Originally Posted November 24, 2008
The media is full of discussion about huge organizations that are being bailed out with taxpayer money because they are “too big to fail”. According to the arguments, letting a General Motors, a CitiGroup, or any of dozens of other compnies fail would result in unacceptable consequences in terms of the economy and job losses.
What I wish someone would talk about is whether these mega-corporations are really too big to fix. Rather than putting them on public life support, would it be better to let them slip away into history?
Fly Safe!
Neil
December 3, 2010
November 29, 2010
WAAS Up?
Originally Posted October 9, 2008
The flight school where I work part time as Assistant Chief Flight Instructor added a new Cessna 172 to its training fleet recently. Like two others we operate, it is equipped with the Garmin G1000 integrated cockpit system. Unlike the others, this airplane is also WAAS equipped. WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) adds to the precision of the GPS navigation system by adding a signal broadcast from the ground.
In many ways, the addition of WAAS is a subtle change. There is no WAAS switch and no WAAS light to tell you it is working. It does, however, add some very useful capabilities. Among these are the ability to navigate vertically as well as horizontally. The system will provide guidance during descents in cruise and on instrument approaches. The glide path it displays looks and works very much like the glide slope for an ILS approach. There is also a general upgrade in the accuracy of lateral guidance over GPS-only equipment.
The primary benefit of WAAS lies in its ability to provide accurate vertical guidance. So many accidents result from the pilots’ lack of awareness of where the airplane is relative to a safe descent path. The WAAS system, properly used, can help to fill that gap.
WAAS capability comes with a price, however, and that is additional complexity. To fully take advantage of its capabilities requires additional programming and an enhanced knowledge of the modes of operation and displays. Autopilots designed to take advantage of WASS also have more features, and therefore a steeper learning curve.
Like so many technological innovations over the past several years, WAAS requires a bit of training before the pilot can really take advantage of it. This is yet another reason to be sure you spend some quality time with your instructor to receive personalized training on the equipment you use.
Fly Safe!
Neil
The flight school where I work part time as Assistant Chief Flight Instructor added a new Cessna 172 to its training fleet recently. Like two others we operate, it is equipped with the Garmin G1000 integrated cockpit system. Unlike the others, this airplane is also WAAS equipped. WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) adds to the precision of the GPS navigation system by adding a signal broadcast from the ground.
In many ways, the addition of WAAS is a subtle change. There is no WAAS switch and no WAAS light to tell you it is working. It does, however, add some very useful capabilities. Among these are the ability to navigate vertically as well as horizontally. The system will provide guidance during descents in cruise and on instrument approaches. The glide path it displays looks and works very much like the glide slope for an ILS approach. There is also a general upgrade in the accuracy of lateral guidance over GPS-only equipment.
The primary benefit of WAAS lies in its ability to provide accurate vertical guidance. So many accidents result from the pilots’ lack of awareness of where the airplane is relative to a safe descent path. The WAAS system, properly used, can help to fill that gap.
WAAS capability comes with a price, however, and that is additional complexity. To fully take advantage of its capabilities requires additional programming and an enhanced knowledge of the modes of operation and displays. Autopilots designed to take advantage of WASS also have more features, and therefore a steeper learning curve.
Like so many technological innovations over the past several years, WAAS requires a bit of training before the pilot can really take advantage of it. This is yet another reason to be sure you spend some quality time with your instructor to receive personalized training on the equipment you use.
Fly Safe!
Neil
November 21, 2010
Keep the Change
Originally Posted September 9, 2007
As you probably know, a debate is raging about how to change the way we fund the FAA. The airlines are promoting a plan that relieves them of most fees and charges – passing them on to their passengers and to general aviation.
Represented by their industry group, the Air Transport Association, they are lobbying for yet another round of cost cuts. In the recent past, they have robbed their employees, vendors, and stockholders in their efforts to reduce costs to match their artificially low prices. Now they are casting business jets as the bad guys – responsible for delays and all manner of ills that cost the airlines money. The balance sheet, of course, is the issue. The airlines don’t seem to consider their lack of ability to provide good service to their customers a problem.
I’m sure it is no secret that I don’t hold the airlines in particularly high regard. For decades they have proven they are unable to solve the most fundamental equation of business: Profit equals price minus cost. The number of airlines that have failed, or have passed through bankruptcy, is astounding.
This latest round of smoke and mirrors is not likely to succeed since general aviation has one of the best lobbying groups in Washington, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. You can read their side of the story on their web site. Try getting that kind of detail from the ATA web site.
Meanwhile, perhaps we can institute a program similar to Bank of America’s, allowing the airlines to keep the change from any tickets they sell. That would be more dignified than having them sit on a corner rattling a tin cup.
As you probably know, a debate is raging about how to change the way we fund the FAA. The airlines are promoting a plan that relieves them of most fees and charges – passing them on to their passengers and to general aviation.
Represented by their industry group, the Air Transport Association, they are lobbying for yet another round of cost cuts. In the recent past, they have robbed their employees, vendors, and stockholders in their efforts to reduce costs to match their artificially low prices. Now they are casting business jets as the bad guys – responsible for delays and all manner of ills that cost the airlines money. The balance sheet, of course, is the issue. The airlines don’t seem to consider their lack of ability to provide good service to their customers a problem.
I’m sure it is no secret that I don’t hold the airlines in particularly high regard. For decades they have proven they are unable to solve the most fundamental equation of business: Profit equals price minus cost. The number of airlines that have failed, or have passed through bankruptcy, is astounding.
This latest round of smoke and mirrors is not likely to succeed since general aviation has one of the best lobbying groups in Washington, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. You can read their side of the story on their web site. Try getting that kind of detail from the ATA web site.
Meanwhile, perhaps we can institute a program similar to Bank of America’s, allowing the airlines to keep the change from any tickets they sell. That would be more dignified than having them sit on a corner rattling a tin cup.
Fly Safe!
Neil
November 16, 2010
New FAA Publications
Originally Posted November 24, 2007
Many of us think of FAA publications as being stuffy and out of date, but there have been a number made available recently that could change your mind.
The newest revision of the “Instrument Flying Handbook” includes material on basic instrument flying using the new generation of glass cockpit instrumentation. This book is a companion to the“Instrument Procedures Handbook” , which was also revised this year to update information on GPS, RNAV, and RNP procedures. Together, these are excellent resources for any instrument pilot.
Until recently, FAA guidance on the conduct of an Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) was vague and out of date. In August 2007, however, FAA released "Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) Guidance", a document that gives instrument instructors and pilots helpful hints on how to prepare for and conduct the IPC. Complementing the IPC book is "Conducting an Effective Flight Review". Together, these two books provide solid recurrent training guidance for just about any instructor or pilot.
Another excellent resource is last year’s “General Aviation Pilot’s Guide to Preflight Weather Planning, Weather Self-Briefings, and Weather Decision Making”. This provides excellent tips on weather strategy and tactics.
Finally, FAA has been promoting the use of scenario-based training for the last few years. A clear and understandable guide to this training technique is found in “Introduction to Scenario-Based Training”.
Many of us think of FAA publications as being stuffy and out of date, but there have been a number made available recently that could change your mind.
The newest revision of the “Instrument Flying Handbook” includes material on basic instrument flying using the new generation of glass cockpit instrumentation. This book is a companion to the“Instrument Procedures Handbook” , which was also revised this year to update information on GPS, RNAV, and RNP procedures. Together, these are excellent resources for any instrument pilot.
Until recently, FAA guidance on the conduct of an Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) was vague and out of date. In August 2007, however, FAA released "Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) Guidance", a document that gives instrument instructors and pilots helpful hints on how to prepare for and conduct the IPC. Complementing the IPC book is "Conducting an Effective Flight Review". Together, these two books provide solid recurrent training guidance for just about any instructor or pilot.
Another excellent resource is last year’s “General Aviation Pilot’s Guide to Preflight Weather Planning, Weather Self-Briefings, and Weather Decision Making”. This provides excellent tips on weather strategy and tactics.
Finally, FAA has been promoting the use of scenario-based training for the last few years. A clear and understandable guide to this training technique is found in “Introduction to Scenario-Based Training”.
Fly Safe!
Neil
November 11, 2010
Complexity
Originally Posted November 5, 2008
My wife and I each have our own alarm clock. Her's is a traditional analog type with the little pointer that indicates what time the alarm will go off. Mine is a fancy digital clock radio that has two different alarm times and lets you choose either an alarm tone or the radio.
If she is in a hurry to set the alarm, it can be as much as 15 minutes early or late. If I am in a hurry, I am likely to get a very precise 12 hour error.
There is no question that my alarm is the more complex of the two, so I suppose it is no surprise that it would be more prone to operator error. This relationship is found in our cockpits as well. Avionics have made a huge jump in capability, and complexity, over the last decade. I often instruct in aircraft equipped with the Garmin G1000 and Avidyne Entegra glass cockpit systems. While I feel I am very proficient in their use, I still learn new things about them from time to time. And my customers have to work hard to take advantage of everything these systems can do.
Researchers tell us that there are two different types of complexity. The obvious one is “detail complexity”, which relates to equipment or situations that involve many facts or elements. My digital alarm is a perfect example of this. It has lots of knobs, buttons, and indicators.
In aviation, detail complexity shows up in avionics systems (particularly GPS navigators), airspace, ATC procedures, and flight and security regulations. The trend is toward increasing complexity.
The other variety of complexity - called “dynamic complexity” - involves situations where cause and effect are separated by time or space. In the fast moving world of aviation, this kind of complexity is increasingly apparent. Just like a error setting my alarm (like missing the small AM/PM indicator) leads to a surprise 12 hours later, we see cases where the result of something we do in the cockpit may not show up until some time later.
Dynamic complexity is particularly troubling in aviation. We see this in IFR flying, where an error copying and comprehending a clearance may not manifest itself until later when we fail to follow the expected path. Autopilots can be incorrectly programmed and not behave as intended. Faulty entry of a flight plan into a GPS navigator can lead to inadvertent airspace incursions hours later.
The bottom line is in managing this complexity to ensure it doesn’t lead to an unsafe situation. The key to this is knowledge of the systems you are using, proficiency in their use, and keeping workload at a reasonable level so you can monitor the complex systems.
My wife and I each have our own alarm clock. Her's is a traditional analog type with the little pointer that indicates what time the alarm will go off. Mine is a fancy digital clock radio that has two different alarm times and lets you choose either an alarm tone or the radio.
If she is in a hurry to set the alarm, it can be as much as 15 minutes early or late. If I am in a hurry, I am likely to get a very precise 12 hour error.
“Fools ignore complexity. Pragmatists suffer it. Some can avoid it. Geniuses remove it.” - Alan Perlis, Computer Scientist
There is no question that my alarm is the more complex of the two, so I suppose it is no surprise that it would be more prone to operator error. This relationship is found in our cockpits as well. Avionics have made a huge jump in capability, and complexity, over the last decade. I often instruct in aircraft equipped with the Garmin G1000 and Avidyne Entegra glass cockpit systems. While I feel I am very proficient in their use, I still learn new things about them from time to time. And my customers have to work hard to take advantage of everything these systems can do.
Researchers tell us that there are two different types of complexity. The obvious one is “detail complexity”, which relates to equipment or situations that involve many facts or elements. My digital alarm is a perfect example of this. It has lots of knobs, buttons, and indicators.
In aviation, detail complexity shows up in avionics systems (particularly GPS navigators), airspace, ATC procedures, and flight and security regulations. The trend is toward increasing complexity.
The other variety of complexity - called “dynamic complexity” - involves situations where cause and effect are separated by time or space. In the fast moving world of aviation, this kind of complexity is increasingly apparent. Just like a error setting my alarm (like missing the small AM/PM indicator) leads to a surprise 12 hours later, we see cases where the result of something we do in the cockpit may not show up until some time later.
Dynamic complexity is particularly troubling in aviation. We see this in IFR flying, where an error copying and comprehending a clearance may not manifest itself until later when we fail to follow the expected path. Autopilots can be incorrectly programmed and not behave as intended. Faulty entry of a flight plan into a GPS navigator can lead to inadvertent airspace incursions hours later.
The bottom line is in managing this complexity to ensure it doesn’t lead to an unsafe situation. The key to this is knowledge of the systems you are using, proficiency in their use, and keeping workload at a reasonable level so you can monitor the complex systems.
Fly Safe!
Neil
November 8, 2010
Top 10 Reasons GA is Better Than the Airlines
Originally Posted March 7, 2007
Airline travel has become progressively more unpleasant, which is helping boost the market for private and business aircraft. Here is my list of the top ten reasons the airlines have become the second choice to general aviation (GA) for air travel.
Airline travel has become progressively more unpleasant, which is helping boost the market for private and business aircraft. Here is my list of the top ten reasons the airlines have become the second choice to general aviation (GA) for air travel.
- You don’t have to stay on the airplane for 8 hours when you divert.
- You don’t get treated like a terrorist upon arrival at the airport.
- You get to pick who you sit next to.
- The weather in New York doesn’t make your flight from Dallas to Phoenix late.
- Some guy in a golf cart doesn’t yell at you to get out of his way in the terminal.
- There is never another plane at your gate when you arrive early.
- You don’t have to wait for your luggage, and it NEVER gets lost.
- Your airplane will not go bankrupt an hour before you get to the airport.
- You don’t have to wait for the crew to arrive from Cleveland.
- You don’t arrive with 5 minutes to change planes while sitting in seat 36A.
Every seat is a window seat!
Fly Safe!
Neil
November 4, 2010
The Trouble with Trouble
One of the difficulties, and attractions, of flying is how easy it is to get into trouble. And, once in trouble, how hard it can be to get out. For as long as man has ventured into the air, we have devised gadgets intended to keep us safe.
One of the newer ones is the “whole aircraft parachute” system. Such systems float the entire airplane down to the ground, and have been adopted widely in the ultralight community. Under the name of CAPS (Cirrus Airframe Parachute System), this equipment is installed on every Cirrus Design product. These systems are credited with saving numerous lives, but are still the object of passionate debate in airport lounges and online forums. Folks either love them or hate them.Many Cirrus owners claim that the CAPS system was the feature that sealed the deal for their purchase decision. As an instructor, I have given a lot of thought to the philosophical aspects of CAPS. A recent post on the Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association members forum helped me focus my thinking. A very wise member, also a lawyer, wrote about his profession “I can either keep you out of trouble, or I can get you out of trouble.”
It seems to me that airplane parachute systems fall in the later category. For KEEPING out of trouble, we have a brain and many other wonderful gadgets – but the parachute is not one of them. It only becomes useful AFTER we GET into trouble. So, my philosophy is that the parachute is a good thing, but I am going to work really hard so that I never get so far into trouble that I need it.
Fly Safe!
Neil
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)