas of greatest need for Cirrus pilots.” (from CirrusPilots.org)

The weekend starts off with a group dinner on Friday night. The Saturday morning ground session focuses on General Aviation Safety with special focus on the Cirrus accident statistics. Normal and emergency procedures are also reviewed.

In the afternoon on Saturday, the attendees are split into two groups. The first group has a myriad of options for ground sessions covering all topics related to Cirrus aircraft and operations. The second group flies, then they switch for the second 3 hour session. Sunday brings the same split, with more courses offered and more flying.

While the Cirrus pilots are flying and learning more about their airplanes, CPPP offers a Partner in Command course for flying partners on Saturday. This allows flying partners to be more comfortable in the airplane and teaches them what to do if something were to happen to the pilot.

All in all, attending a CPPP will improve both Cirrus knowledge and Cirrus flying skills. It’s highly recommended for all Cirrus pilots.

To register for the CPPP event in Conroe, check out the CPPP website.
Icon A5 Thought to Have Crashed in California
ByHank Gibson November 3, 2015November 5, 2015

Most pilots have seen the Icon A5 light sport amphibious aircraft. It’s a neat design that can land on water or on a runway. The high wing design with a pusher prop has foldable wings that allow it to be put on a trailer and towed behind a vehicle, allowing it to be offloaded at boat ramps (it also begs the question can you wakeboard behind it?).

Apparently, not all non-pilots know about the Icon A5. Last week, one landed in the water near a beach in Southern California, but most of the beach goers and local authorities believed it had crash landed in the water. Emergency crews were dispatched, but everyone was surprised when the two occupants crawled out on the wings, had a cup of coffee, and took back off.

You can read the full article on the Flying Magazine’s website.