Recently, I did my TBM and Meridian recurrent training with Joe Casey of Casey Aviation. I always like being challenged my more seasoned instructors than me because I always get to learn something. When I learn something, it makes me a better instructor and allows me to give better instruction to my customers. Plus, there is still a bunch that I don’t know!
Joe has a podcast titled The Malibu Guru (because he really is the Malibu guru!). During our training, we did a podcast together and he interviewed me. I get to tell about Texas Top Aviation and some exciting things coming up this summer (hint: the biggest exciting thing is called The Aviator’s Academy). Before I give too much away, take a listen to the podcast.
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.
It’s winter time, so that means winter weather for the aviation community. For single engine piston pilots, that means dealing with icing conditions. For us Texan flyers, ice only presents an issue for maybe a week out of the year (the exception being for those Panhandle residents!), but it’s nice to have some protection.
Most single engine pistons do not come with ice protection from the factory and, of those that do, most are not Flight Into Known Icing (FIKI) approved. The systems are “get out of jail” systems that can reduce the amount of ice you pick up if you accidentally get into icing conditions and you are on your way out. The Cirrus SR22 line of aircraft has had the TKS system option since 2006, with the new FIKI system being available since 2010. The Cessna TTx has a FIKI option that was debuted in 2014.
The above mentioned airplanes use TKS systems. There are a handful of single engine pistons that use boots that are FIKI certified: the Piper PA46 line (Malibu, Mirage, and Matrix) and the Cessna P210 and T210 line (though not all are equipped with boots).
If you find yourself flying into wintry conditions often and want some protection for your clean wing airplane, there are some aftermarket options for a lot of airplanes now. Do note that all these systems do come with a pretty hefty price tag, but can be worth it if you fly into icing a good bit.
CAV Ice Protection TKS Systems
CAV Ice Protection is a TKS system outfitter. What is TKS fluid? According to Flying Magazine:
“TKS systems dispense an ethylene glycol-based fluid with a freezing point below minus 70 degrees F through porous titanium panels attached to the leading edge of the wing and empennage. The fluid is released through thousands of the panels’ laser-drilled holes, which are not much larger than the size of a human hair. As air flows over the wing and empennage, it disperses the fluid, coating the surfaces, and preventing the formation and adherence of ice.”
The advantages of a TKS system are the whole entire wing gets coated to get rid of any extra ice that adheres to the top or bottom of the wing surface. The disadvantage is there is only a finite amount of fluid, so when it runs out, you don’t have any more protection. The fluid also adds extra weight agains the useful load of the airplane.
CAV Offers a Basic TKS system for the following single engine piston aircraft:
Beech Bonanza
Cessna 182, 206, 210, 350, & 400
Columbia 350 & 400
Piper PA32
Mooney M20
CAV Offers a full FIKI System for the following single engine piston aircraft:
Ice Shield is another after market de-ice option. Ice Shield makes boots for wing leading edges. The advantage of boots is they activate instantaneously, getting rid of ice where it builds up first, on the wing leading edge. No running out of fluid and only the added weight of the system. Ice Shield also offers heated windscreens for several the Piper Saratoga line and the A36, B36, and G36 Bonanza line.
Ice Shield has boots for the following single engine piston aircraft:
One other company, Kelly Aerospace, makes an electric leading edge de-icer called the ThermaWing for the Cessna/Columbia 350/400 line. You can read a review of the ThermaWing here, or check out Kelly Aerospace’s website.
Ever wanted to be a Cirrus owner, but the economics of being a single owner just don’t make sense for you? If you’re in the Houston area, you now have a chance to join a Cirrus SR22 partnership at the West Houston Airport, KIWS.
The group, CirrusShare, is a 4 member group, but one of the members is looking to sell his share. The airplane is a 2007 G3 SR22. It is in excellent condition, with dual WAAS 430s and air conditioning.
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.
Figuring out the pattern altitude at an airport should be pretty simple, right? But, in this day of helpful technology, most pilots actually get it wrong. How can you always get it right? Well, it just takes about an extra 15 seconds. Here’s how.
John Wayne Airport Traffic Patterns
As outlined in the Aeronautical Information Manual, section 4-3-3, “traffic pattern altitudes for propeller-driven aircraft generally extend from 600 feet to as high as 1,500 feet above the ground.” Further, in the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge on page 13-10, it states: “1,000 AGL is recommended pattern altitude unless established otherwise.”
Okay, so for piston driver’s, we’ve got it narrowed down to 1,000 AGL (Above Ground Level for those who don’t like acronyms). But wait! There’s that very important phrase at the end of the last quote: “unless established otherwise.” That means not all airports have traffic pattern altitudes of 1,000 AGL, or else they wouldn’t put that line in there!
How do you find out what the TPA (Traffic Pattern Altitude) is for a certain airport if it’s not 1,000 AGL? Great question! Your first guess is probably to look on Foreflight. Though this is a good start, it is not the full answer.
Let’s use an example. Look up KAQO, the Llano Airport on Foreflight. At the top of the page, the airport elevation is stated as 1,101′ MSL and the pattern altitude is stated as 1,902′ MSL. From what we just learned, 1,902′ MSL is not 1,000 AGL, so is 1,902′ MSL otherwise established?
On the Airports page with KAQO pulled up, tap the A/FD tab, second to last on the left. Scroll down to Llano Muni. Read the whole entry. Does it state in the entry that pattern altitude is different than 1,000 AGL? It sure doesn’t. So, because it is not otherwise established, pattern altitude at KAQO is 2,102′ MSL not 1,902′ MSL.
Where did Foreflight get that? I have no idea. Too often, though, pilots look at the Foreflight pattern altitude and don’t actually check the Airport Facilities Directory (A/FD). Then, they get the pattern altitude wrong.
What does it look like when pattern altitude is otherwise established? Look up KSGR, Sugar Land Regional, on your Foreflight app. Foreflight states the elevation as 82′ MSL and the Pattern Altitude as 1,000′ MSL. Is this correct? Well, tap that A/FD button again and let’s find out.
On the second line of the A/FD entry, it says TPA-See Remarks. Down in the remarks section, we find the following:
TPA-1000 (918) single engine piston acft, TPA-1500 (1418) for twin and turbojet acft, TPA-500 (418) for helicopters within 2NM.
Foreflight got it right this time for single engine pistons, but if you are in a twin, the pattern altitude is different. What’s the lesson here? Always check the A/FD and don’t always go by what Foreflight says. The A/FD is always right and usually has a little more detail to help set you straight.
One last thing. Both the AIM and the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, when talking about pattern altitude, state, “When operating at an airport, traffic pattern altitudes should be maintained unless otherwise required by the applicable distance from cloud criteria in…section 91.155.” 91.155 defines basic VFR weather minimums. So, to fully interpret what the AIM is saying, we have to take into account the type of airspace we are in to determine if we can safely and legally operate at pattern altitude at a particular airport.
For example, let’s say we are at KCVB, the Castroville Airport. Pattern altitude there is 1,602 feet, which is 829 AGL. CVB is Class G airspace up to 700 AGL, then Class E above that. Let’s say there is a 700 AGL broken cloud layer. Pattern altitude is 829 AGL, so you won’t be able to get up that high with a broken ceiling. What altitude can you do pattern work at to stay legal?
Class G VFR weather minimums during the day below 1,200 AGL is 1 SM visibility and clear of clouds. So, legally, you could fly at 699 AGL (which at CVB would be 1,472 MSL) while in the pattern and be legal. Safe? Maybe, but probably not if you are skimming the base of the clouds. Is 1300 MSL a safer pattern altitude in this example? Well, that is 527 AGL, so probably not, since towers tend to stick up that high sometimes.
Let’s go back to KSGR and put a 1,000 AGL overcast ceiling there. SGR is Class D airspace and we already determined pattern altitude there was 1,000 MSL for piston singles. VFR visibility and cloud clearance requirements in Class D airspace are 1,000 feet above clouds, 500 feet below clouds, and 2,000 feet horizontally from the clouds with 3 SM visibility. In order to stay 500 feet below the clouds, you would be flying a 582 MSL pattern. Safe? Probably not, though it is legal.
To summarize, don’t take Foreflight’s word for pattern altitude. Cross reference the A/FD (it only takes 15 seconds at the most) to verify. If it’s cloudy, it’s really best to stay on the ground, but if you want to find out your legal pattern altitude with a cloud deck, cross reference 91.155. I don’t recommend flying below pattern altitude because it is there for a reason.
EAA Airventure at Osh Kosh always draws great innovators every year, leading the aviation consumer to discover something new and different. Flying cars have always been a dream for the everyday pilot. Why not fly to work? Why not park the plane in the parking lot? Why not drive from the runway onto the freeway? All excellent questions!
Well, Samson Motorworks is trying to make those dreams a reality. Samson’s Switchblade flying car is in the (hopefully) finally stages of development this summer. The company expects to be able to conduct test flights early next year, then begin selling the experimental kit.
The Samson Switchblade will be in the Experimental category, but Samson has a builder assist program that only adds $20,000 to the final cost of the kit. The total price of the kit, which comes 49% completed and only takes 3 weeks to complete with the builder assist program, comes in at $140,000. That includes the engine, avionics (it’s equipped with Dynon’s 7″ Skyview glass panel display, a Dynon radio and transponder, a Dynon intercom, a Dynon AOA, an iPad mini, and an ADS-B GPS), and the builder assist program. Similar to a Cirrus, it is also equipped with a Ballistic Parachute Recovery system.
The Samson Switchblade has several different engine options, including a supercharged, liquid cooled, V-4 similar to a Corvette engine that will produce 190 HP. Max cruise in the air should be around 170 knots. The Switchblade will hold 30 gallons of mogas, burn 9 GPH in the air, and get 35 mpg on the ground. The gross weight will be 1,750 pounds.
How does the car to plane transition happen? Samson has developed a fly by wire system to retract the rudder down while the car is in drive mode. The wings use a mechanical linkage to fold up into the belly.
There are several different packages for the Samson Switchblade: the Snowbird, the Aurora, and the Trek options. Details can be found on Samson’s website.
I, for one, will be keeping an eye on the freeways next summer to keep an eye out for cars sprouting wings. No more traffic jams!
