For this month’s poll I’d like to know how you like your flight instructors:

• Full-time or part-time ?
• Younger or older than you ?
• With or without experience in larger aircraft (turboprop, jets, airliners)
• Instructor only or examiner as well ?
• Airline / military / business jet aviation guy ?
• Male, female, same sex, opposite sex ?

If you’ve stories to share about instructors, they’re welcome as well in comments.

A “software patch” solving issues with the EclipseJet power control was released in June 2008. This raised questions about use of software in aviation. I’m a fond of modern aircraft but I know that some are surprised that a “bug” can affect bord computers. The loss of the AirFrance Airbus 330 brought the software theme on front stage again. Mikel, an Airbus rated pilot and blogger kindly accepted that I repost her article on the fly-by-wire systems. She posted again on the unreliable airspeed topic again since.

Another safety / technology question I posted about in June 2008 was about use of the metric system in aviation. The units we use are still a mixture of meters, knots, inches or mercury, to name just a few. Even worse, different parts of the world use different units. Read this post to read more about the reasons causing this situation, the resulting hazards, and why it won’t change before long.

Bird strikes were already a concern before the ditching of US Airways 1549. Boeing even mentions in some checklists that flying below 10′000 feet is not recommended. Most of my flying is below 10′000 feet – click here to read more about this topic.

Safety on ground, recently highlighted by the United 1448 runway incursion, is the topic of this post about the ultimate pilot’s challenge: taxiing. If you think the airport in where the United 1448 occured is complex, check the chart of Paris in my post.

I also posted on lighter topics in June 2008, including my survey of overhead room in general aviation cockpits. I can now add the DA42 Twinstar to the list, and it’s not one with much room, unfortunately. Another timeless post was about Understanding Aviation Weather.

It’s also in June 2008 that I posted about a free online JAA ATPL theory questions database and made my Excel ICAO flight plan form available for free. Visit the Freebies page for more free downloads for pilots.

Chandelles:

First off were the Chandelles and this maneuver also turned out to be the easiest one. The chandelle can be described as a maximum performance 180-degree climbing turn. You start out by establishing a 30-degree bank, adding full power and gradually start pitching up. When you have turned 90 degrees the pitch should be at its maximum. For the remaining portion of the maneuver the pitch attitude should be kept constant while gradually reducing the bank angle so that the wings return to level after 180 degrees of turn and with the airspeed just above the stall speed. A good rule-of-thumb for pitch attitude at the 90-degree point is about 8 degrees of pitch-up on the attitude indicator. This worked very well for me and I actually got the whole maneuver right on the very first attempt.

Take a look at chapter 9 of the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook for a detailed description as well as illustrations of the maneuver. (The document opens at the top of chapter 7 so you need to scroll down near the bottom to find these maneuvers).

Lazy Eights:

The next maneuver I set out to try was the Lazy Eight. This one proved to be a little more challenging although a very useful advice from my instructor helped me quite a bit. The Lazy Eight maneuver is comprised of two consecutive 180-degree turns in opposite directions while making a climb and descent in a symmetrical pattern during each of the turns.

If this sounds a bit complicated at first you can take a look at the instructional video below for a breakdown of how the maneuver is flown:

As you can see in the video we establish several key points throughout the maneuver.

• The first one is the 45-degree point. At this point the pitch up attitude should be at its maximum and the airplane should have smoothly rolled into about 15 degrees of bank.
• The second key point is the 90-degree point. After passing through the 45-degree point the bank angle should gradually continue to increase so that the maximum bank angle of about 30 degrees is reached at the 90-degree point. At the same time the pitch attitude should be gradually decreased so that you return to a level pitch attitude at the 90-degree point.
• At the third key point – the 135-degree point – the bank angle should be reduced back to 15 degrees of bank and the pitch attitude should be at its lowest while descending back to the same altitude at which you first entered the maneuver.
• The final key point is the 180-degree point at which you should have returned to straight-and-level flight at the same altitude at which you first entered the maneuver and the heading should be in the exact opposite direction of your entry heading. As soon as you are straight-and-level at the 180-degree point you start rolling the airplane into a bank in the opposite direction to do the whole thing over in the opposite direction…

These key points provide a good framework on which to base the necessary control inputs throughout the maneuver. However, while trying to accomplish these predetermined flight attitudes at the established key points it is important to remember that there should be a smooth and gradual change in both pitch attitude and bank angle throughout the entire maneuver.

The way my instructor taught me to accomplish this was by initially rolling into about 5 degrees of bank and then bringing the ailerons back to a neutral position while allowing the airplane to continue rolling into a bank by itself. The first time I flew the maneuver I tried this and found that it worked very well. As I continued to pitch up towards the 45-degree point the airplane would indeed smoothly continue to roll into a bank by itself. When I passed through the 45-degree point all I needed to do was to start releasing some of the back pressure on the yoke and the airplane would continue to increase the bank angle on its own while the nose was gradually lowered towards a level pitch attitude.

All in all the first 90 degrees of the maneuver required very little control inputs on my part. After rolling into the initial 5 degrees of bank all I needed to do was to control the pitch attitude with back pressure on the yoke while keeping the ailerons and rudders neutral and the airplane basically did the rest for me.

As I allowed the airplane to return to a level pitch attitude at the 90-degree point and relatively close to the clean configuration stall speed the nose of the airplane sliced sideways through the horizon and into a descending pitch attitude without any significant intervention on the flight controls by me.

The second half of the 180-degree turn was somewhat more challenging as I was required to use the controls more actively to reduce the bank angle and controlling the pitch attitude throughout the descending portion of the turn.

This maneuver is also to be found in chapter 9 of the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook. (Located near the bottom of the document).

Eights-on-Pylons:

After a couple attempts on the Lazy Eights I set out to try the Eights-on-Pylons.

I recommend you watch this instructional video for a thorough explanation of the maneuver:

You can also check out chapter 6 of the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook for a detailed description of the maneuver. (The Eights-on-Pylons maneuver is located near the end of the document).

Before the flight I made myself a table of applicable ground speeds and corresponding pivotal altitudes that looked something like this:

As you have probably noticed by now this maneuver is flown in the shape of a figure eight around two pylons on the ground. While turning around one of the pylons the airplane’s lateral axis should appear to pivot on the pylon as if the airplane’s wingtip was attached to the pylon by a string. This is accomplished by maintaining corresponding ground speeds and pivotal altitudes throughout the maneuver according to the table above.

I can’t think of much more to say about this maneuver apart from one handy rule that I recently picked up from a co-student and which has helped me quite a bit with remembering how to control the airplane correctly through the maneuver. Except for when you are flying in no-wind conditions (which very rarely happens) your ground speed will vary throughout the maneuver and hence so will your pivotal altitude. The clue to remember is to always pitch towards the pylon….if the pylon moves backwards behind the wingtip then you pitch back by applying some extra back pressure on the yoke. If the pylon starts moving forward ahead of the wingtip then you pitch forward as if to catch up with the pylon.

Steep Spirals:

The steep spiral maneuver which is flown with idle power is an efficient way of losing altitude while remaining over a selected point on the ground. This maneuver is similar to that of turns around a point which you have probably been through if you hold at least a Private Pilot license. In fact this maneuver is flown as turns around a point while descending at idle power and the maneuver is complete after three full 360-degree turns.

Here are a couple resources I would like to share with you that explains and illustrates this maneuver:

Chapter 9 of the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook. (The steep spiral maneuver is located near the bottom of the document).

Long time ago, I used to give flight preparation and aerodynamics classes for student pilots preparing the PPL theoretical exam. I met two of them and both had good news. One earned her PPL the week before, and the other just bought a plane. Alone, not as co-owner. And not an used one, but a brand new Cirrus Perspective ! Me, jealous ? Just a bit, but I was really happy for him.

The news on my side are also quite exciting… We discussed about the flight I’m preparing across America next year. The flyingacrossamerica.com project is fascinating and I love to preach for General Aviation. On the less funny side, I decided not to fly anymore before starting it, to save as much money as I can. If you don’t know why, check www.flyingacrossamerica.com. Not flying for one year will be hard, but the goals behind are worth it.

This brings me to the second part of this post: one more reason to fly. Long time ago, I posted a series of posts detailing several reasons to fly. By that time I identified three of them: Pleasure Sharing – Going There – Good Flying is Rewarding. Someone, a fellow pilot, who kindly bought miles for www.flyingacrossamerica.com told me the reason why he decided to donate: the project makes him dream ! How could I forget this when I prepared the “Reasons to fly” series ?

The private pilot license is a license to learn, but also a license to dream. Ask any pilot around you what his or her dream flight is, you’ll be surprise of how quick the answers come. You’ll also be surprised by the variety of  answers. Some will name a destination, or a route. Others will tell you they’d like to get rated on a certain aircraft type, or get an additional rating. Pilots are dreamers, and like to share their dreams. Is that not an excellent reason to fly ?

At first contact, the P2002 JF looks small. The wings and nose are short, the engine compartment is low. It also seems fragile. The cowlings, the leading edges, the flaps, everything seems fragile, and not so well assembled. The hinges’ pins are apparent, and my instructor had trouble opening the fuel caps. Getting in the cockpit was not exactly easy. One must climb on the wing from the front side, and then slid in the pilot seat, but without grabbing the canopy, the back of the seat, the side, nor the dashboard.

I could not close the canopy without before lowering my head. Once closed, I had more room. The next challenge was to fasten my seat belt. The belt is made of two parts which cross themselves behind pilot’s shoulders and then click together. Getting it fastened within the tiny cockpit was kind of a contortion exercise.

The cockpit itself is well organized. The stick and rudder pedals are fixed and the seat can be adjusted. There are two throttles: one left of the dashboard for pilots flying with their right hand on the stick and one in the center for those preferring to fly with their left hand. The instructor can also use the central throttle from the right seat. The flaps are electrically controlled by a switch located beside the central throttle. It’s easy to extend them while keeping the hand on the throttle. I don’t know if it comes from the mechanical coupling of both throttles, but the plungers are not operating smoothly. One must pull hard to reach the idle position and the force required often results in abrupt changes.

The pitch trim is controlled electrically via two switches on the stick. Not the usual two-parts up / down switch, but one button for nose-up and one for nose-down. There is no trim wheel so if the electrical system fails the pilot must fly with the present trim position, whatever it is. If the system fails and continuously trim in one direction, a disconnect switch makes possible to deactivate it.

The Rotax engine starts almost instantly, just like a car engine. The engine is sipping mogas and has two carburetors. There is no need for mixture control, so all what’s left for engine control is the throttle, carburetor heat, and the fuel selector. As all low-wing aircraft, there is an extra electrical pump used during take-off and landing to prevent problems if the mechanical pump fails.

The directional nose wheel makes taxiing easy. There is no toe brakes but a central brake lever which activate brakes on both sides. It’s a much better solution than the free-wheel and finger brakes combination found on the Liberty XL2. The ground roll is smooth on both asphalt and grass taxiways. The nose wheel is effective and I the braking system does not induce directional problems.

The line-up and take-off roll are easy as well. The right foot pressure required to compensate for the left turn tendency is reasonable. We took-off from the grass runway which is sometimes bumpy but the dampers were doing good and the roll was smooth. The initial climb was quite shallow but after gaining a bit of extra speed, the performance was good.

The first good surprise I had was during the first turn. The required control forces are really light. One can easily take the stick between two fingers and fly accurately. The Tecnam P2002 is well balanced – the same amount of force is required for elevator and ailerons action, making it really pleasant to fly. The second good surprise was how good the visibility is, both forward and sideways. I learned to fly in an AS-202 Bravo, which also has a canopy. The visibility from the Tecnam cockpit seems even better.

The Tecnam cruises at speeds slightly above 100 knots making it a quite fast basic trainer. Thanks to the good responsiveness and the excellent visibility, steep turns are easy to fly. Keeping altitude does not requires excessive back-pressure on the stick. Compared to other modern aircraft, stalls are very aggressive. We stalled it with full flaps and the nose dropped abruptly. This has nothing to do with a Piper or Diamond stall.

Once back in the pattern, reducing speed is not easy. The white arc starts at a rather low speed. Power must be reduced massively and well in advance to let enough speed bleed off before flaps can be extended. As all light aircraft, the Tecnam P2002 is largely affected by thermal turbulence. Fly low on a summer day and you’ll feel all the bumps.

Landing is so easy that there’s not a lot to say about it. I flew two touch and go and one full stop. One of the touch and go was a simulated engine failure. I came in a bit high and tried a side-slip, but this was not really effective. The flare height and attitude is very natural and the ground roll is easy to control.

All in all, the Tecnam P2002 JF is a nice little aircraft, but its construction is less than perfect. Many details could be improved. As a result, it looks like the cheap version of a nice aircraft, which is a bit of a shame.

LOFTs are very different from check-rides in that they mimic an ordinary flight with a few extraordinary situations thrown in for good measure. Last April, I had the pleasure of flying my first LOFT since new-hire training in a full-motion CRJ-200 simulator.

My flight began as a winter day trip departing Minneapolis, MN for Des Moines, IA. Our sim instructor informed me that the airplane was iced up, so we would have to deice, which is par for the course in Minnie. After running the appropriate deicing checklist, the flight proceeded normally.

As the first leg was mine, I decided to play it safe by engaging the autopilot early instead of hand flying to my usual 10,000+. With such an increased probability of bells and whistles going off, it just seemed prudent to free up my brain-space for dealing with an anticipated emergency.

Much to my surprise, everything proceeded normally. No systems failures, no passenger emergencies, there wasn’t even a thunderstorm for me to dodge. Through our descent, I began to wonder what the instructor had cooking for me. After all, I had almost a whole hour to get complacent. As I proceeded down the Des Moines localizer I wondered if we were home-free. And then the culprit revealed itself.

Nearing minimums on the ILS, a familiar voice enunciated the red letters on my primary flight display: “WINDSHEAR! WINDSHEAR!” OK, easy enough. I called “max thrust” as I threw the thrust levers forward and pitched for the ascending flight director. My captain called “positive rate,” and once the windshear warning was gone I got to work cleaning up the airplane. “Flaps eight, gear up,” I said, and we were on to a normal go-around climb profile in no time. The following landing was uneventful and my brief ordeal as the flying pilot was over.

After a quick bathroom break, it was the captain’s turn to fly back to Minnie. Clearly I was wise to go first as this was to be the ‘exciting’ leg.

On takeoff, my primary flight display failed, which I promptly announced to the captain. He aborted the takeoff as the instructor repositioned us for another go.

This time windshear got us shortly after rotation. Again, we muddled through it by applying maximum thrust and following flight director guidance. The captain engaged the autopilot early and we were on our way to a Cat-II approach into Minneapolis.

Now this is the part of the LOFT that I found interesting. Established on the glideslope, we experienced a flap failure at flaps 30, fifteen degrees away from our landing setting of flaps 45. We were faced with a real decision. Do you continue the approach and land with thirty degrees of flaps, which is explicitly prohibited for Cat-II approaches, or do you go missed and proceed to your alternate with thirty degrees of flaps slowing you down and wasting your fuel?

The captain made the PIC decision to go ahead and land. Eyeballing the chart’s depiction of 12,000 feet of runway I agreed and set the V-ref speed for flaps 30. The simulated CRJ touched down at the 1,000′ marker and slowed to a halt.

After a short debriefing about how we should do less of this and do more of that, our paperwork was signed and the captain and I were set to fly another day.

Patrick Flannigan is a regional airline pilot and aviation blogger. You can read more of Patrick’s articles at AviationChatter.com.

On another day, I took my wife to eat some fish in a beach restaurant in Montpellier and we flew back same day. 3 hours of flight for a lunch. Does it sound crazy to you ? If not, you’re probably a pilot or at least a serious aviation enthusiast. If yes, consider that: would you ask a marathon runner why he’s doing it ? Runing 42.195 kilometers, usually in a loop. Does that make sense ? No one asks that to the 40.000 participants of the New-York marathon.

Pilots flying for fun find their pleasure and satisfaction in the act of flying. For sure, some are using that for business travel or holidays, but the vast majority do it because they like it. Those of us flying aerobatics are the perfect example. Short flights, same departure and destination, and some aerobatic manoeuvers in the middle. Lot of fun.

My personal favorites are IFR flights with complex approaches, preferably with low ceilings but no icing. Geneva was a perfect base for that. In February the combination of lake and mountains often produces low and thin stratus layers. Getting through and reach the sun after two minutes of flying or slowly diving in and see the runway few seconds before landing was really exciting and rewarding

A short look in my logbook confirms it – most of my flying is done on same-day basis. I never flew out for holiday trip because it’s not reliable enough. Some do, but I’m not one of them. Each aviator has his own version of aviation…

But like sportsmen or performers, the best part is not to go somewhere, but the way you go. Got it ?

The idea of flying from Florida to California and back to promote General Aviation popped-up one month ago. We’ve worked hard since then to turn this crazy idea into a credible project. We’re launching it today and you can find all the details under www.flyingacrossamerica.com.

The message we want to send with this flight is simple: General Aviation carries important positive values which must be promoted. Solidarity between pilots around the world, development of self-control and self-confidence, service to the community and fun. We also want to show that general aviation is not reserved for the elite or the affluent.

You can help us to make this flight become reality. Are you living close to our route ? We’d love to visit you. We’ll fly as far west as our budget will allow for and we hope to reach Catalina Island, off the coast of California. We need financial support but also help with the logistics along the route. If you’re running an FBO and can support us, please contact us.

You can also profit from several promotion opportunities, from simple link on our website to sticker on the plane. We’ll organizing giveaways for our patrons and look for additional sponsors. You can fund a single mile for $3.75 !

We already invested a lot of time and some money in this project and this will continue because we think it is important. All the revenues from plasticpilot.net will directly flow in this venture. If you have a blog, please put one of the logos or banners you can find in the support page of www.flyingacrossamerica.com and link to us.

The blog on www.flyingacrossamerica.com will be updated at least weekly during the preparation, and at least daily during the flight. You can help us to make general aviation better and we count on you !

Visit www.flyingacrossamerica.com for all details and to support us.

YouTube
YouTube for flight planning ? Yes, definitely. When I fly to an airport for the first time I like to have as  much information as possible. Looking at videos of the approach taken by other pilots gives additional information and is kind of a preview. Here again, seaching by ICAO code or location indicator is the most efficient way to find what you’re looking for.

Airliners.net
Just like YouTube gives information in video, airliners.net gives information via photos. What does the airport look like ? Even if charts are quite accurate, a photo gives much more information.

liveatc.net
If your new destination is in a different country or has specific procedures, what about test-driving the local ATC ? liveatc.net provides live audio feeds of ATC almost worldwide. If you think ATC is the same everywhere, try listening to New-York JFK (KJFK) and then Geneva (LSGG). Some preparation can only help.

Official AIP online
Several European countries offer their AIP online, some for free. Here is a short list: French AIP, UK AIP, Belgian AIP. The Swiss AIP can’t be accessed online but you can subscribe to the paper version here.

Less official information online
Different websites managed by aviation enthusiasts provide extensive but unofficial information databases. Nav2000 (French only) covers France, Switzerland and Belgium. It offers chart extracts, photos, price of fuel, contact information, pilot reports and much more about airports and ultralight bases.

www.fl95.de (German only) offers flight planning and weight and balance online. It contains a database of en-route points and of aircraft for the weight and balance.

Flight plan filing
Several sites offer flight plan online. Some require that the flight starts or ends in the country operating the website, other are more flexible. Olivia, the French system (also in English) allows for NOTAM, weather and flight plan filing. The German DFS AIS (German and English) provides flight plan filing as well as TAF / METAR / NOTAM briefings. eurofpl.eu offers the possibility to send a flight plan directly to the EUROCONTROL systems. www.homebriefing.com offers full service, but users have to pay for flight plans.

Aircraft manuals
Many aircraft manuals and checklists can be found online. They can not be used as replacement of the official documents of YOUR aircraft, but can be helpful. Click here to access the download page of Diamond Aircraft.

Your link here
If you know about great online resources for flight preparation leave a comment and I’ll update this post.

Now that the initial mediatic storm is over I want to comment on certain points. This post is based on questions that friends of mine asked. Some are reactions to unclear or partial information heard in the media. This post is about thunderstorms, radar coverage, communication, automated messages, electronic flight instruments and flight controls, pitot tubes, and causality.

Thunderstorms
Thunderstorms are powerful things. Can one destroy an aircraft ? Yes, indeed. Over the Read this older post about thunderstorms for more details. Pilots avoid thunderstorms using the on board weather radar. No crew will ever fly in a thunderstorm without a working weather radar. Beyond lightning and hail, thunderstorms also contains massive quantity of water and icing.

Radar coverage
The exact position of the accident was not known for a simple reason: there is no radar coverage over the ocean. A typical radar has a range of 150 to 200 nautical miles, which is much less than the distance flown over the Atlantic. Even if a radar was installed on each island, many holes would remain.

But what about GPS ? Yes, GPS is global. But remember, GPS is used by the aircraft to determine its position. The GPS system is “one-way”. The satellites are not informed about the position of the receivers.

Communication
Over land and near the coasts, pilots and controllers communicate using VHF radio. This requires direct line of sight between the transmitter and the receiver. The range of such radio is limited because the Earth is not flat.

HF and satellite are working over the ocean but they are not reliable or easy to use. Typically, pilots receive two HF frequencies before crossing the ocean and have to use one or the others, depending the state of the ionosphere. Moreover, proximity with thunderstorms don’t facilitate communication because of electromagnetic perturbations.

Automated messages
The aircraft sent a certain number of messages about failed systems. These messages are transmitted via the ACARS system to the airline’s maintenance unit. They are designed to inform the maintenance teams about the works to be done and help them prepare their intervention. Aircraft are complex systems and almost all flight sends at least one such message. Because of this limited purpose, these messages do not contain the position of the aircraft at the moment the failure occurs.

Electronic flight instruments and flight controls
Airbus aircraft are equipped with computer screens that replace the classical, mechanical instruments and fly by wire systems which interpret pilot inputs and fly the aircraft accordingly. Is this high technology less reliable than “good old” electro-mechanical instruments and direct, hydraulically assisted controls ?

The safety record of Airbus is not bad at all. This A330 is indeed the third being lost within almost fifteen years. Remember that the certification standards are the same for all aircraft, whatever the technology they use. Are such modern aircraft too complex, are they “pieces of engineering” ? These are the classical things heard after each Airbus incident. Once again, the safety record seems to speak against that. Media never report about all the cases where the technology compensated for pilot errors. 80% of recent accidents find their roots in human (not always pilot) error.

Pitot tubes
The pitot tubes are the sensors measuring the speed of the aircraft with respect to the surrounding air. They are tubes pointed in the direction of flight and provide air to a pressure sensor. The pressure generated by forward movement is measured and this is the base for speed measurement. If they get obstructed or damaged, the pilot and flight computers don’t get a correct speed reading anymore. The Airbus 330 is equipped with three pitot tubes.

Loosing all of them is not an enviable situation because the difference between stall speed and overspeed at high altitude is really small. However it the pitch attitude and power setting are maintainted there is no reason the aircarft would depart controlled flight.

Causes and effects
In the present situation, we have very partial information only about what happened via the maintenance messages. A crutial part is missing: which of these messages are causes and which ones are effects. For example, the autopilot was disconnected. Was it because it failed or did the crew disconnect it for some reason ? The black boxes will tell a lot more, if they can be found. Until then, all what will be said will be speculation only.

I hope this post helped you to clarify your thoughts about this accident. Feel free to ask for more via comments.