Texas Air Travelers Mandated to Self-Quarantine

Non-Standard Alternate Minimums

ByHank Gibson August 15, 2016September 2, 2016

When filing an IFR flight plan, part of the process is determining whether or not an alternate airport is required.  An alternate airport is required when the following conditions exist(as is outlined by the FAA in 91.169 (b)):

The weather conditions at the destination airport

• From 1 hour before your arrival time to 1 hour after your estimated time of arrival, the weather conditions are forecast to be below
• 2,000 Feet AGL and/or
• 3 statute miles visibility

Let’s paint a scenario.  You are traveling from KSAT (San Antonio International Airport) to KHBV (Jim Hogg County Airport in Hebbronville, TX).  You start to file your flight plan and get down to the space where you put your alternate in.  Since Laredo (KLRD) is the closest airport with a TAF, you check Laredo’s TAF and see that the forecast conditions there at your ETA are ceilings 1,500 and visibility of 2sm.

Based on this information, you need an alternate airport.  Now, the process of finding one.  In Part 91.169 (c), the forecast conditions at the alternate airport must be at or above:

• 600 Feet AGL and 2sm visibility for a precision approach, or
• 800 Feet AGL and 2sm visibility for a non-precision approach

Alright, now we have some guidance.  Laredo is the nearest airport to KHBV, and we know the forecast from the above TAF showing the conditions are forecast to be above the alternate minimums outlined in Part 91, so let’s pick Laredo.  All done?

Not quite.  A lot of airports have Non-Standard Alternate Minimums.  How do you figure out if they do?  The easiest way is to look at any approach plate for the airport.  In the notes section of the government plates, there will be a black triangle with an A in it.  That means there are non-standard alternate minimums published for that airport (in layman’s terms, different than the ones stated above in Part 91).

Now the question is, where do you find those non-standard alternate minimums?  On Foreflight:

• Go to the Airports page
• Tap the Procedures button
• Tap the Arrival button
• Tap the Alternate Minimums option

This brings up the IFR Alternate Minimums document for all the airports with non-standard alternate minimums in that area.  Scroll through to find Laredo.

As you can see, there are several notes there concerning the different approaches into Laredo.  For our example, we’ll say the winds are out of the south and we are planning on flying the ILS 17R if we cannot get into KHBV and have to come to Laredo.  The note there is that the Alternate Minimums for the ILS 17R are actually 700 AGL ceilings and 2sm instead of the above state 600 AGL ceilings and 2sm, the procedure is NA if the tower is closed, and NA if the local weather isn’t received.

What does this tell us?  If the forecasted ceilings at Laredo were below 600 AGL instead of 700 AGL, we would not be able to use LRD as an alternate airport if we were planning on flying the ILS 17R.  The RNAV approaches are all fair game, so a GPS equipped aircraft would have no problem.

On top of that, some approaches at a certain airport are not authorized to be used in the case of the airport being used as an alternate.  At the Galveston airport (KGLS), the ILS 14 is NA as an alternate procedure, but all the RNAV approaches are available.

Picking an alternate seems simple at first, but there are actually a lot of things to consider in the process.

Need help remember all this stuff?  AOPA has put out a kneeboard sheet that helps all IFR pilots remember those important things when it comes to IFR flying.  Check it out here.

Beechcraft Flap Issues

ByAndrew Robinson September 8, 2015

There has always been something that felt wrong to me about how the walkway on many models of Beechcraft extends onto the right hand flap. I have never felt right about stepping onto the flap as I make my way into and out of my dad’s E33A Bonanza and therefore I generally try to step over top of it and place my foot on the wing instead. But does this effort actually make any difference, or am I just making my self look silly for no reason?

Well, as it turns out, it wasn’t such a bad idea. In 2007, a pilot flying a Beech reported a split flap condition. Upon inspection, it was found that there was damage to the actuation rod attachment as well as the nose rib and nut plates. Six other aircraft were checked and found to have similar damage. These findings were submitted to Hawker Beechcraft and in 2008 and they issued a maintenance alert regarding the issue. In 2011 the FAA issued SAIB CE-11-21 (Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin) to alert owners, operators, and maintenance personnel about the problem; specifically warning of the potential for cracking in the nose flap rib (part number 35-165050-84). And while its true that this type of damage is not limited to the right hand flap, it is known to be much more common on that side. Stepping over the flap instead of on it is recommended by both the FAA and Beechcraft as a solution.

Unfortunately, the flap cracking is known to span a wide variety of aircraft types. A 2011 “Safety Communique” issued by Hawker Beechcraft lists the affected models as:

-Bonanza 33, 35, and 36
-Baron 55, 56, 58, and 95
-Duke 60

According the the FAA, the cracking can been found most commonly on airframes which are between 4,000 and 6,500 hours, but has also been found on aircraft with as few as 2,000.

So, what do we do about it?

First off, although much of the damage is difficult to detect without dis-assembly, the paperwork from both the FAA and Beechcraft recommend taking a look at the flap yourself to see if there are any obvious signs of problems. They also suggest taking special care looking in this area during your preflight inspections.

Next, if you have an airplane which may be susceptible to cracking, talk to who ever is doing your maintenance work and have them look carefully during your annual inspections. I talked to one of the IA’s at our shop who has dealt with this issue before and he told me that most shops will remove the flap and send it away to a repair station to have it fixed. It’s possible that if you purchased your airplane used it may have already had this issue taken care of; a quick look through the maintenance logbooks should clear up any questions.

Regardless of whether your airplane is known to suffer from this problem or not, do your best to avoid stepping on the flap when getting in and out of the cockpit. It is also a good idea to ask your passengers to do the same as this simple act could end up saving you big headaches and big money someday down the road.

For more information regarding the flap issues discussed above, talk to your maintenance provider and visit these links:

ABS Flight Controls, Flaps, and Trim System Inspection, Repair and Rigging Guide (See Page 17)

ABS Information on SAIB CE-11-21

Andrew Robinson is a 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor in Pennsylvania.  He flies Pilatus PC-12s and instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.

The RDD LX7

ByHank Gibson December 11, 2017December 23, 2017

Have a Lancair IV-P?

Want to make it better than a Cirrus or a Cessna TTx?

Meet the team at RDD creating the LX7.  Just make sure you are sitting down as you are about to be blown away.

RDD (Research. Design. Development) is a professional building company for the Lancair line of experimental aircraft (Lancair unveiled the Mako at Osh Kosh this summer, which performs slightly less than the advertised values of the LX7, but is available as a new kit).  For those unfamiliar with the experimental world, when an experimental kit is bought, the owner/builder can build the entire aircraft himself, partially build it then send it to a completion center, or have a professional build company put it together.  This last option is what RDD did with Lancair aircraft before Lancair moved from Oregon to Uvalde, TX.

Once Lancair was sold, RDD started thinking on how to make the IV-P better.  Boy, did they.  What resulted is the LX7.

The LX7 is a retractable gear, single engine piston, pressurized aircraft that sits 4.  See it on the ramp and it looks like a Lancair or a Columbia.  Sit in the cockpit and you’ll know something is different.

Starting with the power plant, RDD put a Continental TSIO 550-E engine in the IV-P airframe, giving the airplane 350 HP.  They redesigned the wing to hold 180 gallons of usable fuel and a much better stalling envelope (anyone who has looked at a Lancair IV or IV-P wing knows that there isn’t much wiggle room with angle of attack on those airplanes), lowering the stall speed to 62 knots dirty.

The cabin is roomier and the panel is beautiful.  Equipped with 2 or 3 Garmin G3X Touch panels (the experimental equivalent of the G2000), plus a GTN 750 and a fully digital backup flight instrument from Grand Rapids, plus ESP technology built in to the autopilot, this plane seems like a pilot’s dream.

I haven’t even gotten to the best part:  the speed.  Being pressurized, the LX7 has a 25,000 foot service ceiling where it can achieve cruise speeds of 260 knots at best power (24 GPH) and 250 knots at best economy (18 GPH).

Yes, I did just say 250 knots at 18 GPH in a single engine piston.

With 180 gallons of fuel.

Make sure you bring a Travel John.

Worried about an experimental?  The airframe is equipped with a full BRS system similar to the Cirrus SR22, keeping everyone safe and sound.

There is one flying LX7 currently and RDD is working on 3 more.  The price tag for the full conversion is $550,000.  The kicker is, the owner has to provide the Lancair IV-P airframe.  There are currently 10 Lancair IV-Ps for sale on Controller, varying in price from $200,000-$400,000, bringing the total price of the project to $750,000-$950,000.  Owners who already have a IV-P or a IV-P kit can send it on over to RDD to get started on their project.