Garmin 430 Guide By Pilot Workshops

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.

Cessna TTx Production Ceases

ByHank Gibson March 21, 2018May 1, 2018

Sadly, in January, a pretty great airplane was put out to pasture.  Textron (the conglomerate that now owns Cessna, Beechcraft, Hawker, and Lycoming) announced it was ceasing production of the Cessna TTx.  With the end of the Cessna TTx production, an airplane that was the main “competitor” to Cirrus (if you can call it competition; Cirrus consistently outsold the Cessna TTx by a wide margin each year), it leaves the SR series to stand alone atop the High Performance piston single market.

I got to go through Cessna’s FITS Accepted Instructor (CFAI) course back in 2012 and have flown in the Cessna 350 and 400 (which is what they were known as at the time; the Cessna TTx name came around in 2011) for about 120 hours.  I really like the airplanes.  I’m partial to the Cirrus, but the Cessna 350 & 400 are fast airplanes and great for 1-2 people.  I flew a 350 (the non-turbo charged version) from New York to San Antonio last fall and routinely saw 170 knots at 12 GPH.

Columbia started out making the 350 & 400 (the turbo-charged version) in the early 2000s, but went bankrupt in 2007.  Lancair started Columbia to make a certified version of their popular kit planes.  If you see a Lancair ES floating around, you would swear it’s a Columbia with only 1 door.  Cessna bought the design from Columbia in 2007 to begin manufacturing the airplanes themselves.

Cessna then made a huge mistake as they moved the production facility from Bend, Oregon to Mexico. Production completely halted in 2009 as the planes coming out of Mexico were found to have defective composite work.  The sales never really recovered, even though Cessna put the Garmin G2000 panel in the Cessna TTx, complete with a touchscreen key pad.  A FIKI system was added as an option in 2012.

A prospective buyer can still get a great value on a used 350, 400, or TTx, as they are valued a little lower than a Cirrus.  The 350, 400 or TTx all make excellent single pilot or two person speedsters with very comfortable amenities.

Information for this article was taken from Flying Magazine’s website.

Spring Cirrus Austin, TX Get Together (CATGT)

ByHank Gibson April 5, 2017April 13, 2017

The South Central Cirrus Owner’s and Pilot’s Association (COPA) Region is hosting it’s second Fly In dinner at the Austin Executive Airport (KEDC) on Friday, October 8th, dubbed the Spring Cirrus Austin, TX Get Together.  The event is from 5:30-9pm.

Like the first CATGT in October, there will be dinner ($25 per person), drinks, and several presentations.  Jack Long and Josh Marvil will speak about their trip around the world in a PC-12.  Ed McCombs and Eric Opiela will give a safety presentation about automation and task saturation.

Plus, best of all, Cirrus is bringing a real live flying SF50 Vision Jet, plus a brand new SR22 G6 with the Garmin Perspective NXi panel.

Fly in or drive to EDC.  The dinner will be in the Henrickson Jet Center’s main hangar.  You will need to RSVP so event organizers can get a proper head count.  The link to RSVP is here.

Register for the CATGT before the slots are all filled up!

Cirrus Announces The New Cirrus G6 SR20 & SR22

ByHank Gibson January 12, 2017

Earlier this month, Cirrus announced the new Cirrus G6 SR20 and SR22.  To the naked eye, they look like incredible airplanes.  There is new lighting and the updated Cirrus Perspective+ avionics in both models, plus the SR20 is now a Lycoming powered airplane.

The Perspective+ in the Cirrus G6 is based on Garmin’s G1000 NXi platform.  The keypad is updated to a QWERTY keypad, allowing for quicker inputting of data since our fingers are already used to the setup.  A home button was added to the center stack to get back to the map page without having to hold down the CLR key.  The bug knobs were moved down to the autopilot, while the display of the GFC 700 was altered slightly to match the Vision Jet setup.

The Perspective+ also boasts a 10-fold increase in processor speed, allowing the system to move quicker than the standard Perspective.  The ability to wirelessly update databases has also been included.

The exterior of the Cirrus G6 SR22 and SR20 models has changed as well.  Cirrus has added the Spectra wing tip lighting system to the Cirrus G6.  It incorporates an entire light panel that runs the length of the wing tip.  The LED dual strobe setup helps with aircraft visibility and ramp appeal.

The SR20 engine has been changed to the Lycoming IO-390, 215 HP engine.  The Continental IO-360-ES 6 cylinder engine comes out of the SR20 and the 4 cylinder Lycoming goes in.  2 less cylinders will help with useful load and the extra 15 HP will help with takeoff and climb performance.

The new Cirrus G6 is available for order and delivery immediately.  To read all the details and specs on the Cirrus G6, you can check out Cirrus’ website.

Cirrus CAPS Pull in Arkansas

ByHank Gibson December 9, 2015December 21, 2015

Cirrus CAPS pull #55 took place at the beginning of November over Fayatteville, AR.  From initial reports, it appears a clamp broke on the oil cooler, causing a loss of oil pressure.  It does not appear that the engine immediately quit, but an annunciator alerted the pilot that the engine was losing oil pressure.  At this point, it appears the pilot elected to do an emergency descent to an airport below him, but ended up not timing it right, missing the airport and pulling the parachute.

As an experienced Cirrus flight instructor, there appears to be some suspect decision making in handling this operation.  I teach in a Cirrus that if an oil light comes on, given that a pilot has some altitude to work with, it is a better option to physically shut the engine down, leaving control of the situation in the pilot’s hands.  This way, the pilot knows when the engine is stopping and is prepared for it, instead of the engine acting erratically and causing problems on the descent.

After checking the engine gauges and shutting the engine down, a pilot should establish best glide first, not nose down and descend at a high rate trying to make an airport.  Best glide gives the pilot many more options and a lot more altitude to work with, further allowing him/her to plan how to make an airport directly underneath the airplane.

To pontificate, it seems that if the pilot had adjusted the plane to best glide, instead of performing an emergency descent, there is the possibility that Drake Field would have been reachable, the chute would not have been needed, and the driver of the truck would not have had to visit the hospital.  Hindsight is 20-20, but this may be an overall training and decision making issue that may need further emphasis.

The initial NTSB report as well as a link to the CBS story is below.

http://www.cbsnews.com/live/video/pilot-forced-to-deploy-emergency-parachute-in-arkansas/

NTSB Identification: CEN16LA026
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, November 03, 2015 in Fayetteville, AR
Aircraft: CIRRUS DESIGN CORP SR22T, registration: N857SW
Injuries: 3 Minor, 1 Uninjured.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.
On November 3, 2015, at 0950 central standard time, a Cirrus SR22T airplane, N857SW, descended under the canopy of the cirrus airframe parachute system (CAPS) and landed on a road in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The pilot, pilot rated passenger and one person on the ground received minor injuries. One passenger in the back right seat was uninjured. The airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to WG Aviation LLC, Rogers, Arkansas, and operated by a private individual under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed. The flight departed from the Bentonville Municipal Airport (VBT), Bentonville, Arkansas, at 0934 and was en route to the Waco Regional Airport (ACT), Waco, Texas.

According to the pilot, after departure from ACT he leveled off around 10,000 ft mean sea level (MSL) and was in “VFR on top” conditions. The pilot noticed that the crew alerting system (CAS) flashed a yellow caution light for oil pressure; the engine was still producing power. The pilot notified air traffic control (ATC) of the issue and received vectors to the nearest airport, Drake Field Airport (FYV), Fayetteville, Arkansas. The pilot descended and maneuvered toward FYV as the CAS indicated a red warning light for oil pressure, which had dropped below 10 psi. The engine was producing inconsistent power as the airplane descended to 3,300 ft and FYV was still not in sight due to cloud coverage. The pilot was unable to maintain altitude and the airplane’s stall warning horned sounded. The pilot deployed the Cirrus airframe parachute system (CAPS) and descended to the ground. During the landing the airplane collided with a truck and then came to rest on a four lane road.

At 0953, the weather observation at FYV reported wind from 190 at 9 knots, gusting to 17 knots, 10 miles visibility, clear sky, temperature 61° F, dew point 57° F, and altimeter setting 30.11 inches of mercury.

An initial postaccident examination was conducted on November 4, 2015, in Fayetteville. Engine oil was observed on the underside of the fuselage. The oil cooler cross fitting was broken and oil was observed in the engine compartment.

The airplane’s recoverable data module and three data cards were removed and sent to the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory for download.

The airplane has been retained for further examination.

Bruce’s Custom Covers

ByHank Gibson February 15, 2018February 26, 2018

I have used a few different sun shields in airplanes in my flying career.  I have found one that I really like. Bruce’s Custom Covers knocks it out of the park for usability and ease of storage.

Let’s start off with functionality.  Like other window sun shields, Bruce’s Custom Covers fit very nicely into the airplane glare shield and side windows. Depending on the type of airplane you have, some of the window covers use the suction cups and others don’t.  I recently had 2 customers order from Bruce’s, one that owns a P210 that uses the suction cups for all windows, including the glare shield, and the other owns a Cirrus which doesn’t use the suction cups on anything.

They work great.  They do the job of blocking the sun and keeping the cabin much cooler while the airplane is sitting on the ramp.

The thing I like best about Bruce’s Custom Covers is their storage.  Other sun shields require you to roll them up and lash a tie around them. Bruce’s, on the other hand, come folded very neatly in a black canvas bag.  The folded covers don’t take up nearly as much room as the rolled up covers, plus they are really easy to just fold up and store.

Bruce’s Custom Covers also sells plugs for cowling, pitot tubes, etc., as well as aircraft exterior covers.

Bruce’s Custom Covers gets my recommendation for anyone wanting to get some new sun shields.  For those of you in Texas, you know you need them!