Scud Running

Cirrus Embark

ByHank Gibson April 24, 2018April 24, 2018

Free training?

Yes, you heard correctly.  Last fall, Cirrus released a program called Cirrus Embark.  The Cirrus Embark program offers 3 Free Days of Training to new purchasers of used Cirrus aircraft.  The 3 Days is equivalent to the Cirrus VFR Transition Training Course.

Previously, Cirrus offered free factory training to anyone who purchased a new Cirrus from the Cirrus factory. Now, anyone buying a used Cirrus gets the same offer through Cirrus Embark at their home airport with a local CSIP training provider.

IFR pilot?  No problem.  The Cirrus IFR Advanced Transition Training Course is 5 days in length, but the Cirrus Embark program covers the first 3, reducing the out of pocket pay to only 2 days.

Want more information?  Check out the Cirrus Embark website.

To get more information on both the VFR and IFR Cirrus Transition Training Courses, visit the Texas Top Aviation Cirrus Training Page.

The Importance of Density Altitude

ByHank Gibson August 14, 2018August 14, 2018

Density Altitude:  Pressure Altitude corrected for non-standard temperature.

That’s the book definition of density altitude.  The problem is, that definition leaves a lot of general aviation pilots scratching their heads.  What really is density altitude?

All airplane engines rely on air and fuel mixing together, then that mixture is ignited to create combustion. Normally aspirated piston engine airplanes get their best performance at sea level, where the air is nice and thick, allowing plenty of air molecules to get sucked in the engine intake.  As a normally-aspirated airplane climbs, the ambient air pressure drops with an increase in altitude (the air gets thinner, less dense), thereby reducing airplane takeoff, climb, and landing performance.  There just isn’t as much air at higher altitudes, to put it simply.

Turbo charged piston engines assist with this air density problem.  A turbo charger boosts the air coming into the engine and fools the engine into thinking it is at sea level pressure all the time.  The higher the altitude, the faster the turbo charger spins, spinning the compressor faster, which compresses more air to continue to give the engine sea level pressure air.  This gets faster cruise speeds the higher you go.

Both normally aspirated & turbo charged engines do experience longer takeoff rolls and reduced climb rates at higher airport elevations & higher altitudes.

How does this all relate to density altitude?

When the outside air temperature rises, the air becomes thinner, less dense.  This means that when an airport elevation is 1,000 feet, but the density altitude is reported as 3,000 feet, the airplane engine thinks it is at 3,000 feet.  It won’t accelerate as fast.  The airplane’s climb rate will also be reduced.  That means that the normal climb pitch attitude a pilot is used to seeing won’t be accurate at higher density altitudes. It will lead to slower indicated airspeeds, slow enough to potentially lead to a stall if a pilot isn’t paying attention.

Where does this get dangerous?  High elevation airports.  Whenever the OAT creeps above 85 or 90 at an airport that is higher elevation (I would classify higher elevation as 2,500 feet or higher), the corresponding density altitude sky rockets.  If a pilot isn’t paying attention to airspeed or angle of attack (if the airplane is equipped with an AOA), a stall can come very quickly on climb out.

What to take home from this?  Monitor your climb speed and angle of attack, especially right after takeoff, when you hear density altitude on the ATIS or AWOS.

Upgrading Avionics

ByHank Gibson October 6, 2014

There are many different ways to upgrade an instrument panel.  Putting in a 696 here, a JPI engine monitoring system there, even an Electronic HSI.  But, if you want to swing for the fences and get a serious upgrade, you have to go for a complete glass instrument panel.  For good measure, you might as well throw in a touch screen GPS while you are at it.

Which panel to go with?  There are two mainstream options (Garmin and Aspen) and a handful of other companies that make glass panel replacements (Avidyne being one, King for a short period of time at the end of the last decade being another with the KFD 840).  Around 2010, there were a lot of companies trying to get into the glass panel retrofit game, but many of the products didn’t gain a whole lot of popularity, leaving Garmin and Aspen at the top of the heap.

What about the touch screen GPS market?  Garmin has this pretty much cornered as well, with Avidyne and King just getting into the game.  The gap between Garmin’s GTN series and Avidyne and King is pretty wide.

The answer is pretty easy when it comes to the GPS (go with Garmin!), but not so easy when it comes to the panel.  The G500 and the Aspen Evolution series are both excellent interfaces with strong reliability, so which one do you go with?  Feature-wise, both have a lot of the same features: traffic, weather, terrain, synthetic vision, to name a few.  The presentation for each feature is a little different between the two interfaces.  It just depends on what you like better.

The nice thing about the Aspen system is you can go glass, but you have options on how much glass you want:  1 screen, 2 screens, or 3 screens?  With the single screen PFD, you have all your instrumentation, traffic, weather, and optional synthetic vision.  You don’t need the synthetic vision for the traffic and weather, as it shows up behind your HSI.  It is an honest to goodness glass panel retrofit.

When you decide to upgrade to 2 screens, this is where Aspen has a leg up.  The second screen is a completely redundant PFD and, if you get the 2 hour emergency backup battery installed, acts as the backup instrumentation to the main PFD.  This means you can take out the old steam gauge standby instruments.  This helps clean the panel up.

I personally don’t see the need for 3 screens, but maybe there is someone out there who needs it.

One selling point that Aspen has over Garmin is the wide variety of autopilots and GPS units that Aspen units are compatible with.  The G500 is only compatible with King autopilots, it’s own GFC 700 autopilot (which would be a retrofit), some Collins autopilots, and the Century 21, 31, 41, and 2000.  This does cover a wide array of autopilots, but it keeps some on the outside.  Aspen, on the other hand, is compatible with most autopilots on the market.

Finally, let’s talk price.  Going with an Aspen EFD 1000 PFD (this is the single screen Aspen) will run you somewhere in the area of $12,000.  The price will vary based on the shop and the airplane.  When you want to add a screen, it’s an additional $6,000.  This is for the base, so if you want to add weather or synthetic vision, it’ll run you a little more.

The Garmin G500 comes in around $20,000, again depending on the shop and the airplane.  The screens are bigger on the G500, which is kind of nice, and you are buying a Garmin product, which has a fabulous track record in the aviation industry.

Decisions, decisions.  There really is no wrong answer here.  Both are excellent products with very good track records.  Both have really nice features and don’t hardly fail.  Really, the choice comes down to what you want.

Need training on your upgraded GPS or glass panel retrofit?  Contact Texas Top Aviation for thorough training on your new avionics today.

Cirrus CAPS Saves Lives Again

ByHank Gibson September 9, 2015

In July, a Cirrus SR22 suffered an engine failure in Houston after departing KIAH.  The CAPS system was deployed and the airplane came to rest in a neighborhood on the north side of Houston.  This makes CAPS save number 53 for Cirrus and no fatalities.  The initial NTSB report is below.

14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, July 07, 2015 in Houston, TX
Aircraft: CIRRUS DESIGN CORP SR22, registration: N422PB
Injuries: 2 Minor.
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 July 7, 2015, about 1137 central daylight time, a Cirrus SR-22 single-engine airplane, N422PB, descended under the canopy of the cirrus airframe parachute system (CAPS) and landed in a residential neighborhood at Houston, Texas. The pilot and passenger sustained minor injuries, and the airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to and operated by AIRCCS, LLC; Humble, Texas, as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 business flight. Day visual meteorological conditions (VMC) prevailed and a flight plan had not been filed. The airplane departed George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport (IAH), Houston, Texas, at 1133 and was destined for Austin Bergstrom International Airport (AUS), Austin, Texas.

The pilot reported that during initial climb, he noticed the engine temperatures began increasing and he reduced power in an attempt to lower the engine temperatures. When the airplane was about 900 feet above ground level (agl) the engine began detonating, and soon after there was a complete loss of engine power. With no suitable forced landing areas the pilot deployed the CAPS ballistic parachute system and the airplane impacted terrain and came to rest upright next to a residence.

An initial on-scene wreckage examination showed there was adequate fuel on-board. At the facility where the airplane had most recently been refueled, refueling unit records and a review of security camera video showed that the airplane had been refueled with aviation gasoline and not with jet fuel. Postaccident fuel quality checks of that fuel facility were satisfactory.

The wreckage was moved to a different location and will be further examined. Several avionics components containing non-volatile memory (NVM), including engine performance data, will then be removed from the wreckage for examination and an extraction of useful data is expected.

At 1053 the Automated Surface Observation System at IAH reported wind from 160 degrees at 15 knots gusting to 20 knots, visibility 10 miles, scattered clouds at 3,000 feet agl, broken clouds at 25,000 feet agl, temperature 31 degrees Celsius (C), dew point 24 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 30.03 inches of Mercury.

A Complex Clearance?

ByHank Gibson August 25, 2017August 29, 2017

I was flying in the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas a few weeks ago and heard an IFR clearance given to a King Air that pricked my ears up.  It was a clearance from CRP to LRD, but the routing was one you don’t hear too often anymore.  Because of active military airspace, the routing was via a radial and DME off the CRP VOR (so a point defined by the radial and DME) to another radial and DME point off the LRD VOR.

It took me a second to think about how to do this the easiest (without setting up the VOR and watching the DME).  After a moment’s thought, it’s actually a snap with the G1000.  You create 2 user waypoints, one for each Radial/DME spot, then put those 2 user waypoints in your Flight Plan.

Here’s how.

Step 1

Using the big knob, go to the Waypoint chapter.  Once there, scroll down to the User Waypoint page using the small knob.

Step 2

Press the New soft key.  If you want to name the waypoint something specific, you can do that at the top of the page.  If not, it will default to something like VOR 1 or VOR 2.

Step 3

Under Waypoint Type, use the small knob to select RAD/DIS (stands for Radial/Distance).

Step 4

Under Reference Waypoints, again using the small knob (or your keypad), type or dial in the VOR identifier, the radial from that VOR, and the DME distance.  Press enter and you are done.

Once you have both User Waypoints created, then just put them in your flight plan (if you forget what you named them, you can just go back to the User Waypoint page), and off you go.

The Importance of Transition Training

ByHank Gibson October 15, 2016October 19, 2016

In September, the FAASTeam at the San Antonio FSDO put a special emphasis on transition training (AOPA put out a free course last year covering general transition training topics).  A lot of pilots don’t understand the need for transition training or what it even entails.

Transition training deals mainly with piston engine aircraft, regardless of whether the airplane is a single or twin.  The FAA doesn’t have any special requirements for changing from one piston engine airplane to another, as long as the pilot has the appropriate endorsements (high performance, complex, high altitude, etc.) and is rated in that category and class.

Transition training is promoted mostly by insurance companies. An insurance company looks at a pilots experience when deciding to insure him or her in a new airplane.  If the pilot has only flown Cherokees and Comanches and is now upgrading to a Malibu, then the insurance company is going to require some transition training with a knowledgable instructor.

What is transition training?  It is when an appropriate rated pilot needs to learn how to fly a different airplane.  These are referred to commonly as checkouts, but with more complicated airplanes, the training is actually very in depth.

Using the example above, Pilot A just sold his Comanche 260 and bought a 1987 Malibu.  Pilot A says, “A Malibu is a complex, high performance, single engine piston, which is what I had in my Comanche.  I can fly that, no problem.”  In reality, a Malibu has a lot of differences.

First, there are more systems in a Malibu.  You have pressurization, air conditioning, emergency oxygen, turbo charging, and possibly radar.  Not to mention you are dealing with a Continental engine instead of a Lycoming.  And, is it a factory TSIO 520 or a converted 550?  2, 3, or 4 blade prop?  Glass panel or steam gauges?  What kind of autopilot?  Plus, it’s a much heavier airplane so it’s going to fly different, have different rotation and landing speeds and handle differently in stalls.  What’s the sight picture supposed to be on final approach?  What are the emergency procedures?

Overwhelmed yet?

An experienced, insurance approved instructor and training program is a necessity when getting into new airplanes.  It makes for safe pilots and safer skies.

Texas Top Aviation offers Cirrus Transition Training as well as Bonanza Transition Training and Columbia/Corvalis Transition Training.  We are working on an insurance approved Piper PA 46 piston transition course as well (Malibu and Mirage) and will have the course approved by the end of 2016.  Contact us today to schedule your transition training.