From the Flight Deck

Of PIC and Runways

2009-08-11T20:10:00.006-04:00

One of the first things that pilots learn in flight training is the concept of pilot in command. The Federal Aviation Regulations provide a simple definition in Part 1:

pilot in command means the person who:

(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;"

The definition is as simple as it is profound. The ultimate authority and responsibility for flying well, and safely, resides with the person acting as pilot in command of the aircraft.

The following audio recording was made on 8 August 2009. On the recording are two pilots approaching to land at Leesburg Executive Airport (KJYO). The audio has been edited to take out some rantings by the observers, and reduce the intervals between silence, so it is not real-time.

Frankly, this communication exchange is becoming more common; indicative of a real issue that all pilots need to consider. Are you pilot in command, or do you rely on others to operate your airplane?

Now, this is not to say or indicate that pilots should impose their authority on others - a recording of that will no doubt be coming forth in the near term as there is plenty of that out there to be heard (actually already have that in the recording files).

Finally, FAA Advisory Circular 90-66a states that "Landing and takeoff should be accomplished on the operating runway most nearly aligned into the wind.

So, what runway are 'you' using?

The Toledo Express

2006-08-18T11:34:00.000-04:00

The family was scheduled to drive out to MI for a family birthday with my in-laws. I really wanted to go, but I do have a lot of things going on and felt that it would be better from a work/life balance perspective to keep going, especially since some of the activities are of the away from home variety anyway.

So, instead of driving 11 hours, I suggested that I fly them to Toledo and return home. They picked up a rental car in TOL to drive the remaining two hours, and I flew back to Leesburg. The flight out was very uneventful with very little haze or clouds. We even had a slight tailwind.

The return flight was equally uneventful except that the time to climb was noticeably shorter. I made a PIREP just west of the BSV VOR. After the report I checked back in with Cleveland center and decided to monitor 121.50. Much to my surprise, I was receiving a very strong Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) signal. This was a first for me. I reported that to the Center controller who said that he had received other reports at all altitudes as well. A quick check of the GPS showed that I was passing over the New Philadelphia airport (KPHD). I suspect there was an airplane transmitting a signal on the ground there.

Flight of the Guinea Pig

2006-08-08T16:21:00.000-04:00

I was selected to participate in a NASA research study a few weeks ago, so yesterday I flew down to Newport News (KPHF) for an interview with the research team. I also spent some time wearing the Oculometer for calibration purposes. The goal of the study is to evaluate GA piloting performance while interacting with datalink weather services.

The flight down was mostly uninteresting until just northwest of the airport. Apparently there was some maneuvering traffic below me that I passed over and avoided, but never saw. Visibility was pretty bad and I will log a good portion of the flight as actual. The haze was thick until I got closer to Norfolk.

Upon rollout and landing on runway 20, I turned onto Charlie and taxied to Mercury at about 1:2opm for a 2:00pm appointment. The sequence was textbook in terms of the utility of GA flight in action. The project folks had arranged a car for me. I parked the airplane with directions from the lineman, hopped out, grabbed my bag, closed up the airplane and put the cover on. I grabbed the keys and jumped in the rental car, drove the 11 miles to the facility and was on time for my 2:00pm appointment, which was interesting and fun. I learned a lot about the MX20, a device I have really never touched. I will be using it a lot when I pilot the NASA Stationair around VA NC and/or WV next month.

By 6pm, I was following the Garmin 3200 directions back to the airport in the rental car. I filed a flight plan enroute, and despite the heat and humidity, learned that the storms prognostication for 4pm onward would be no factor on the way back to Leesburg. After a quick human refueling courtesy of the golden arched restaurant, and some bio-recycling, it was time to taxi.

The clearance was HPW RIC COATT4, but nearing BRV, it was fly a 340 heading forever. The flight at 6000 was punctuated by continuous light chop from RIC to BRV, most likely somewhat a by-product of some intense convective activity NE of our position. The other noteworthy part of the cruise portion of the flight was the RJ flying the COLIN departure from RIC that was capped at 5. I was in the way at 6. Once in sight I approved the controllers request for visual separation and the jet streaked by about 2 miles ahead climbing to 9000.

Passing HEF on the western tour to JYO, and now well inside the ADIZ, I cancelled the IFR to join the Route 15 arrival at 1400'. The nice surprise, in addition to the direct destination, was the 141 knot groundspeed, which during cruise had been stuck at 121 knots. With the beacon in sight at 8 miles, I called it in with ATC and they dropped radar services and approved the frequency change. The airport was very quiet, so, I joined the crosswind for the 17 downwind, and completed a very uneventful flight.

3.1 hours on the meter.

Flight to Teterboro

2006-07-21T22:34:00.000-04:00

I received a request Monday to fly an Angel Flight mission to NY City on Tuesday. My passenger snapped a few pictures.

Here is short final for 19 at Teterboro, (KTEB) (yeah well, this is called S-turns on final to allow the jet to get across the runway- yeah, that's it ;) )

Giants stadium in view on the departure off 24.

I'm glad we'll be turning to the left soon. No interest in penetrating that kind of IMC.

Unfortunately, the winds were aligned with our desired direction of flight.

The steady steed awaits another day of flying adventure.

Missed on Memorial Day weekend

2006-05-28T08:38:00.000-04:00

We scheduled a flight up to Hamilton, NY (H30) for the long weekend in N2871R. The weather was warm and moist, and the circulation and instability caused by low pressure descending eastward out of the Great Lakes made the weather analysis complex. However, the satellite showed that the sky cover was mostly broken across all of PA with a few complexes of heavy and severe precip. I decided to delay the flight to let the afternoon convection die down.

The number one rule for safe IFR in areas of thunderstorms is to stay visual with and avoid the weather. Closer to departure time, a narrow complex of thunderstorms stretched from Latrobe past Harrisburg moving east with a large area of convective activity east of Pittsburgh. Our route of flight was over Harrisburg, and the second rule for safe thunderstorm avoidance is to avoid flights cross/through lines of activity. If that is the plan, see rule one above.

We received our clearance out of Leesburg which was immediate right turn off runway 17, direct STILL, radar vectors MRB, HGR v377 HAR and on up through PA, passing over Selinsgove and Williamsport, then up over Binghamton and then destination.

Climbing out of Leesburg just after 8pm we were quickly on our way to HGR; P-40 was expanded, so we got the western routing, but it wasn't too bad. Closer to HGR, we were turned to SCAPE on v377, and then direct HAR. We checked in with HAR approach, and advised we could use some help with the weather. Harrisburg concurred and said that closer to HAR they would probably have to route us east.

It wasn't long after that when HAR recommended a deviation left of course to avoid activity west of victor airway 31. When I asked about direct SEG, we were told that the line of
weather was currently there as well. We could see the weather off our right wing and continued northbound toward clear skies. The late evening sun was still illuminating faint strands of high cirrus ahead - a sign that large weather complexes were not on our route of flight. So far so good.

As we neared Williamsport, the weather to our east was headed away and the light show we got near Selinsgrove came to an end. I asked NY center for a frequency change to talk to Flight Service. I got two responses to the call (Competition at the FSS. ;) ) The weather at IPT was reporting in as 1SM visibility, but from altitude it looked much better than that - the weather from flight service was a few minutes old. Syracuse weather was still overcast at 4000.

As the darkness prevailed, the visibility was decreasing and the gloomy view ahead suggested that we would soon be entering some weather. Binghamton airports started going in and out of view, and the lights below disappeared. IMC. Binghamton approach soon handed us off to Syracuse, and we got ready to shoot the GPS-A into Hamilton (H30).

The approach controller reported twice that moderate precipitation had enveloped the approach area, and I knew pretty well that it was just rain- there was nary a bump since we entered the weather. The rain got very heavy as we descended down to 5000, but did not last long. We crossed the VOR at about 4000 on a descent down to cross hutch at 3500. I stayed higher and then started the descent for the airport. As we got down to 2300' I looked for the airport lights I had turned on. They were already directly below us and I could see ragged looking clouds surrounding the airport.

Knowing that I needed greater than 2SM visibility, not able to determine whether or not I could keep a visual on the airport, and the town lights shrouded in haze to the south, it was an easy decision to avoid the sucker approach and power up for the missed approach. We turned back for HUTCH and called Syracuse approach. When queried for intentions, it was time to head for Syracuse.

We were told to expect the ILS 28, vectors through the approach course for the sequence. Ok. The airplane ahead of us reported ceilings at 850 feet. I picked up the lights at about 900' and the runway at about 800 feet, the ALFS-2 approach lights bright and welcoming. The water covered runway shimmered below and we continued the approach. I can honestly say that it was my best landing ever - there was no thud, whatsoever.

We taxied down to Landmark at about 11 and were glad to see they were still open. Since the rental car companies were well closed, the FBO lent us the crew car overnight and we headed back to Hamilton... through the foggy woods to gram's house.

I got up the next morning to return the crew car promptly and ferry the plane back to Hamilton. I spent the morning working on the airplane, adding oil and gas, and generally getting it re-organized. The slight slant of the ramp had allowed the fuel to migrate to the downhill tank, but that was easily corrected.

The weather finally lifted at about 1 and I logged the GPS-A approach again with the airport coming into view this time in good visibility. I cancelled IFR in the air. Marybeth and the kids were at the park about 1 mile or so from the airport and heard me fly in, so they came over and picked me up. We fueled and secured the aircraft. As we did, the skies cleared from overcast to scattered cumulus.

Hastening their own end

2006-05-05T12:01:00.000-04:00

The controversy during the past year or so about the Aviation Trust Fund and the implementation of user fees instead of airline ticket taxes continues to expand. The consequences of this are profound, and in a nutshell, if the proposal by the FAA is adopted, it will lead to the demise of the Air Traffic Control System.

The immediate consequences for general aviation will be diminished safety. Some other consequences, good and bad:

1) The number of GA VFR flights will increase, the number of IFR flights will decrease
2) The economic barriers to entry for ADS-B and other technologies that support in-situ (in cockpit) flight safety will come down.
3) Class E airports will increase in value
4) Congestion at larger airports will become worse to the point where VFR entry will be denied (the airlines will gain a foot hold over their GA competitors to service larger airports exclusively - in some cases this is true already.)

Eventually, GA flight operations will minimize their use of ATC in the NAS. The airlines will be paying less for the system. A gap will develop and there will be funding shortfalls - shortfalls that do not exist today. The airlines will resist any increase to the fees, and lobby for down-sizing the ATC system in favor of technology in the airliner that can provide the same level of safety for the flying public as the ATC system, possibly as proven by GA (true or not, that could be one argument).

On the surface, this would appear to be a pretty good result. Unfortunately, aviation safety is extremely complex. The agenda of the airlines is not safety, it is short-term profitability. They do not foresee the impacts on flight safety that this will have - they just don't see it on the radar as an issue for them. But that is where they are wrong, because the overall incredible level of safety we enjoy today will be lost, perhaps irreparably, and the impact that will have on profitability will be even more significant.

ADIZ Impact

2006-04-27T12:11:00.000-04:00

Here is a poster-child flight for the impact of the DC ADIZ/FRZ. One might call it a "Great circle route". The flight originated at Leesburg, VA and flew to Stevensville, MD.

Please Tax the Oil Companies!!!

2006-04-26T15:14:00.000-04:00

Congress needs to act; it is an election year and we’ll be voting.

In addition:

Please extend the tax incentives for purchasing large SUVs that weigh more than 6000 pounds.

Also, keep enacting environmental protection legislation with unreasonable timeframes for implementation

Please make sure the public is fully in-the-know well in advance so that we can have nationwide panic which will lead to even stronger short term demand.

There is no doubt that all of these efforts will bring the higher gas prices necessary to make some tangible progress in actually finding viable alternative fuel sources.

DayJet Announces Service Region, Plans

2006-04-25T14:00:00.002-04:00

DayJet announced that it will serve all the airports in the FAA Southeast US Airport Facility Directory (A/FD) ... almost. Readers from Kentucky should know they will not be included in the initial service launch.

As for the reason for this post, I almost hurt myself laughing when I read this.

WARNING: The quote presented below has been known to cause loss of physical motor control. This weblog accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any injury that may result from continuing to read this post.

DayJet has 239 Eclipse 500s on firm order, plus 70 options, all planned for delivery within 24 months of beginning operations. -- Graham Warwick, Flight International

I have lived long enough to learn that there are a several simple rules to live by, for example:

1) Avoid consumption of mass-produced fish
2) Avoid buying the first model year of a new car design

NEW: 3) Avoid air travel in newly designed, mass-produced aircraft.

Scary. If they can, great. I'll wait until Eclipse produces serial number #601 about 5 years from now to work out the bugs before I hop on board.

Here is Cessna's production in 2005 for comparison.

During the year, Cessna delivered 249 Citation jets, 822 single engine pistons, and 86 Caravan single-engine turboprops.

Cessna Aircraft Company is a subsidiary of Textron Inc. (TXT), a $10 billion, multi-industry company with 46,000 employees in 36 countries.

Now, here is some insight into Eclipse:

And as it ramps up production to 130 jet planes this year, Eclipse will nearly double its work force to 1,000 employees by the end of the year, Raburn said.

Flight aware upgrade

2006-04-16T21:48:00.000-04:00

Flightaware now provides historical flight track map overlays. Outstanding!

Here is the flight track for the ORH-TTN flight last week.

Cheat -ed / -ing on return

2006-04-08T16:51:00.001-04:00

With a warm front stretching from Atlantic City to Danville, and a strong low in the midwest the weather was less than ideal when I got to the KORH airport to come home. The reported weather was OVC007, strong winds on the surface and enroute (40-60 knots forecast), and wind shear on the TAF. After a lengthy study of the weather computer and chat with flight service, it looked like I could fly to Trenton (TTN). The flight plan I pre-filed the day before was completely out the window.

Once the tower found the new flight plan, I got a full route clearance to TTN, and taxiied to rwy 29. The clearance was runway heading, vectors ORW v16 DIXIE v276 RBV KTTN, 3000, expect 6000 in 10. I started messing with the weather pages in the G1000 again - big mistake. More on that later.

There was a good bit of turbulence in the climb, but nothing outrageous. Cleared up to 6000 and heading 250, I cleared the clouds at 5000 feet. Total IMC time, like 5 minutes maybe. Cheated. I was eventually cleared south to ORW. Arriving north of ORW, the clouds faded and by the time I hit the LI Sound, skies were clear above, and below. Over Long Island I saw a few distant flashes of activity to the West-Northwest. When I asked NY approach about any weather, the response was - nothing apparent anywhere.

The reason I had to ask NY about the weather, despite having XM Weather on the G1000, was that I had managed to turn it off. There is a "Done" softkey on the AUX page. This should be relabeled the "kill" key - it effectively disables the data link function. Upon further study of the purpose of that button, there is no information on what it does, except to denote its use when first activating the system. So, at a time when weather would have been nice to have, I had none.

But then, I really didn't need it. The trip to TTN was very uneventful. I landed, got self-serve fuel, refiled, and reviewed the weather. With the radar trend showing a slot opening up west of JYO, it looked like a very doable flight. All that and a phone call to Mike to discuss the G1000 WX problem, I was on my way within about 30 minutes. The fuel farm is to the left rear of the FBO building when pulling up. I will remember that as TTN is a good stop.

Departing runway 24, I called Phili approach to activate IFR. The tower had closed. After a few minutes, I was cleared to JYO via direct MXE v408 ROBRT AML JYO at 6. Phili had me hold at 5000 as can be seen in the Flightaware track log.

It was definitely a bumpy flight and the log shows the horrendous ground speeds. As such other traffic was overtaking me once cleared to 6000, so I was assigned 7000, but given direct JYO - hard to beat that. I flew through one rain shower and the autopilot fought with the turbulence with occasional excursions through 20 degrees of bank and one chart flipping jolt.

For this flight though, I had full weather again and just monitored the radar images. Cheating. It was clear VMC for the whole trip with ceilings at about 8 or so. 44 miles and still 30 minutes from JYO, I had the beacon in sight. With 405 total flight hours as of this trip, I have still not had a weather scenario occur that convinces me that cockpit weather is as valuable as it costs. My thinking is that if it becomes a necessity while in flight, something is wrong with the pre-flight planning process. Yes, weather changes quickly and often, but at most GA airspeeds, it's not that much change. Maybe there is some regional weather variable to this.

As usual for a late night flight, I cancelled IFR once firmly planted on runway 17. 1.8 hours from TTN to JYO - 147 miles - or an avg gs of 82kts. Yikes!

JYO-ORH via JFKrazy

2006-04-07T00:01:00.000-04:00

Leesburg, VA to Worcester (that's "wistah" for those of you who grew up south of the Mason-Dixon line) in 2.5 hours. Wheels left runway 35 at 1820, landed ORH runway 29 at 2055. Here is the flight track.

It was a fun flight. I called up clearance delivery at JYO and heard the magic words - "Cleared as filed..." Woohoo!

STILL WOOLY BAL V268 ENO V16 JFK V229 WITNY

Turning east out of JYO to WOOLY, ground speed was over 160 knots, and over BAL and down v268 speeds topped out at 171. Making the turn over BROSS, and heading north, speeds quickly slowed to 145, and continued a southbound trajectory toward 130 for most of the second half of the trip.

McGuire descended me down to 5000 passing CYN, only to have NY turn me 40 left and climb back to 7000 15 miles from JFK. The controller in the south departure sector off Kennedy was non-stop instructions, until the Saudi heavy jet started a two minute (that's not an exaggeration) rant about flight plans - on the wrong frequency. I would have to guess dispatch was on the other end. Oops. The NY controller gave him an earful, demonstrating how a similar dressing down can be done in only 12 seconds. ;)

After the vectored climb, it was direct Kennedy again. Then soon after passing over top the field, I was given 090 for 10 miles, then 30 left to join the airway soon after. The next controller cleared me direct Hartford after I checked in with a request for BDR, as I headed out over Long Island sound. That soon became direct ORH for the visual 29.

Spinning Decathlon

2006-04-02T19:09:00.000-04:00

What a nice day to fly! The winds were light with a few scatterings of cumulus clouds at 4500'. Went over to VKX to work with Adam Cope and his Super Decathlon to meet the flight training requirements for stall spin awareness.

Here is a picture of the Super Decathlon.

After an extensive briefing on stalls and spins, and a lengthy suit up process with the chute, the flight began with some stalls and dutch rolls. This was great since it really brings home the experience of adverse yaw.

Climbing up to 3500' on the fringe of the DCA class bravo, we then performed some falling leaf stalls. In this maneuver, the goal is to understand the power of rudder authority. With the airplane set up in a stall, opposite rudder is applied to 'catch" the falling wing. As such, the airplane wallows in a nose up descent as the wings slowly oscillate back and forth from high to low, just as a leaf does. Of course, with good feet skills, this can be minimized a great deal.

Then it was time for incipient spins and fully developed spins. With the airplane stalled, kick the rudder and over we went. Two turns and then it was release the stall and pull out from the dive. Simple.

After a couple of those to the left and right, we did two fully developed spins with 5 rotations from 4500'. After two rotations the spin was fully developed and releasing the back pressure had NO EFFECT! The spin tightened and the rotation increased - a stabilized spin. Now, full opposite rudder to stop the rotation, and pull out of the dive. The first one came out at 2500' and 4.4 G's! 2000' of altitude loss in about 15 seconds (if that). The others also were good for 2000'...exactly. Weird, but most things in flying are mathematical, so not too surprising.

After another one of those, we were basically done. My stomach (more literally my brain) had had enough spinning. A simple three point landing (my first ever in a taildragger), and it was
a day. 1.0 on the hobbes meter. Will have to go do it again some time (on purpose) - it was a lot of fun!

$200M and counting

2006-03-30T09:27:00.000-05:00

The inanity of antimissile technology for airliners continues. It reminds me of nuclear deterrence. The only logical hope is that by having something, it will deter/persuade terrorists to pick a different target.

This approach was costly then and it is even more costly now. As a society, we continue to struggle with an understanding of risk management, cost/benefit analysis, etc., when it comes to security.

Unless this system is just as effective against rocket-propelled anything's (grenades for example), this is a complete waste of taxpayer revenue.

Why not spend $200M on making sure that FBI agents have email and others tools they need so they can track down terrorists before they have a target in their sights?

Hooters Buffaloed by Messy Industry

2006-03-30T09:12:00.000-05:00

Well, Hooter's Air is the latest casualty in the domestic airline travel industry. I thought the quote by Bob Brook's in the AP article is concise and brutally accurate. "The flying industry is in a terrible mess. ... I've got a fair amount of money, but I don't have enough to fix this animal."

What's in your hangar?

2006-03-23T22:18:00.000-05:00

As fate would have it, I converted a small windfall from some intangible paper shares with no market value into a tangible, flying asset.

Pre- Sun N Fun FAA Bloopers

2006-03-22T20:55:00.002-05:00

Reviewed the video today for the Sun N Fun event in Lakeland, FL (KLAL) next month. Two things struck me watching the video produced by the FAA:

1) The introduction is narrated by a pilot who jumps out of his airplane and hangs onto the propeller like that's a safe idea... and,

2) The arrival procedure includes (practically requires) low altitude overflight of a power plant. The FAA might want to review its own FDC NOTAM 04/0811. Or more logically, rescind the NOTAM since it very little, if any, deterrence or enforcement value.

NTSB releases Stafford, VA preliminary accident report

2006-03-21T12:18:00.000-05:00

It took awhile, but the preliminary accident report for a recent fatal crash at nearby Stafford, VA in February has been published by the NTSB. Accident reports like this one are important, not for the morbid details they sometimes provide, but rather for what can be learned from these unfortunate circumstances. While we'll never know what exactly happened, there are points of fact in these detailed reports that allow one to perceive the circumstances from a first person perspective to gain some insight.

The temperature dewpoint spread was reported as 5/3. The expected, theoretical vertical visibility would have been 900 feet, but the reported visibility was only 500. It seems likely from the weather described by witnesses that heavy banks of fog were in the vicinity of the airport. There is a phenomenon that occurs in such conditions where straight up and down visibility doesn't tell the complete story. While the horizontal visibility was reported at 1.25 miles, the presence of heavy fog can render visibility near zero at any time. Such are the limits of automated weather reporting without human intervention. At towered facilities, the weather information is analyzed and augmented by human observers.

So, as an aircraft approaches the airport and makes visual contact with the runway environment to continue for a landing, the visibility can go from acceptable to zero in fog (illuminated by the landing light and made worse) as the aircraft gets closer to the ground. If this occurs close to the ground and the runway cues (i.e., lights, centerline, etc) are lost, the plane is now in a no-man's-land situation past the missed approach point. The airplane is slow, the flaps are likely set full down, and the outcome has changed instantaneously from one of assured landing to a total "Uh oh!" to say the least.

Power, pitch, flaps, positive rate, climb, flaps. Forget any of those and the airplane will not fly too well. Put the airplane into a 30 degree bank as reported (to fly the published missed approach procedure), and it doesn't climb as well either. It will be interesting to see if the NTSB can determine if aircraft similar to the accident aircraft can climb with full flaps in a 30 degree left turn at high gross weights. It will be interesting not because that may have been the cause of the accident, but because no one may have thought to know the answer to such a question.

Night currency

2006-03-13T01:30:00.000-05:00

Robby and I flew down to Culpeper (CJR) in the DV20 to try to grab a VAA stamp. Unfortunately CJR closed at 6 so no one was home. Being that it was night, we flew around the airport so I could update my night currency, and then it was back to JYO.

We received Bravo clearances both to and from CJR. Leaving JYO, we flew down the "Rt 15 transition" (below the IAD class B). Once clear of RWY 30, PCT cleared us to enter the Bravo. On the way back, the controller cleared us into the Bravo direct to JYO, but nearing Dulles at 138 knots, we were asked to descend below the Bravo. This meant flying the Rt 15 transition again, at night, but that was okay. Keep the red lights on the mountain to the left and the white lights of Rt 15 on the right.

Robby flew left seat and thought that the ride was a bit "bumpy" as we descended coming back to Leesburg. No stamp but night currency and we had a good time.

Foul Follow-up

2005-12-13T21:09:00.000-05:00

I received the QAR response from Potomac Consolidated TRACON today. Essentially, when the Restricted Area South of Manassas is hot and Dulles is landing north, this creates an operational problem for PCT. As such, they would prefer that no one follow the route we intended to fly, even remaining below the Dulles Class B.

I protested that Class E airspace is for everyone. The sentiment of the QAR representative was that we were better off and that PCT provided us a service that was in our best interest as well. It was further suggested that had we continued into the ADIZ along the intended route, we could have created a workload issue because of the number of point outs needed to IFR aircraft on Dulles final. In turn, that could have made it necessary to stop servicing ADIZ requests. The QAR will be reminding controllers not to issue headings to VFR aircraft, but frankly I was glad that we were given exact instructions.

The good news is that since the FAA will now be acting PIC for any flight into or out of the ADIZ that I make, I am thinking that maybe I don't have to meet currency requirements or carry my license.

Post Holly Run... A-Foul

2005-12-04T11:10:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, December 3rd was the annual Holly Run to Tangier Island (TGI). Jason, Robby and I stopped for fuel, lunch and to meet a friend at Hummel (W75). We also filed our VFR ADIZ flight plan. We took off and flew up the Northern Neck at 2500’ to stay under the 40 knot winds aloft.

Approaching BRV, our filed entry point, we contacted Potomac Approach to obtain our squawk code. We had been having difficulty raising Potomac because the Garmins were over-autosquelching ATC communications and apparently we were too low to get through. When we finally got through after trying three frequencies, we were swicthed to the correct frequency (which was not the one published). We were 6nm southeast from BRV. We continued northbound to enter the ADIZ.

We had planned to fly east of the MOA and restricted areas, above Quantico at 3000, continue north and then northwest under the outer ring of the class B, and south of Manassas (HEF).

We were then instructed that the Restricted Area 6608 was hot and that Dulles was landing north, and that we were to fly west of the Restricted area. The original intention had been to request a BARIN1 STAR transition at 2500 feet. Given the pre-emptive instructions, I knew intuitively that request was going to be rejected.

I replied that we intended to fly east of the restricted area, remain below the Class Bravo and over fly Manassas.

(See graphic of the flight plan.)

The controller responded that we were to “Turn to a heading of 300, remain west of the restricted area, Dulles is landing north and there are too many airplanes in the vicinity of Manassas … you are aren’t going to over fly Manassas.”

At that point I made the command decision that any continued discussion on the plan was not in anyone’s best interest. I replied, “Turning left 300, wilco.” There would be time to hash this out in a more appropriate venue. We flew through the MOA, which is something I prefer to avoid as well, but we were given a heading we were going to fly it.

I contemplated having the tape marked, but the controller was also dealing with an aircraft south of Stafford with Mode C problems and who apparently needed recurrent IFR training to refresh his understanding of procedures and IFR communication protocols. I didn’t see any point in further exacerbating the situation – I noted the time and frequency and we continued the flight.

When is 120 faster than 600???

2005-10-12T22:14:00.000-04:00

The bigger one might be able to go non-stop for 24 hours, but for flights to locations 750 miles or less, the tortoise beats the hare with no 21-day booking penalty.

;)

(Photo Courtesy of AOPA)

The aircraft was photographed with a Cessna 182 owned by the Boeing Employee Flying Association in preparation for an upcoming article in AOPA Pilot.

Just keep thinking that ... this won't hurt a bit

2005-10-11T00:53:00.000-04:00

Regarding the Federal preparedness for a new pandemic of Avian flu, The Washington Post editors wrote today:

It was disturbing to hear the president ruminate on the use of
military troops for mass quarantines. That comment -- conjuring images of
soldiers shooting as sick people try to cross a cordon sanitaire -- could have
been a scare tactic.

In fact, there is no legal, let alone ethical, means of
enforcing mass quarantine in this country....

For those of us that fly (well try to) near DC, we know better. The rule of law and democratic principles have been usurped by a simple sentiment: where there's a will, there's a way.

The ADIZ is wrong for democracy and freedom

2005-10-09T18:04:00.000-04:00

Oppose the erosion of democratic principles. Oppose the ADIZ!

Keep America free.

Response to the DOT NPRM FAA-2003-17005

2005-10-08T10:05:00.000-04:00

October 8, 2005

Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20591

RE: Docket No. FAA-2003-17005, Wash, DC Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules Area

On 4 August 2005, the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) "to codify current flight restrictions for certain aircraft operations in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area." The NPRM requests comments from interested parties. As a resident, pilot, voter and employee of a flight school in the region, as well as a member of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) and a volunteer Angel Flight pilot, I feel particularly compelled to comment on the NPRM.

My considered opinion is that the assertions and justifications provided in the NPRM do not satisfactorily substantiate an overwhelming need for the expense and drastic actions being suggested. In summary, the NPRM fails to acknowledge or consider that the facts presented consist of out-dated information – most of the content can be traced to information available in the 2003 timeframe – or that the analysis of the threat profile as perceived by the DoD and DHS of general aviation aircraft is exceedingly narrow, and thin, with no cost/benefit discussion whatsoever. This response analyzes the core justifications offered by the FAA in the NPRM.

1) DC is home to all three branches of the Federal government, as well as numerous Federal buildings, foreign embassies, multi-national institutions, and national monuments

Yes, the United States is a “federal” government. As such, there are elements and components represented in every state of the Union, which is representative of the institutional strength and resiliency that such a form of government offers. Moreover, we know from the attacks of 11 September 2001 that Washington, DC is not the only city that the terrorists assign a high value. Without trying to speculate where those other locations might be, no one except the terrorists can really know the values that might be assigned to any number of high profile buildings, memorials and locations within the entire United States. For example, recent bombings in Egypt occurred in resort communities far away from the seat of government there. Thus, the formation of a permanent ADIZ for Washington, DC will lead the way, and become the model for, additional implementations nationwide.

To enact this NPRM is to support directly the objectives of the original 2001 terrorists at an intangible cost to liberty… and upwardly spiraling costs to taxpayers and users of the National Airspace System (NAS). In fact, the NPRM notes that the deterrent value provided in the security protocols in place for Part 121 operations might encourage the terrorists to consider general aviation aircraft to use in an attack. This is consistent with the belief that the terrorist mentality is to select targets they believe will have the largest psychological impact with the least amount of operational risk. As such, the ADIZ/FRZ airspace construct might actually encourage the terrorists to attack so-called “softer” or less defended targets. The Government should consider the tactical advantages of discontinuing the ADIZ to let the terrorists mistakenly believe that an attack on DC can be successful.

2) There is a need for continued vigilance in aviation security.

There is no question that vigilance is necessary. The terrorists leveraged outdated and lackadaisical protocols in commercial transport security operations to carry out the September 11th attacks. That said, the FAA notes that there really is “no evidence” to support more drastic security protocols like the ADIZ/FRZ. Moreover, just as Waleed bin Attash was apprehended on the ground with explosives in Pakistan, the DHS should be called upon to justify why it is that Americans cannot reasonably expect similar results for thwarting such plots through U.S. law enforcement initiatives and awareness efforts in the U.S. aviation community. If the answer is that these initiatives are inadequate and do not serve as inherent and significant operational risks to terrorist plots trying to use light aircraft for terrorist purposes, then that needs to be explained and/or corrected.

Please note that the cost just to the FAA of the NPRM is estimated at $11M, while the Airport Watch initiative is being funded nationwide with just $275,000. The cost/benefit ratio of these two programs should be studied. I would suggest that the disparity in the benefit of each dollar spent between the two efforts will be staggering. On the surface, one program covers the whole country including Alaska and Hawaii, and one covers a relatively small geographic region at a much higher expense.

I also submit that the $296M cost estimated in the NPRM for the ADIZ/FRZ would be better spent to supplement what can only be reasonably concluded as inadequately capable law enforcement initiatives and awareness efforts rather than continue the ADIZ/FRZ. Awareness efforts and initiatives like Airport Watch are a significant and cost-effective deterrent to such plots because of the uncertainty of success that they create for terrorists.

As noted in recent ADIZ/FRZ violations involving a pilot from Pennsylvania, a governor from Kentucky, and a flock of birds on April 27, 2005, the “temporary” airspace restrictions actually create results that terrorists consider successful at no cost to them! Summarily, it is now established through these incidents that the existence and enforcement of the ADIZ airspace will create permanently an ongoing source of panic, chaos, disruption, and other unforeseeable safety issues in addition to economic distortions to the underlying NAS infrastructure (i.e., airports). The effects on cost and safety are incalculable while the security benefit is negligible. In four years, there has yet to be one successful intercept of a terrorist anywhere in the nation or over DC; yet the residents of the DC metropolitan region have been “terrorized” by the flare dropping F-16s and other fast moving, loud and dangerous, low altitude intercept aircraft. The DOT proposes to make this security posture a permanent reality, but the NPRM never mentions these issues?

Furthermore, since 2001 subsequent terror attacks launched by al Qaeda around the world have not used any form of aircraft. Recent bombings in Spain, Egypt and England have used more traditional forms of ground-based attacks. This is tangible fact, and not speculation about how the terrorists might attack next. In fact, despite the success of the attack on the USS Cole prior to the September 11th attacks, the Department of Transportation has made no provision even remotely similar to this NPRM to address similar threats on rivers and ports within the vicinity of Washington, DC. Before the NPRM is approved, this needs to be explained. Have not rental trucks proven to be highly effective conveyances for terrorist weapon delivery in New York and Oklahoma? What has been done to fingerprint and identify drivers of these vehicles, and log every trip conducted by them since these incidents took place? The myopic, over-analysis of the threat posed by small aircraft must end. It is needlessly diverting resources from considering more likely attack profiles for the next incident. This NPRM should be not be enacted in favor of the presumption of innocence standard – a right that all Americans are supposed to enjoy equally.

Finally on this point, the GAO found that the “FAA has not established written policies or procedures for reviewing and revalidating the need for flight restrictions that limit access to airspace for indefinite periods of time and could negatively affect the general aviation industry.” As such, once enacted, the costs of the ADIZ will be born in perpetuity by American taxpayers and the aviation industry even if it provides no benefit.

3) While the DHS has no specific information that terrorist groups are currently planning to use general aviation (GA) aircraft to perpetrate attacks against the U.S., it remains concerned that (in light of completed and ongoing security enhancements for commercial aircraft and airports) terrorists may turn to GA as an alternative method for conducting operations.

First, this argument is reminiscent of the infamous “white van” of the 2002 DC Sniper attacks. In that case, considerable law enforcement resources were utilized to detain and inspect thousands of “white” vans, which later proved irrelevant to the investigation. Just as finding the white van had no bearing on locating the snipers and preventing further terror and loss of life, the continuation of the DC ADIZ and prohibitions on GA aircraft operations in the ADIZ/FRZ will not prevent terrorists from achieving their objectives. In fact, the ADIZ is an ongoing terrorist success because they have affected a change in our behavior as a result of their actions.

Should the NPRM be approved, I would hope then the we’ll start looking for “missing red fire trucks” again. That was another risk profile broadcast publicly in the aftermath of September 11th.

Moreover, the ability of the Intelligence community to prove the validity of its assertions and conclusions is not without reproach. Specifically prior to moving forward with this NPRM, the FAA and DOT must consider whether or not the threat estimate regarding general aviation aircraft is any more accurate than the 2002-2003 analysis that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. If DHS is unable to provide or share substantive and irrefutable information with DOT that a substantiated threat (not a risk) exists, this NPRM should not go forward.

Finally, the November 2004 GAO Report to the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives says it best, “Additionally, industry and TSA officials stated that the small size, lack of fuel capacity, and minimal destructive power of most general aviation aircraft make them unattractive to terrorists and, thereby, reduce the possibility of threat associated with their misuse.”

The NPRM for creating the ADIZ continues to perpetuate the search for the “boogeyman in a small plane” despite documented assessments by the Government that small aircraft are not a threat.

4) One area that the FAA does not address in the NPRM is the cost to upgrade inadequate radar facilities. At the moment, the radar coverage available to the FAA is not capable of the task created by the NPRM. Moreover, neither the costs to flight operations for GA aircraft in the ADIZ to comply with the limitation of the radar facilities nor the cost to upgrade these facilities to address the issue is addressed in the NPRM. I have specifically been instructed by ATC to avoid such facility deficiencies (e.g., below 3000 AGL SW of EMI VOR and below 5000 AGL SW of CSN VOR) in flights through the ADIZ. The costs to upgrade and enhance radar facilities on an accelerated timeline must be forthrightly produced and considered.

5) Ongoing and recurrent training expenses for both pilots and controllers are another cost element not considered in the NPRM. This cost may have been addressed beneath other costs, or omitted. It is unclear which is the case.

In summary, it is important to note that the American Bald Eagle is the greatest American symbol of freedom. The freedom that flight affords is a significant component of that symbol. By this comment to the NPRM, I implore the DOT and FAA to consider the needs of all Americans to allow those who have earned the privilege to fly in the NAS to be able to exercise those privileges free from unnecessary encumbrances that provide little, if any, security value. The airspace around Washington, DC is a critical component of the NAS, supporting the busiest and most economically significant aircraft operations anywhere in the world.

Making the ADIZ/FRZ construct permanent provides nothing more than a false sense of security at a substantial cost to freedom and national heritage that is totally unquantifiable and antithetical to America’s founding principles.

Finally on September 20, 2001, President Bush said, “It is my hope that in the months and years ahead, life will return almost to normal. We'll go back to our lives and routines, and that is good.” Unfortunately, this NPRM codifies an ADIZ that represents nothing close to a“return almost to normal.” The NPRM is inconsistent with the President’s stated vision and should be withdrawn. The costs of implementation and enforcement are considerable and dire, while no one can quantify any actual benefits. The impact on lives and routines dependent upon aviation activities is quantifiable to an extent, and they are outrageous in the fact of no quantifiable benefit achieved. The Administrator should exercise statutory authority to rescind this NPRM and retire the ADIZ/FRZ without any further delay.

Flying in Relief

2005-09-24T10:42:00.000-04:00

(Photo captured the night before landfall, courtesy of the NHC)

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina ...

a group of health care professionals and pilots out of Atlanta called Operation Brother's Keeper formed to help bring relief to the homeless and stranded. This group was offering to transport families out of the destruction area to temporary housing offered by Vacation Rentals for Families. Considering my commercial pilot qualifications, I saw a way to use that skill to help. I signed up on the web page; the call to fly a mission came on Saturday morning, September 10th.

Working for a flight school, there are numerous resources available to choose from to make this flight. Considering that I do not personally own an airplane, I contact acquaintances that have access to airplanes that meet the mission requirements. My first call was to John Tabor, who has a share in a Cessna 182. Even though it is not a twin engine airplane, which was the preferred platform requested by the group, it is a more sufficient airplane for the mission at hand than the other training aircraft I normally fly. Upon calling John I learned that he had also signed up with OBK and had been waiting for a call that had not come yet. We decided to check with the logistic officers (spouses) for any un-considered issues and start formulating a plan. Having cleared the initial hurdles, we planned to leave that Saturday evening.

Departing Leesburg, John is ready. So am I.

John's parents live thirty miles outside of Augusta on the way to Atlanta, so overnight accommodations became a non-factor. John's parents live just three miles from the airport, which demonstrates the incredible flexibility and convenience that 5000 airports provide to the general aviation pilot. We left Leesburg, VA (JYO), made a planned stop in Concord, NC (JQF)at the two-hour mark for fuel and charts, and then flew to Wrens, GA (65J) to overnight there.

(View ahead over SW Virginia; there is not a cloud in the sky. One word: HAZE!)

Upon arriving and transferring meager luggage to the car left graciously by John's sister, we drive to the house and settle in for the night. The requisite 20 minutes of TWC (The Weather Channel) was absorbed, and then it was off to bed for an early Sunday morning. Despite the haze of the day before, the weather was looking good, and we awoke just after 6am to a beautiful, almost-autumn-like day.

(Sunrise over the wings - a busy day ahead.)

We were wheels up for the quick 50 minute, 109 mile flight to Dekalb (PDK) just before 8. About 15 miles from PDK, we were cleared for the VOR/DME RWY 27 circling 2R approach and switched to the tower before entering the procedure turn. We were instructed to make right traffic for runway 2R.

(Final approach to PDK).

Established on the ¾ mile final, we were asked to sidestep to 2L. John made that look easy.

(Short final)

Taxiing up to the staging area on the west ramp, we were greeted by the assignment coordinator and other pilots. We soon learned that the plan of the day was in development and that trucks with aid supplies would be arriving on the ramp mid-morning. Following a quick run to grab some post-flight breakfast we took some time to plan, assess fuel status, and get the plane ready for cargo. At 10:15 the truck arrived full of children's clothing, which works well for us since weight would end up being no factor, only space was the determining factor.

(Loaded.)

By just after 11, we were taxiing to depart for Hammond, LA, number 4 for takeoff. After a couple of quick vectors to the west, Atlanta approach cleared us direct to Hammond (HDC), which was fabulous - a 350NM great circle "straight" line. The flight was long enough to actually watch the GPS provide the DTK information to stay on the circle. Curiously, it wasn't until after we were cleared direct that the controller asked us where the airport was. Once we clarified it was in Louisiana, everything was quiet as we climbed up to 8000 feet. Prior to handoff to the next sector, the Atlanta controller took a moment to ask if we were taking supplies, and we replied that we had a full load of kids' clothes. The controller responded with his sincere ÂÂthanks for all that you guys are doing to help outÂ and switched us to the Center frequency.

Considering the somewhat extra workload that slow GA airplanes add to a controllers' day, those words are high praise indeed.

As we get closer to Hammond, the haze starts to break and the blue tarps and scattered trees start to become visible as we descend. There is a temporary tower set up at Hammond and we report inbound 9NM NE.

(Final RWy 18; Army helo guards the fuel farm.)

After landing on RWY 18, we follow instructions to the west ramp. We see some familiar airplanes and decide where to park. In a few minutes, the truck and people to unload us gather around. The National guard provides some much appreciated bottled water for us. We are quickly unloaded and look to find out what is planned, or being planned for the rest of the day.

(Unloaded)

Now 2:30pm Central time. Other posts by pilots cover the next few two hours fairly well. The trip is a screaming success so far. At this point though, there are no passengers to take northeastward. After an hour of watching the call-a-thon to determine if any shelter has anyone in need of transport, I pick up the Angel Flight literature, which is right next to the Red Cross Hurricane Preparedness tri-fold brochure - how ironic. I call the number on the brochure at 3:20 pm CT on this Sunday, and someone answered the phone. I explained that we, and a whole bunch of assets were on the ground in Hammond, and wanted to know if there was anything that we could be used to do.

After about a half-dozen calls back and forth, I am informed that there is a mission from Naval Air Station Meridian, MS (NMM) to Birmingham, AL (BHM) to transport one person from the MASH unit to facilities in Birmingham. I am briefed for the mission and we start making plans to go. For those not familiar, it is rare to have permission to fly into a military facility, but our flight will use call sign "Angel-Flight-Seven-One-Romeo."

5:00pm, CT. Gas, flight plans, we are soon departing HDC RWY 18 for a northbound trek to NMM. After we climb out, we contact New Orleans departure to request and activate the IFR flight for NGF71R. Once again, we are cleared direct, and the GPS is programmed for the 90 minute flight. Meridian approach requests confirmation that we intend to make a full stop landing at NMM. We confirm our intentions and are switched to tower once in sight of the field for a visual approach to 19R, which is later changed to 19L. John must like those last minute runway changes because he keeps getting them albeit without asking for them. ;)

We are advised of the arresting cable at 1400 feet past the arrival threshold and to "check wheels down." We confirm the information and make the approach to land AFTER the arresting gear.... We'll bring the carrier landing hook next time.

We taxi toward the MASH unit; two US Navy marshallers guide us to an open spot on the voluminous ramp. We are met quite ceremoniously by representatives of the US Public Health Service. The brief tour of the facility informs us that it was established from a pre-positioned hospital kit transported to the station to provide low-priority services, designed to take the pressure off of hospitals who need space for the care of more critical patients. There are few people here and this deployment is the first time it has been tried. Lessons are being learned, which is the good part.

Our passenger is a retired oil worker evacuated from the coast to this facility. He is being relocated to facilities in Birmingham. The case worker is quite glad that he will be leaving this facility for something much more suitable to his needs. He has been here for over two weeks. We are happy to make this happen, and glad to find out he had flown small aircraft and helicopters during his pre-retirement years. It's getting dark and this will be a one-hour night flight. We have plenty of fuel and expect that we will be staying in Birmingham for the night.

9:20 pm ET. We land at BHM. I walk toward the FBO and quickly locate the folks transporting our passenger from the airport to his new home. The transfer is made and it's time to consider what to do next. John and I are both boosted by the success of our day, and determine that a two hour flight to land in Wrens/Augusta again is practical, doable and safe. The prospects of a good night sleep in Birmingham are slim and the hotel availability an issue with so many people still relocated. We gas up and file the flight plan, and coordinate a few more plans with family in GA.

It's a long trip, but we manage to consider and dialog some lessons learned at the micro- and macro-policy levels across all of Alabama and much of GA. A weary approach controller is only too happy to receive our IFR cancellation at 1215 Monday morning, and we make the only approach into the airport - a visual one. There are no instrument approaches to Wrens, but we have the GPS and I put it into OBS mode to create an artificial extended center line for intercept and tracking. It works well. Considering that it's dark, late and the fatigue of having departed 17 hours ago is starting to creep into the picture, it's good to be down safely and headed for bed.

Cessna 182K N2871R performed flawlessly for the 9.5 hours of flight time that was recorded this particular 11 September. She would see us safely back to Leesburg the following day.

One mission accomplished.

$100 Lobster (Roll) Flight

2005-08-06T20:00:00.000-04:00

Ken and I flew to Martha's Vineyard (MVY).

Our original mission profile was to obtain some famous NE Clam Chowdah, but we opted for the the special, too!

Tally Ho, Vihnyud 12 O'clock!

The Mooney likes gas... alot! But given the 180 knot TAS, I'm not complaining. Ken demonstrates proper pilot supervisory technique for the fill-up.

A quick shot of the terminal counter.

Some history of aviation at MVY.

The calf! (NE for cafeteria)

Block Island, NY at 9 o'clock, on the way back! Yes, that is an airport just past the inland bay area.

Total flight time round trip 5.0 hours; total cost... priceless.