Night Flying

Skyvector Has a New Look

ByHank Gibson July 26, 2015August 20, 2015

Skyvector has changed it’s look.  The aeronautical chart website is now offering flight plan filing capability. In order to gain the ability to file flight plans, the user has to form an account first.

Personally, I really liked how Skyvector had a simple interface before they changed.  As an instructor, a lot of times, I go to multiple airports on one flight.  It was really nice to just plug in airport IDs to check distances and heading information on Skyvector.  The new format is a little clunky as the website has made it a little more difficult to do what it did best before.

Did the aviation community need another venue to file flight plans?  Not with Foreflight, Garmin Pilot, and WingXPro leading the way in the app market.  Skyvector was smart in not trying to develop another app to compete with the big boys.

Will the new Skyvector last?  We’ll see.  I’m hoping they’ll go back to the way they used to be, but we’ll see. I may use it enough to come around to liking it.

The Aunt Betty Directive: PFD Failures

ByCharles McDougal April 8, 2015April 15, 2015

Glass panel displays, ballistic parachute aircraft recovery systems, portable tablet computers enabling paperless cockpits, and widely available three axis autopilot systems have changed the way we fly, the way we train, and the way we are expected to perform on check rides. Our training and testing paradigms have tried to stay in synch, yet always seem to be catching up to the latest levels of technology.

This is very apparent when we instructors are preparing a student for an FAA practical test. When training aircraft had no autopilots, no GPS, and certainly no parachutes, the general philosophy was that during training, the student should have the lowest level of technology available. This was also the expectation on the check ride. This theory has changed over the years and now the Practical Test Standards require that an applicant integrate all available technology while demonstrating mastery of his or her aircraft. This raises numerous questions from instructors and students about what technology will be available for each task.

One example of this dilemma is found when contemplating an instrument airplane practical test in a Cirrus SR20/SR22. The test requires the task “Instrument Approach without Primary Flight Display”, which has taken the place of what was the partial panel approach, accomplished without use of gyroscopic heading and attitude indicators. In the Cirrus, the standby attitude indicator, standby airspeed, and standby altimeter are available, as is the Multi-Function Display. Guidance from the FAA has us shooting a GPS approach using the moving map display on the MFD after disabling the PFD. Those of us who trained and tested in steam gauge aircraft think that this task should be fairly easy. With a fully functional Attitude Indicator and a nice big moving map display showing our course, a reasonably competent instrument pilot should have little trouble adapting to this setup and flying a good approach.

But, in the Cirrus specifically, and perhaps in other aircraft as well, another question comes up. Can the applicant use the autopilot (which still works just fine after a display failure) during the approach without the PFD? A rather famous DPE who writes for a national magazine says “yes”, opining that not to allow its use would be introducing simultaneous multiple systems failures, which is strictly forbidden in the minds of some. If we follow this logic, we would not test simulated engine failure emergencies in these aircraft either, because to do so would imply failure of not only the engine, but the CAPS parachute system as well. In my former role as a pilot examiner, I always said no, that the approach should be hand flown. Here is my logic.

I was amazed that flight instructors and examiners would accept the substitution of autopilot technology for the skill required to fly an approach without the PFD. I would argue that the intent and the well described emphasis of the PTS is that the applicant must demonstrate the ability to control the airplane after a loss of the primary flight display, not observe and monitor the autopilot controlling the airplane! This argument was generally unpersuasive, so I approached from a different point of view, that of a concerned family member.

“Aunt Betty” represents a future passenger flying with the soon to be rated instrument pilot. Here is the question posed to Aunt Betty: “When we train and test pilots for instrument proficiency, we require them to demonstrate the ability to safely and skillfully fly the airplane without their primary instruments. Now, Betty, in this airplane, we can test this task in one of two ways. We would like your input on which way you would prefer, seeing as you will be a frequent passenger with your nephew. We can either have the pilot (might be your son, brother, husband, or nephew) demonstrate that he can fly the airplane by hand without the PFD, which does require a little more skill and a slightly different technique, or, we can require the pilot to perform this task using the autopilot so that the pilot basically monitors the airplane flying itself on the approach.

“Now, Aunt Betty, a pilot allowed to use the autopilot system on this approach may not have the skill or technique to fly the approach by hand in the clouds should the autopilot shut down due to turbulence or mechanical failure. Should this happen to a pilot without the skill and practice normally required, the odds of a fatal accident occurring would be quite high.

“So what do you think, Aunt Betty? Would you feel more comfortable flying with this fellow if he has demonstrated mastery of the aircraft (sans PFD) without the autopilot or only with its assistance?”

This leads us to a larger discussion about the use of other technology, iPad, GPS moving map, and more. If technology is used as a replacement for pilot proficiency during training and testing, we end up with less skillful, less competent and ultimately less safe pilots. But, if we require that our students demonstrate mastery with the lowest available level of automation and technology (which, by the way, implies excellent fundamental aircraft control skills) then, when technology is added into the equation, we have a safer pilot.

Technology can be a value added safety multiplier, or it can be a crutch needed to make up for lack of fundamental and advanced skills. Crutch or Safety Multiplier, which one will you choose? I know which one Aunt Betty prefers.

Charles McDougal is a flight instructor, corporate pilot, and former DPE ‎who offers basic and advanced flight instruction in the San Antonio area.  To find out more information about Charles or to contact him, visit his website, www.flighttrainingcoalition.com.

Garmin VNV

ByHank Gibson April 19, 2017

The Garmin G1000/Perspective combined with the Garmin GFC 700 Autopilot can be a great tool in descent planning.  When you want to end up at pattern altitude a certain distance from the airport or you get a clearance to cross a fix at a certain altitude, Garmin VNV is a great tool.  Here’s how to use it.

VFR Garmin VNV Use

Let’s say you want to end up at pattern altitude 3nm from your destination, but you don’t want to descend down into the bumps before you have to.  Here’s how to set it up:

• Go to the Flight Plan page on the MFD
• Press the ATK OFST soft key on the bottom of the MFD.  It stands for Along Track Offset, which, in laymen’s terms, means you are setting a point along your track a certain distance from your destination.  In this case, it will be 3nm
• Input the distance using either the keypad or the small FMS knob and press enter
• Select the altitude you want to be at (in this case pattern altitude) and press enter
• You will see a point 3nm before you destination appear on your magenta line and a Top Of Descent (TOD) appear where you need to start your descent
• 1 minute before the Top Of Descent, an indicator will appear next to your altimeter
• To have the GFC 700 Autopilot fly the descent for you, you have to do two things
  • Set the Altitude bug for the desired altitude
  • Press VNV on the autopilot
• All you have to do now is manage power

IFR Garmin VNV Use

Let’s say you are told to cross a fix at a specific altitude.  Here’s how to use Garmin VNV to plan it out.

• Go to the Flight Plan page on the MFD
• Turn the cursor on and highlight the altitude blank next to the fix in the flight plan
• Input the desired altitude
• You will see a Top Of Descent (TOD) point appear along your course where you need to start your descent
• 1 minute before the Top Of Descent, an indicator will appear next to your altimeter
• To have the GFC 700 Autopilot fly the descent for you, you have to do two things
  • Set the Altitude bug for the desired altitude
  • Press VNV on the autopilot
• All you have to do now is manage power

Direct to the FAF

ByHank Gibson December 9, 2017December 13, 2017

A common practice when ATC is setting an aircraft up for a visual approach is giving a clearance direct to the Final Approach Fix (FAF) for the approach for that runway.  The theory is, the pilot will fly to the FAF, then he’ll pick up the airport and fly visually in.  It is a handy way of setting the pilot up for a 5 mile straight in visual approach.

For anyone who flies with a Garmin GPS, whether is be a 430, a G1000, or a GTN 750, you have probably discovered a little nuance with going direct to the FAF.  Once an approach is loaded into the flight plan, whether is is loaded via vectors or via an IAF, all the waypoints on the approach go into the flight plan.  If the FAF is selected in the flight plan and the direct to command is given, the plane turns to the FAF and flies direct to it.

The fun starts once the plane gets to the FAF.  The Garmin doesn’t sequence to the next waypoint.  It just keeps the FAF as the active waypoint and the airplane just continues on the course it had to get to the FAF. This has probably caused some stress and frustration as the pilot is expecting the airplane to turn inbound (if the autopilot is engaged), but then it keeps flying, usually away from the runway.

How to fix this?  If a Garmin GPS is closely inspected once the direct to the FAF command is selected, the pilot will notice that the GPS goes into Suspend mode.  The Garmin programers thought this was a good idea to do.  

How to get it to sequence properly?  Well, once the FAF is the active waypoint and the airplane is flying direct to it, simply unsuspend the GPS, then the airplane will turn inbound on the final approach course and track inbound and the glide slope will pop up.  On the 430 or 530, just press the OBS key.  On the G1000, press SUSP.  On the GTN 750, tap UNSUSP on the bottom of the unit.

Hopefully, this will lead to reduced frustration on what otherwise should be a simple approach to an airport.

Weather Avoidance

ByHank Gibson October 31, 2014

I began flying a Piper Malibu earlier this year.  For those of you not familiar with the original PA-46, a Malibu has a Continental TSIO-320 engine, with 310 HP.  It’s pressurized and cruises at about 185-200 KTAS.

A few things are introduced to the equation when pilots start flying higher, faster, and farther.  When you start flying over longer distances, weather becomes more of an issue.  On a quick hop from, say, Austin to Dallas, you can be pretty sure of what the weather will be since it’s a short trip.  When you fly from Austin to LA, leave in the morning, land once along the way, and arrive in the afternoon after spending six and a half hours in the air, weather can change a lot in that amount of time.

A must for any pilot flying high and over long distances is some kind of Nexrad system, whether it be a Garmin 696, or it shows up on your GPS or MFD.  Having this situation awareness is very helpful when planning ahead as to what to do about weather.  A stormscope is also a handy tool, since you can see where the lightning is with it.

Cold fronts can be pretty nasty, depending on how strong and how fast they are moving.  A strong, fast moving cold front usually has a lot of convective activity associated with it.  The tricky thing with storms associated with fronts is that storms form in lines, most of the time.  If you’re trying to cross a front in the morning, you can usually get high enough over the clouds with a pressurized airplane since the temperature is still relatively low to get clear of the cumulonimbus clouds.  The cloud tops will only be around ten or twelve thousand feet.

Crossing fronts in the afternoon when daytime heating is pushing the tops of the CBs up to the 20-40 thousand foot range, it’s best to land, have a meal, stretch your legs, and wait till the sun starts to go down before pushing on.  Do not, under any circumstances, try and go through the cumulonimbus clouds associated with a cold front in a small airplane.  Not only is it uncomfortable (the turbulence bounces you around pretty good), but you’ll get ice, scare the passengers, and, if you’re in the heart of a storm, the plane could come apart.

When crossing mountains, the weather is always highly unpredictable.  If it’s a clear day, no matter your altitude, you’ll probably pick up some turbulence from all the rising air off the peaks.  If there is moisture in the air, there are going to be isolated to scattered thunderstorms in the summer time.  The advantage of flying high when there are isolated or scattered storms is you can utilize the see and avoid method.

See and avoid is simple.  When the storms aren’t embedded in other clouds, it’s actually rather easy to spot the big, rising clouds and go around them.  The same concept holds true when avoiding those pesky pop up thunderstorms in humid areas like Houston and Florida.

One thing that I learned this summer was this.  Sometimes, with an area of closely grouped storms, the cloud base is actually quite high (some storms I went underneath in New Mexico had cloud bases of 15,000 MSL).  The thing to do here is just stay below the bases of the clouds and go around the areas of rain.  These will be visible and you’ll be able to navigate around them.  With bases even as low 9-10 thousand feet, it’s a much better idea to stay below the clouds, sacrifice some speed, and dodge the rain shafts.

The most important concept to take away is don’t fly into a thunderstorm.  If there are a bunch of really high clouds in front of you and you don’t see a safe way around them, descend down and land, wait it out, and then continue on your way.