Today’s post is inspired by conversations born out of Sporty’s post The 7 deadly sins of radio communications.

When I initially weighed in, I hadn’t actually read the post, but I have now and I encourage you to do the same.

What actually prompted me to weigh in were questions regarding the phrase “roger.” In the list of sins it is number two, but that’s really only half of the story. When I weighed in I wasn’t wrong, but I wasn’t really on the same page as the list. That’s because “roger” is misused a lot.

“Roger is not a read back.”

This is exactly what the original post addressed regarding “roger.” If you listen to radio communications near airports for very long, I’m sure you’ll hear it misused this way at least once.

“Cessna 234SF, Knoxville Tower, cross runway 5 left.”

“Roger.”

According to AIM 4-3-18, you must actually read back any clearances relating to runways. This rules out any shortcuts, like “wilco” or simply reading back your call sign, but that’s the intent. Why? It is important that the controller knows you know what you are cleared to do. So, what should happen in the above situation is this:

“Cessna 234SF, Knoxville Tower, cross runway 5 left.”

“Knoxville Tower, Cessna 234SF, cross runway 5 left.”

There are times for brevity, but this isn’t one of them. When you are cleared or not cleared to do anything regarding a runway, just read it back.

Roger vs. Wilco–what’s the difference?

That brings me to the point I made; most pilots misuse roger, anyway. In fact I would wager it is the most misused piece of radio terminology. According to the Pilot/Controller Glossary available in the AIM, possibly the most informative and least read aviation publication, “roger” is a means of acknowledging you received all of the preceding transmission. Nothing more. It is not much of a tool, in fact, it’s mostly filler.

“Wilco,” on the other hand, is a semi-useful phrase that competes with “affirmative” and “negative” as what is actually meant when most people say, “roger.” It means, “I will comply.” It is useful for brevity when you don’t actually have to read anything back. I used it a lot when I worked at an airport and we’d be driving around in movement areas. As for flying, I’ve only used it a few times.

There is a taxiway down the middle of my home airport that was closed for resurfacing toward the end of my training. If you didn’t hit the numbers and make the first turn, which is at about 500 feet, you had to taxi to the middle of the 9000 feet of runway to turn. Since it is a busy airport with plenty of scheduled jet traffic in a Class C, tower would routinely ask for prop swingers to keep the speed up on the roll out to reduce the amount of time they were on the runway. The exchange always went something like:

“Cessna 21693, keep the speed up on roll out.”

“Wilco, 693.”

I can’t really think of any other times I’ve used “wilco” and even then all I really had to say was, “693.” The rest of the time a readback was required or “affirmative”/”negative” were the appropriate response.

Going forward, any time you’re tempted to say, “roger,” consider whether you actually need to read the instruction back or some other response is correct. A couple of rules of thumb to remember: if you “will comply,” say wilco; if the answer is yes or no, go with affirmative or negative.

What’s your radio sin? Weigh in in the comments.

Mine’s “with you;” it just slips out.

Last December, the final production F-22, tail number 4195, rolled off the line in Georgia and entered a lengthy test program.

The flight home

Last week, on the second of May, testing was completed and the aircraft was accepted by the Air Force during a ceremony at Dobbins Air Reserve Base. After the ceremony, it flew across the country to its new home, Elmendorf Air Force Base in Alaska, where it touched down on the 5th. It is the 195th aircraft produced, and one of 185 operational F-22s in the Air Force’s arsenal.

I found some raw footage of the arrival on Youtube and was surprised to see a familiar face at the end. It turns out that Air Force Lt. Col. Paul Moga, who is 525th Fighter Squadron commander, made the non-stop flight and will operate the jet as the squadron’s flagship. If, like me, you’ve seen the shows Showdown:Air Combat or Great Planes, you may recognize Moga as the host.

The non-stop flight from Georgia to Alaska took 8 hours and featured two aerial refuels courtesy of KC-135s from MacDill and McConnell. It was a flight of two, tail numbers 4195 and 4193, which according to Moga was “Flawless…literally no problems.” Moga’s statement was given in response to questions about the flight, which may have been nothing more than routine, but were more likely born out of recent reports regarding the F-22.

Troubles with the F-22

The F-22 has its share of problems, a high accident rate and several groundings have left a black mark on an otherwise spectacular plane. Latest reports have been that some pilots are refusing to fly F-22s until the mysterious issues with the oxygen generation system are fixed. I hope the Air Force gets their money’s worth out of the contract with Lockheed and the problem is solved. The F-22 is too expensive and too awesome an aircraft to go down in history as a failure.

While it seems certain that the oxygen system in the F-22 is severely crippled, no one seems to know what exactly the problem is. In fact, the Air Force apparently isn’t confident whether the issue is lack of oxygen or contaminated oxygen. At least one of the stop gaps was a resounding failure, causing the pilots more trouble than the hypoxia they might get normally. For now the Air Force seems to be sticking with increased physiological monitoring and supplemental oxygen systems.

Why an F-22 is worth almost half a billion dollars

According to GAO estimates, each F-22 costs taxpayers $412 million. If the Air Force can divine the cause of the oxygen system troubles and fix them, I contend that an F-22 is well worth the price. Its fifth generation status, including low-maintenance stealth coatings and insane radar capabilities, make it a huge boon for air superiority. It can track multiple targets and destroy them well before they can even see the F-22.

Additionally, the F-22 is capable of super cruising at nearly mach 2, mach 1.82 to be exact, and at full tilt, with both afterburners burning it can exceed mach 2.2. This alone makes the F-22 pretty spectacular, but the real benefit is the vectored thrust, which allows the F-22 to perform some pretty unique stunts. In all, the F-22 has great speed, range, and maneuverability that put it on top of the pile when it comes to fighter jets.

While 412 million seems like a big number, the truth is increased production numbers could drive this number way down. As it is, export of F-22s is banned and, with only 195 production aircraft, the Air Force isn’t spreading the development costs out very much and they’re, or rather we’re, footing the entire bill. The actual price tag for an F-22 is closer to 150 million with the huge cost of development making up the other almost 300 million. That said, it is unlikely that the Air Force will restart production given the introduction of the F-35 and a no significant F-22 deployments in its 7 year operational history.

A small gallery of F-22 photos for your viewing pleasure

Do you like airplanes?

What about helicopters?

If you like both, and I’m sure you know where this is going, for the low, low price of only about 5 to 30 million dollars you can buy an AW609. Well, more realistically, you can buy a spot on the waiting list with 70-some people like the billionaire mayor of NYC, Michael Bloomberg.

The AW609, which was previously known as the BA609, is AugustaWestland’s tilt-rotor executive transport. The development program hit some speed bumps, which culminated in AugustaWestland buying Bell Helicopter out of the joint venture last November. At that point they renamed the aircraft AW609 and moved on full speed ahead. They now project an early 2016-ish date for certification.

The AW609 is, like the V-22 Osprey I suspect, massively complex and development has stretched on for more than a decade. Considering the costs of owning ordinary private jets and helicopters, I’m sure it will be costly to own and maintain. Why would someone like Bloomberg want such a thing?

Well, honestly, because it is awesome and because he can.

If I had a billion dollars, you can bet I’d be doing the same thing.

Something I really like about mayor Bloomberg, which I suspect says something about why he would want an AW609, is that he is a rotor-head and is fanatical about the convenience of helicopter flying. According to a recent New York Times piece, He already owns and pilots an Augusta A109 and several other aircraft. Why not add one more.

Why would anybody want a machine that couples the complexity of a helicopter with about half the speed of a new Citation Jet?

Flexibility. In the NYT piece referenced above, there is a story about Mayor Bloomberg defeating delays at LaGuardia by flying his helicopter to Albany. Once he got to Albany, he could put down in virtually any flat field or on a helipad.

The problem is the limitations of helicopters. An A109 like the Mr. Bloomberg flies has a maximum range of just over 500 NM and a top speed of about 150 knots. Anything more and you’ll need to land and refuel or switch to the jet.

Why not just stick with a jet? Sometimes a jet is overkill and they usually require a mile of runway or more. That restricts your available landing areas a bit.

What if you combined the two? Well, you’ll get the AW609. It’s not a huge improvement over the helicopter range-wise, as it only adds about 250 NM to the range, but you can cover ground almost twice as fast as an A109. Once you get where you’re going, you can land on shorter runways, with the aircraft configured for a short landing, or vertically anywhere you’d land a helicopter. Well, anywhere you’d land a 16,000 pound helicopter.

So, what can Michael Bloomberg teach us about buying aircraft?

Helicopters are cool, buy the craziest one you can afford. In all seriousness, cost doesn’t matter as long as you can afford it and it serves the mission you need it to serve. For Bloomberg, he is a billionaire who needs to get to and from places in and around the city. He can certainly afford it and this will only cut time off his commute.

Regarding the AW609 specifically, it looks good. Based on demo flights, it seems to perform pretty well without making a ton of noise. Compare that to some helicopters, a blackhawk comes to mind, and AugustaWestland already has a winner.

For dessert, here is a nicely cinematic look at the AW609. It looks like it is from one of the airshow demo flights, but for all I know, all those people watching are employees.

Not really related, but nice nonetheless.

Before I address that directly let me say, I’m sure you’ve noticed a bit of silence around here lately. I hope you have, but that’s actually what I’m afraid of.

See, the thing is I’m not so happy with the stuff I’ve put out here in the last while. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy aviation videos as much as the next guy and I have written some decent content, but lately I’ve felt like I’m phoning it in. So, I’m changing a few things including the social media channels for this blog, the posting schedule, and the type of content I’m producing.

Social Media Channels

I plan to use the social media channels more effectively to deliver some content that was showing up here on the blog; namely the Movie Monday and Warbird Wednesday posts. From this point forward, I’m going to post those things to Twitter, Facebook, or Google+. So, to receive that content, you’ll need to like Leaving Terra Firma on Facebook, follow Leaving Terra Firma on Twitter, or circle Leaving Terra Firma on Google+. I’d appreciate if you’d do all three, but if you’re not on Facebook, I’m not going to force you to join.

Posting Schedule

I think a big part of the way I feel relates to the daily posting schedule. I’m changing that, because it just doesn’t allow me to go into great enough depth on topics.

Going forward, I don’t expect to post on the blog more than twice a week. Most likely I will only post once a week on Tuesday, but I’m considering putting together a big Flying Friday post that offers a run down of the big news from the week. Leave a comment and let me know if this is something you’d be interested in.

Content

As for content, I love magazines. As a photographer, I love the big glossy photos. I really like to see great photography or videography go with text. So, my newest goal is to start producing even more good photography and move toward producing video. I’m tossing around a few ideas, but I’m not ready to announce anything yet. I’ll just leave it by saying, I’m considering producing new types of content.

Big glossy photos are a big part of the draw of magazines and, as previously stated, I like that aspect, but I’m really drawn in by the articles. I think my specific goal for this blog going forward is to produce something magazine caliber every week. That means longer posts, more writing time, and research, but I think it also means better content. Something sharable. Something that will open doors for even better content.

So, be on the look out for the new content starting next week. I’m tentatively scheduling the new post day for Tuesdays at noon EST, so be on the look out. Also, head on over to Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ and connect with Leaving Terra Firma.

I just wanted to post a quick little video update from Flying Magazine. It’s only about 4 minutes long, but it offers nice views of FiFi, some other warbirds, and other aircraft. It’s a little like being there.

While I’m at it, here’s a little night airshow action. It’s from two years ago, but it’s better than nothing. I’m just trying to create an approximation of a day at the show for those of you, who like me, couldn’t attend the actual show. Anyway, I’ll leave you with the following video. Have a great weekend.

Upon realizing that it is 10 pm and I didn’t post anything for the day, I thought I would put up a quick note regarding an interesting challenge bracket AOPA have put together. Today is the day to vote on the quarter-finals of the AOPA Favorite Aircraft Challenge. Tomorrow and Saturday will decide the semi-finals, which will leave two aircraft competing for top spot. I think you’ve got to be an AOPA member to vote, but anybody can follow along.

It was really hard to vote today because I had to choose between a P-51 and F-4U. I’m hard pressed to find any reason why one should beat the other, so I picked the P-51. After all was said and done, I realized that in all two rounds I’ve voted in, I’ve voted for airplanes that production ceased on long before I was born. I didn’t even think twice about voting for the DC-3 over the Bonanza, because if I had $400,000 to spend on an airplane, I’d buy a DC-3 not a Bonanza. I don’t know what that says about me.

Anyway, if you’d like to catch the last few rounds click through the link above. My guess is that the final round will be J3 versus P-51, but I could be wrong.

Just to add something interesting from Sun ‘n Fun, AvWeb posted an interview with the Black Diamond Jet Team. It’s got a nice collection of in-flight footage to accompany the interviews. It offers a nice look at the ‘home team’ for Sun ‘n Fun, since the Black Diamond Jet Team is based on the field at Lakeland. It’s also nice to see that the Naval aviators and Air Force pilots can play nicely. Anyway, here’s the video:

So, be sure to vote and feel free to leave a comment with your favorite aircraft below. If you’re enjoying Sun ‘n Fun, continue; if you’re not, I sympathize. Have a great night.

So, are you familiar with Stallion 51? If not, let me bring you up to speed. You give them money, they let you fly their P-51. Now, ordinarily this costs several thousand dollars–after all it isn’t exactly cheap to operate a P-51–but, thanks to a raffle being put on by SAFE, you could have this pleasure for as little as 20 dollars. Yes, 20 dollars.

This could be you, but I'd rather it was me.

The deal is, you give 20 dollars to safe they give you an entry into the raffle for a ride in The Little Witch. The best part? the odds are no worse than 1 in 2000. That’s much better than the lottery and I think the prize is better. 20 bucks isn’t a bad deal for being able to log an hour in a dual control TF-51. I know this is short notice, since the drawing is Saturday 31 March, but surely you can lay your hands on 20 bucks by then.

Curious what the flight will be like? Watch the video above and you can ride along on a 30 minute flight. If you win, you can do the same thing, but for twice the amount of time. Imagine the surprised look when your CFI sees you’ve got some tailwheel time…in a P-51. Now, go buy a ticket (or don’t, the odds are better for me that way).

I’m sure the guys from Stallion 51 will be around somewhere at Sun ‘n Fun; even if you don’t win the raffle, they’ll probably still sell you a ride. Speaking of the show, if you’d like to keep up with the day’s events, check out the SUN ‘n FUN Radio Stream. Also check Twitter and Facebook for all the latest chatter from the show.

If you’re there, make sure to share the love with those of us who are not. As for me, I will now resume not enjoying a nice day in Florida surrounded by planes. Seriously though, if you’re at the show enjoy and share the love, if not have a good day anyway.

Last summer the nonprofit Sun ‘n Fun organization got a new president. John “Lites” Leenhouts, a veteran Naval aviator, was named president of the organization. He brought a multitude of new ideas and a level of enthusiasm for the show that is positively contagious.

According to a recent AvWeb report, the two big focuses this year are customer service and aviation education/careers. Leenhouts desire for the show as reported by AvWeb is for “all of our guests to leave here feeling inspired and educated, and with a plan for moving forward if they want an aviation career or to learn how to fly.” Watch the video above for a brief interview with Leenhouts regarding this year’s show. Also, be sure to look at all the memorabilia in the background; it is quite a collection of goodies.

He is also working on plans for the future including a new weekend fly-in/bbq/car show, which has been scheduled for 9 and 10 November of this year. From the way things sound, I’m sure Leenhouts will be a huge asset to the show and the organization as a whole, if for no other reason than he has attended the show for the past 30 years.

As for today’s events, the following video is a brief overview of the happenings in Lakeland. It’s short, but it provides a pretty decent taste of the show. The only thing I don’t care for is the music. I would have preferred airplane noise, especially toward the end when that 4-engined behemoth called FiFi made her appearance.

Looks like beautiful weather down there. I hope it continues all week. If you’re at Sun ‘n Fun, have a great week and enjoy the show. Since I’m not, I’ve got get back to mowing the lawn. Maybe I can pretend I’m flying?

Today’s movie is a clip from The Aviators on Sun ‘N Fun. Why Sun ‘N Fun? Well, if you don’t already know, it is this week.

I’m not there, but I’m keeping tabs on all the goings on. If you are there and you feel like sharing, feel free to send your photos, videos, etc. You can post them to the wall on the Leaving Terra Firma facebook page, Google+, or just email them to me.

Anyway, I’m going to keep it very short. Enjoy the video and if you’re flying to Florida, fly safe.

Are you ready for Sun

Image courtesy Alaska Airlines

Yesterday I was confronted with a lot of chatter regarding the FAA and approved personal electronics. Most of the articles cite a post on NYT’s blog Disruptions. The post itself seems to be largely speculative, but has set off a storm of chatter amongst the general media. Most of this chatter centers on the general public and their use of personal electronics, like iPads and Kindles, during critical phases of flight (e.g., take off, landing). The problem is, no one has told the general public that their use of personal electronics is inconsequential. Yes, that’s right; the FAA doesn’t care if Alex Baldwin wants to play Words with Friends on the runway. Here’s why:

The same policies that dictate that Alex Baldwin stow his iPad mean the pilots must stow theirs, too.

Yep, without extensive testing, the guys in the front have to stow theirs, too. Unfortunately, they aren’t playing words with friends, rather, they’re trying to view documents they need to fly the plane. While they certainly are convenient, most iPads would be considered a Class 1 EFB, which doesn’t exempt them from typical regulations on personal electronics.

Unlike Part 91 operations, airlines must perform some extensive tests to certify personal electronics for cockpit use during critical phases.

If I bought an iPad and loaded up Foreflight, the FAA has provided a means by which as pilot in command I can determine whether it meets regulations for use during flight. This is relatively simple, unfortunately, airline pilots aren’t so lucky. They must wade through a host of regulations and their iPads must be extensively tested before they could do the same thing. The bottom line is that off the shelf electronics, like iPads, just haven’t been that economical when it comes to testing them for use. With the current trends toward paperless cockpits, it is likely that the pilots, airlines, and/or their unions have been pressuring the FAA to reevaluate their stance on this issue in order to ease the process of approving the use of personal electronics during critical phases. After all, it was only last December when the FAA gave American Airlines’ pilots the green light to use iPads during all phases of flight after more than 6 months of testing.

In the event of an overrun, your iPad becomes a really nasty projectile.

Perhaps the biggest reason the FAA isn’t trying to approve Alex Baldwin to use his iPad on the runway is that if something happened, his iPad could maim someone. Interference, which is often cited as the issue dictating the FAA’s stance, isn’t as much of a problem as some would lead you to believe, but limiting the number of projectiles in the cabin is an issue. If you don’t think flying iPads are dangerous, throw one across the room at your wife or kids or someone and then ask them if it hurt. I’m willing to bet they won’t be too happy and they’ll probably bleed. The same FAA regulations that dictate how to certify personal electronics for use during critical phases also state that the operator is permitted to prohibit anyone from using personal electronics. That means even if the FAA allows it, the airline can still prohibit you from using it.

So, suck it up and stow your iPad. You can live without it for the 10 minutes you’ll spend taking off and landing.

What’s your opinion, is the FAA really concerned with passengers use of personal electronics? Am I mistaken in my understanding of the regulations? Leave a comment with your take.