Texas Top Aviation is proud to announce that Hank Gibson has completed the training to become an American Bonanza Society Instructor, or ABS Instructor. He is now qualified to give instruction in Beech Aircraft.
As an ABS Instructor, Hank brings over 2800 hours of flying experience in a variety of aircraft to the cockpit of Beechcraft. Along with his ABS Instructor Designation, Hank is also a Cirrus Standardized Instructor Pilot (CSIP) and a Cessna FITS Accepted Instructor in both Cessna high and low wing piston aircraft (CFAI+). Hank is proud to add the ABS Instructor designation to his list of qualifications.
The process of becoming an ABS Instructor is quite comprehensive. The coursework consists of 20 powerpoint lessons covering anything and everything related to flying Debonairs, Bonanzas, Travel Airs, and Barons. The ABS Instructor course is quite in depth and detailed, giving the graduate a full understanding of the Beechcraft piston line of aircraft. To find out more about ABS Instructors, see the ABS website.
Hank is now giving initial and recurrent training in Beech Debonairs and Bonanzas. Please visit the Texas Top Aviation Bonanza Training page for more information on Bonanza and Debonair initial and recurrent training. Interested in Bonanza or Debonair training with a qualified ABS Instructor? Contact Texas Top Aviation today!
In the fall of 2021, Garmin announced the long awaited confirmation that the Garmin GFC 600 autopilot is now certified for the Piper Meridian. The Garmin GFC 600 autopilot has been certified for all other types of the Piper PA46 line of aircraft, but the Meridian was last in line. The airplane has to have been manufactured prior to 2009 and have Avidyne avionics, Meggitt, or have been retrofitted with a Garmin G500 (no G1000 aircraft since those already have the GFC 700 autopilot).
The Garmin GFC 600 autopilot is the ultimate digital autopilot. The integration with the Garmin G500, GTN 750 and GTN 650 units is a beautiful thing. The autopilot communicates with all the heading and altitude bugs, flies approaches smoothly, and even has a level button.
In the latest technological marvel from Garmin, Garmin Safe Glide, the GFC 600 autopilot is critical in reducing pilot workload in an engine failure situation. It flies the airplane for you and takes you to the nearest airport, reducing the stress and allowing the pilot to troubleshoot the situation.
Texas Top Aviation recommends Abilene Aero in Abilene, Texas for any and all avionics installs. They have worked with several of our customers in the last year, are extremely knowledgable and do excellent work. Call them for a quote on a new Garmin GFC 600 autopilot in your Piper Meridian.
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.
Late last year, the Diamond Aircraft Corporation announced a brand new twin engine, the Diamond DA62. At first glance, this is a pretty cool airplane. It seats 7 passengers, spread out amongst 3 rows, with 2 massive doors, leading to an “SUV” type feel, according to Flying Magazine. That is only one of the “neato” features of the Diamond DA62.
The thing that will make pilots believers is the fuel burn. According to Flying Magazine, which did a test flight of the airplane, at 14,000 feet and 60% power, the airplane was only burning 12 GPH, but still doing 170 KTAS. Remember, this is a twin. That’s about the same as a normally aspirated Cirrus SR22 at the same altitude.
How does Diamond do it? Jet A. The company put two Austro AE330, 170 Horsepower, Jet A burning piston engines on the Diamond DA62. You may say, well, yeah, at 60% power, that’s great, but I want to go places. How much fuel does it burn then? Even at max continuous power of 95%, it’s still only burning 18.5 GPH total and cruising at 195 knots. Paying Jet A prices, that’s pretty sweet.
The range on the airplane is quite nice too. Again, according to Flying Magazine, the range with full fuel (86.4 gallons with aux tanks) is about 1,300 miles. You can carry the whole family too, as the full fuel payload is 1,000 pounds. Golf clubs? No problem. Just stick them in the nose.
The Diamond DA62 is probably one of the easiest twins to manage, engine-wise, too. The Fully Automated Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system that Diamond installed leaves the pilot with only 2 power levers, instead of 6 on the typical piston twin. All that needs to be done at cruise is set a percent power and the FADEC computer does the rest.
Need air conditioning, built in oxygen, and TKS? Diamond can set you up. The G1000 system complete with digital backup instruments is standard in the airplane. What more can you really ask for?
If you haven’t figured it out, I really like this airplane and would be aching to fly it. I enjoy the DA40 and have a good amount of DA42 experience, but I’d really like to hop in a Diamond DA62.
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.
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.
Texas Top Aviation wants to express our heartfelt concerns and prayers for those affected by Hurricane Harvey along the Texas Gulf Coast and in Houston. We have several customers in Houston and hope and pray that they are all safe.
The Houston Hobby Airport after Hurricane Harvey’s Torrential downpour
If you would like to donate to the relief effort, there are several organizations that are accepting support. A few are below.
Most of us who have been through instrument training are familiar with the traditional view limiting devices. There is the original hood, which does a decent job of blocking a pilot’s view of outside, but there are still gaps that allow “peeking”, though that peeking doesn’t really help a pilot fly an approach. It does help them figure out which way is up, so it’s not a true simulation.
The other problem with a hood is the process of putting it on to begin simulating IFR conditions, then taking it off when it’s time to land. This process takes time and the instructor has to take the controls (or the autopilot flies), losing some of the realism of the simulation.
Overall, an IFR hood is relatively comfortable. The elastic band sits under your headset, doesn’t squeeze your heard, and doesn’t press underneath your ear cups of the headset, giving you a headache. Hoods are large and somewhat unwieldy.
Foggles are another way to simulate IFR conditions for training. Most of the time, these are safety glasses that have most of the lens blacked out or fogged out, leaving little slits at the bottom for the pilot’s eyes to see the instruments.
Foggles aren’t quite as good as an IFR hood at blocking the outside. Due to their shape, there are often cracks that allow more “peeking” then a hood. The process of beginning to simulate IFR conditions and ending the simulated IFR conditions is easier though, since all the pilot has to do is put the foggles on or slip them off, which can often be done one handed (putting them on can be more difficult one handed since they have to fit underneath your headset). Wearing them for a long period of time can get painful as your headset is probably going to start crushing them against the side of your head.
The best comfort and view limiting combination I have found, so far, is called the ViBAN. It’s very comfortable and does a really good job of simulating IFR by blocking a view of the outside.
What’s the whole goal behind a view limiting device? When a pilot starts instrument training, ideally, all the training would take place in the clouds, since that is why someone get’s an instrument rating. As we all know, this isn’t possible, hence the need to simulate IFR conditions. The problem with simulating IFR is, it’s not true IFR. True IFR conditions are different then what a hood or a set of foggles can simulate. This can lead to spatial disorientation if a fresh instrument pilot enters the clouds for the first time, having done all his training in simulated conditions.
I’ve even heard a story of a pilot who did all his IFR training with a hood, passed his check ride, went into the clouds the first time, and put the hood on because he was getting disoriented since he hadn’t ever experienced true IFR.
What about full motion simulators? How I wish every airport had a full motion simulator for instrument training. Full motion sims are truly the best way to simulate IFR conditions. A pilot can easily get spatially disoriented in a sim if he or she isn’t careful. It’s a great way to simulate IFR conditions, but, alas, this just isn’t possible.
Are we doomed to just do an okay job of training instrument pilots in simulated IFR conditions with a hood or foggles?
Nope, at least not anymore.
Enter the ICARUS Device. The ICARUS Device, which stands for Instrument Conditions Awareness Recognition and Understanding System, is an amazing piece of equipment which truly simulates IFR conditions in the training environment. The ICARUS is a plastic shield that uses a Polymer Dispersed Liquid Crystal film that allows the degradation of a pilot’s visibility. It clips on to a baseball cap and is attached to a battery. That battery is then bluetoothed to an iPad or iPhone App that allows the instructor to put the pilot into and take him out of simulated IFR conditions.
Originally designed for helicopter training, it’s an excellent tool for fixed wing IFR training too. I’ve been using it for the last month and a half and I am hooked. The customer’s that I have used it with truly say that they cannot see a thing outside. Because the plastic shield turns white, it really does give the view that the pilot is in the clouds. The inner ear certainly believes it. The curve of it fits the glare shield in most planes nicely (there is some custom cutting that would have to take place for specifically rounded glare shields, but it fits Cirrus and Piper Saratogas nicely, the two planes I have used it in), and it sits away from the pilot’s face, blocking out all windows, which is what clouds do.
The greatest thing from an instructor’s standpoint is the ICARUS Device app. The pilot puts the device on before taxi and I set the app to VMC. This completely clears the ICARUS Device so the pilot can see just fine for taxi and takeoff. Then, at about 400 AGL, I tap the <1/2 VIS button on the app, and boom, the pilot is in the clouds. I even have a time delay to slowly make the ICARUS Device opaque to simulate slowly entering the clouds. I do the same thing on an approach, except in the reverse order, simulating we are slowly exiting the clouds.
The ICARUS Device is a game changer for IFR training. It’s comfortable, easy to use, the battery lasts for a long time (though bring a standard USB charging cord with you in the plane because the battery failure mode makes the ICARUS Device opaque instead of transparent. You don’t want that to happen at 200 AGL!), and, most important, it truly simulates IFR conditions.
After using it, I believe all flight schools and CFII should get one of these, both in the fixed wing and helicopter world. It’s the best option for simulating IFR conditions.
Texas Top Aviation, LLC was given an ICARUS Device by the ICARUS Device company to test. Texas Top Aviation, LLC was not paid for our above opinion on the ICARUS Device (trust me, if it was terrible, I would have told you!).
