 | | | | | |||||||||
| |||||||||||||
           Government Weather Flight Planning Tools General Aircraft Magazines Books & Tapes Organizations 
|
|
February 2010 
Five Airspeeds You’ve Got To NailSo much of operating personal aircraft is a numbers game: How many gallons of fuel are required, how many inches aft is the center of gravity and how many more minutes until we arrive? The automation available in today’s avionics makes some of this child’s play, but we still need to know how to do the basic computations, if for no other reason than the day our expensive panel soils the bed. The same is true for just basic stick and rudder skills, also. For example, there are several performance airspeeds that, when the need arises, you’ve got to be able to predictably attain. Some may be obvious, others perhaps not, and some reference speeds we’ll address a little differently than you might have been taught. Unfortunately, recent NTSB accident histories show a growing trend away from proper airspeed control, so with that in mind, let’s review five speeds you’ve got to nail. How Rain May Affect Aircraft Performance To my mind, only a couple of decent reasons exist to fly through rain: First, because your destination is out there in or beyond the precip—and it’s light rain and not far through it, at that; second, because you’re too cheap or lazy to wash the plane normally. Otherwise, rain stands among those conditions to not take lightly—and on many fronts, to be taken as a condition to avoid as much as possible. When you think about it systematically, a lot goes on with the airplane when exposed to rain and—aside from the possibility of improved cooling on a hot day—it’s difficult to conjure up much to commend rain flying to anyone. But, we know you’re going to fly in the rain; we do, too, but begrudgingly and guardedly—or avoid it if the datalink weather returns show orange or red. So instead of saying, "Don’t do what we do, have done, and will probably do again," we offer five strong reasons to make you think about what’s happening to the aircraft when flown in rain. The Mountain Pass And Ridgeline Venturi Effect Mountain flying is one of the more challenging but rewarding types of aviation available to most pilots. The scenery is magnificent, landing on remote strips affords access to some of the least-trammeled locations on Earth and it’s rare to find much of a crowd. Whole books—and careers—have been based on the skills and knowledge needed to fly mountainous terrain safely. Indeed, the hazards of mountain flying in personal aircraft go far beyond what is normally taught to "flatlander" pilots in ground school. Most mountain flying caveats dwell on the vagaries of leeward hazards such as downdrafts, waves, rotors and resulting turbulence. The effects of temperature and altitude on aircraft performance also are part of this equation, as is the reduced power available when a normally aspirated engine is taken up to around 10,000 feet msl and the pilot forgets proper leaning. This is not one of those articles. Why So Many CFITs? There’s one undeniable constant in aviation: All accidents eventually terminate by contact with the surface of the planet. We have various ways of describing how that contact occurs, thus the somewhat oxymoronic phrase "controlled flight into terrain," or CFIT. This category of accident is an attempt to explain the unexplainable: why pilots so often fly perfectly functioning airplanes into the ground, killing themselves and all aboard. However anomalous the concept, the occurrence of CFIT is anything but. Pilots fly into the ground—terrain, trees, obstacles, water—nearly as often as they stall or lose basic control of the airplane. As we reported in our January 2010 article on the causes of fatal accidents, stalls lead the list, but CFIT is essentially tied for second, along with loss of control. The New SFRAs Airspace designations, along with what is and isn’t permissible inside specific areas, are perennial sources of frustration and confusion among pilots of even considerable experience. Once one’s understanding develops beyond the different classes and past special use airspace, there’s always the issue of how to deal with airspace in which more and different rules or procedures apply. In recent years, special flight rules areas, SFRAs, have been created to ease the flow of traffic and prevent unsafe conditions at the Grand Canyon and at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The dimensions, rules and procedures for these areas are clearly documented in various places, including FAR Part 93, the FAA’s Airport/Facility Directory and the respective visual charts. (It’s always helpful, of course, to ask local pilots about any tricks they may know or additional information necessary to safely operate in these and similar areas.) Meanwhile, two additional SFRAs were created recently—one over Washington, D.C., and the other at New York, N.Y. Both were created in the aftermath of significant events and demand pilots planning to operate in or near them become familiar with their requirements. Missed Expectations Way back when I was training for the instrument rating, I was enraptured by the entire concept of operating an aircraft without visual reference to the world outside. Part of that love affair—which continues today—had to do with the elaborate rules and procedures designed both to keep the airplane and its occupants out of the weeds while ensuring everyone associated with its operation knew what to expect. For the average VFR-only pilot contemplating the instrument rating, there’s a lot to learn—and by no means do I know it all—but there’s also a very clear philosophy behind it. Once the underlying rules are understood, the actual flying often is easier than doing the same trip VFR. | |
About Us / Contact Us / Privacy Policy / Site Map | Copyright Belvoir Media Group, LLC. All rights reserved. | ||||||||
