Dear reader,
given its succes, and to make things easier to manage, but also easier to read for you, this blog has been moved to www.plasticpilot.net
I'm sorry if this cause any inconvenience to you, but hope to see you there soon !
PlasticPilot
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Phraseology is your business card
A wise man once told me...
I've made my basic training on a quite busy controlled airport. In the begining, my instructor was doing the voice. Then I went through a voice course, which are give by tower controllers. One important thing I remember from this course is that it started by saying that voice communication is like a pilot's business card given to a controller.
What he meant is that controllers will be confident with a pilot doing a good, efficient voice than with someone hesitating, or sounding confused. In example, if a VFR plane is waiting for a runway slot, and there are two airliners coming in with just the time in between for the VFR take-off, the controller will decide to leave him go or not mostly on the trust he has in the pilot. If he feels the pilot will manage a quick departure properly, he will let him go, but if he feels that the pilot could be slow, or block the runway, he will have him waiting.
And on what is this trust feeling based ? Mostly on the quality of the voice communication ! So be efficient, clear, complete, and polite if time allows.
No overload allowed
You will probably get more out of ATC if your voice is good, and this also includes not overloading a frequency, particularly when it's already busy. An important point here is to listen what the controller acutally said, not just to assume it. Want a real life example ? Look at this.
TWR: AirLiner 123, Line-up and wait 23, expect take-off in 30 seconds, due to wake turbulence
AirLiner 123: Line-up and wait 23, AirLiner 123
BigJet 456: BigJet456, passing 2 miles final 23
TWR: BigJet456, continue approach, traffic about to depart
BigJet 456: Continue approach, BigJet 456
Nxxxx: TWR good morning, Nxxxx with you
TWR: Nxxxx TWR good morning, stand-by
Nxxxx: Nxx is a C172, VFR from zzzz, errrrrrr with information A, errrrrrr 5 miles nort of the field, errrrrrrrr to land on the active, errrrrrr requesting landing instructions
Do you get the error from Nxxxx ? Yes, it was told to stand-by because of the close departure / arrival situation, but instead he blocked the frequency for a long while. Can you guess the next transmissions ?
TWR: BigJet 456, Go-around, I say again, BigJet 456, Go-around
BigJet 456: Going-around, BigJet456
This example of an airliner going around because of a pilot not complying with a simple "stand-by" instruction could seem silly, but I heard it very recently. Yes, I changed the callsigns.
You might then argue that it's unfair from me to have a example where the private pilot is behaving wrong, causing an airliner go-around. It is true that the situation could have been the opposite. My point here is not to say private voice is not as good as commercial, but to insist on the fact that any pilot should actually LISTEN to the controller, and not ASSUME anything.
One could also argue that the controller made a mistake by lining-up the first plane so close to the approach. This is true, but remind that the VFR was probably not on a flight-plan, so the controller could not guess, nor he could expect a pilot not understanding "stand-by" !
How safe is your readback ?
The voice communication also carries its share of safety issues, especially when it's time for a pilot to read a clearance back. This applies more to IFR pilots, but it is a general issue.
I noticed it once while being the safety pilot on an IR leg, and it was part of the feed-back I gave to the captain. Here is an extract of the communications:
H-xxx: Approach good morning, H-xxx, FL090, ready for lower
Approach: H-xxx Approach, good morning. You're identified, descend FL070
H-xxx: 070 H-xxx
Is not the H-xxx read-back a bit short ? Look at the following communications...
Approach: H-xxx, reduce speed 180 knots
H-xxx: 180, H-xxx
...
Approach: H-xxx, turn right heading 160
H-xxx: 160, H-xxx
The approach controller did not made any remark, and I guess as the traffic volume was low, he probably just monitored the turn on his screen. But how misleading was this readback ? By just answering "160, H-xxx", the pilot does not make clear to the controller that he understood the heading change, and not a new speed restriction.
In a complex situation, the controller would probably request a correct read-back, which would make the frequency busier, and possibly the situation even more complex.
Penser, Presser, Parler
To sumarize, you should always attempt to do a clear communication, short and efficient, and non-ambiguous. And remind that frequency time is precious. In french we have the "PPP" motto: "Penser, Presser, Parler", literally "Think, Push, Talk".
Think: to what you will say
Press: the PTT button
Talk: say your message
I've made my basic training on a quite busy controlled airport. In the begining, my instructor was doing the voice. Then I went through a voice course, which are give by tower controllers. One important thing I remember from this course is that it started by saying that voice communication is like a pilot's business card given to a controller.
What he meant is that controllers will be confident with a pilot doing a good, efficient voice than with someone hesitating, or sounding confused. In example, if a VFR plane is waiting for a runway slot, and there are two airliners coming in with just the time in between for the VFR take-off, the controller will decide to leave him go or not mostly on the trust he has in the pilot. If he feels the pilot will manage a quick departure properly, he will let him go, but if he feels that the pilot could be slow, or block the runway, he will have him waiting.
And on what is this trust feeling based ? Mostly on the quality of the voice communication ! So be efficient, clear, complete, and polite if time allows.
No overload allowed
You will probably get more out of ATC if your voice is good, and this also includes not overloading a frequency, particularly when it's already busy. An important point here is to listen what the controller acutally said, not just to assume it. Want a real life example ? Look at this.
TWR: AirLiner 123, Line-up and wait 23, expect take-off in 30 seconds, due to wake turbulence
AirLiner 123: Line-up and wait 23, AirLiner 123
BigJet 456: BigJet456, passing 2 miles final 23
TWR: BigJet456, continue approach, traffic about to depart
BigJet 456: Continue approach, BigJet 456
Nxxxx: TWR good morning, Nxxxx with you
TWR: Nxxxx TWR good morning, stand-by
Nxxxx: Nxx is a C172, VFR from zzzz, errrrrrr with information A, errrrrrr 5 miles nort of the field, errrrrrrrr to land on the active, errrrrrr requesting landing instructions
Do you get the error from Nxxxx ? Yes, it was told to stand-by because of the close departure / arrival situation, but instead he blocked the frequency for a long while. Can you guess the next transmissions ?
TWR: BigJet 456, Go-around, I say again, BigJet 456, Go-around
BigJet 456: Going-around, BigJet456
This example of an airliner going around because of a pilot not complying with a simple "stand-by" instruction could seem silly, but I heard it very recently. Yes, I changed the callsigns.
You might then argue that it's unfair from me to have a example where the private pilot is behaving wrong, causing an airliner go-around. It is true that the situation could have been the opposite. My point here is not to say private voice is not as good as commercial, but to insist on the fact that any pilot should actually LISTEN to the controller, and not ASSUME anything.
One could also argue that the controller made a mistake by lining-up the first plane so close to the approach. This is true, but remind that the VFR was probably not on a flight-plan, so the controller could not guess, nor he could expect a pilot not understanding "stand-by" !
How safe is your readback ?
The voice communication also carries its share of safety issues, especially when it's time for a pilot to read a clearance back. This applies more to IFR pilots, but it is a general issue.
I noticed it once while being the safety pilot on an IR leg, and it was part of the feed-back I gave to the captain. Here is an extract of the communications:
H-xxx: Approach good morning, H-xxx, FL090, ready for lower
Approach: H-xxx Approach, good morning. You're identified, descend FL070
H-xxx: 070 H-xxx
Is not the H-xxx read-back a bit short ? Look at the following communications...
Approach: H-xxx, reduce speed 180 knots
H-xxx: 180, H-xxx
...
Approach: H-xxx, turn right heading 160
H-xxx: 160, H-xxx
The approach controller did not made any remark, and I guess as the traffic volume was low, he probably just monitored the turn on his screen. But how misleading was this readback ? By just answering "160, H-xxx", the pilot does not make clear to the controller that he understood the heading change, and not a new speed restriction.
In a complex situation, the controller would probably request a correct read-back, which would make the frequency busier, and possibly the situation even more complex.
Penser, Presser, Parler
To sumarize, you should always attempt to do a clear communication, short and efficient, and non-ambiguous. And remind that frequency time is precious. In french we have the "PPP" motto: "Penser, Presser, Parler", literally "Think, Push, Talk".
Think: to what you will say
Press: the PTT button
Talk: say your message
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Video of a VFR flight intrusion within the Heatrow Control Zone
This video from NATS, the UK ATC authority, shows what happens when a disoriented VFR pilot enters the Heatrhow CTR. You will see that the pilot gets closer and closer to the approaches in progress to runway 09 L.
As the intruder gets closer, the controller has to interrupt two approaches and have the airliners going around and turning right. Thanks to this action, all risks are avoided, so all three aircrafts remain safe at all time.
Note that I did not say you should go through any airspace hoping the ATC will manage it ! This also shows why it is important to have your transponder on 7000 anywhere, particularly in crowded airspace when flying VFR !
However, as you can imagine, the following investigation will lead to strong consequences for the VFR pilot. The whole site holding this video is also worth a visit.
As the intruder gets closer, the controller has to interrupt two approaches and have the airliners going around and turning right. Thanks to this action, all risks are avoided, so all three aircrafts remain safe at all time.
Note that I did not say you should go through any airspace hoping the ATC will manage it ! This also shows why it is important to have your transponder on 7000 anywhere, particularly in crowded airspace when flying VFR !
However, as you can imagine, the following investigation will lead to strong consequences for the VFR pilot. The whole site holding this video is also worth a visit.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Spatial disorientation in VMC
Is that still VMC ?
The JAA syllabus for the PPL includes some very basic instrument flying training. It is limited to the ability to fly a 180° turn in IMC, just in case a pilot enters a cloud by mistake. And you can beleive me, this happens, hopefully not frequently, but periodically.
Most of time, pilots flying just below a layer of clouds enter it because the layer is getting down, or because they get distracted and climb that extra few feet. Suddenly anything gets white outside, the pilot realizes what's going on, push the column, and everyhting is normal again.
But there is another case where the notion of VMC vs. IMC becomes much more subtle than the simple "in cloud" vs. "out of clouds" definition. When flying over the sea, with a high pressure haze layer in example. Under such circumstances, you can clearly see the sea when looking down, but there is no clear natural horizon, as sky and sea seem to merge in the haze.
Boat or plane ?
While flying in such conditions recently, under an IFR flight plan, I experienced a brief spatial disorientation because of an extra factor. I just finished a left turn after receiving a clearance direct to some point in my flight plan, and I had a short glance to the right.
At this moment, I saw a white spot with a white trailer, on a blue background. My brain interpeted it as planes with condensation trails in the sky, and he concluded that we were still in the left turn. I had to look at the artificial horizon for a few seconds to convince me that I was flying straight and level !
So what about these planes is spotted ? They were in fact boats on the sea, looking similar to planes because of the trail and background color. Even as a trained IFR pilot, I needed all my confidence in the instruments not to start a corrective manoeuver.
Trust the instruments
Once again, the basic rule of IFR must be reharsed here, and it also applies to VFR pilots flying in such conditions: trust the instruments ! The likelihood of an instrument failure is much less than of disorientation.
And even if you're a VFR pilot, it is certainly legal to fly in such hazy condition over sea, but it is certainly questionnable. If you have some open sea crossing to fly and suddenly feel uncomfortable, keep the following things in mind:
1) If your plane is equipped with an autopilot, it is the good time to use it
2) Even if your fly manually using the instruments to help maintaining attitude, you're still VFR, and have to look outsite for traffic
3) In case of haze, it is much better to have the sun in your back than in front, so turn around if it gets really bad
4) Again, trust the instruments
With all of that, your flights in situations with an un-clear natural horizon should be uneventful, but never tell I engourage such flights, nor I encouraged you flying VFR in IMC.
The JAA syllabus for the PPL includes some very basic instrument flying training. It is limited to the ability to fly a 180° turn in IMC, just in case a pilot enters a cloud by mistake. And you can beleive me, this happens, hopefully not frequently, but periodically.
Most of time, pilots flying just below a layer of clouds enter it because the layer is getting down, or because they get distracted and climb that extra few feet. Suddenly anything gets white outside, the pilot realizes what's going on, push the column, and everyhting is normal again.
But there is another case where the notion of VMC vs. IMC becomes much more subtle than the simple "in cloud" vs. "out of clouds" definition. When flying over the sea, with a high pressure haze layer in example. Under such circumstances, you can clearly see the sea when looking down, but there is no clear natural horizon, as sky and sea seem to merge in the haze.
Boat or plane ?
While flying in such conditions recently, under an IFR flight plan, I experienced a brief spatial disorientation because of an extra factor. I just finished a left turn after receiving a clearance direct to some point in my flight plan, and I had a short glance to the right.
At this moment, I saw a white spot with a white trailer, on a blue background. My brain interpeted it as planes with condensation trails in the sky, and he concluded that we were still in the left turn. I had to look at the artificial horizon for a few seconds to convince me that I was flying straight and level !
So what about these planes is spotted ? They were in fact boats on the sea, looking similar to planes because of the trail and background color. Even as a trained IFR pilot, I needed all my confidence in the instruments not to start a corrective manoeuver.
Trust the instruments
Once again, the basic rule of IFR must be reharsed here, and it also applies to VFR pilots flying in such conditions: trust the instruments ! The likelihood of an instrument failure is much less than of disorientation.
And even if you're a VFR pilot, it is certainly legal to fly in such hazy condition over sea, but it is certainly questionnable. If you have some open sea crossing to fly and suddenly feel uncomfortable, keep the following things in mind:
1) If your plane is equipped with an autopilot, it is the good time to use it
2) Even if your fly manually using the instruments to help maintaining attitude, you're still VFR, and have to look outsite for traffic
3) In case of haze, it is much better to have the sun in your back than in front, so turn around if it gets really bad
4) Again, trust the instruments
With all of that, your flights in situations with an un-clear natural horizon should be uneventful, but never tell I engourage such flights, nor I encouraged you flying VFR in IMC.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Passenger briefing
Make their flight enjoyable
I don't know if you flew a general aviation plane as passenger before becoming a pilot or not, but beleive me this is not always an enjoyable experience. One factor possibly making passengers feeling bad onboard is their lack of knowledge. This difference between you and them can make their interpretation of things stressing.
Typically, the noise of a landing gear being retracted and hitting the ceiling of the plane can sound really strange to someone hearing it for the first time. And you certainly does not want you passengers being stressed or even worse, panicked, because of that.
A short information from you can make them feeling safe, and their flight will be much more enjoyable.
Important information
Your passenger briefing must be short, make them informed, and if possible not scary. I mention the last point because a good briefing must include some safety information, including but not limited to:
1) Critical phases of flight
2) How to open the doors / evacuate the aircraft
3) Safety belts, and life jackets if applicable.
4) Fire extinguishers
Talking about such topics before the flight can make your passengers feel unsaf, so present these information in a calm environment, not while boarding or taxiing.
About the route
An important point I include in my briefings is a brief description of the route to be flown, and especially the departure procedure. A low level turn after take-off can seem risky to a non-pilot. So if you have to fly such a thing, inform your passengers in advance, so they won't be surprised.
Don't forget that most of time, your passengers are with you for leisure. Let them know that there is no problem to come back at any time if they don't feel good. There is no reason to fly the 2 hours flight you planned if your passenger does not feels well on board, so inform them that you can fly back at any time.
Make the difference
The passenger briefing can play a key role in making the flight enjoyable for the passengers. Missing it can change a stressing event a pleasure. Practice it with fellow pilots if you're not used to it. This will make you a better pilot, even if it has nothing to do with your flying skills.
And if have to cope with a passenger that does not want to get in the plane at the last moment, don't try to force him, he would only get more stressed. Give him as much time as needed to relax, and if the flight is cancelled, don't regret it. It is much better to have a coffee with a stresed person than having to managed a panicked passenger in flight !
I don't know if you flew a general aviation plane as passenger before becoming a pilot or not, but beleive me this is not always an enjoyable experience. One factor possibly making passengers feeling bad onboard is their lack of knowledge. This difference between you and them can make their interpretation of things stressing.
Typically, the noise of a landing gear being retracted and hitting the ceiling of the plane can sound really strange to someone hearing it for the first time. And you certainly does not want you passengers being stressed or even worse, panicked, because of that.
A short information from you can make them feeling safe, and their flight will be much more enjoyable.
Important information
Your passenger briefing must be short, make them informed, and if possible not scary. I mention the last point because a good briefing must include some safety information, including but not limited to:
1) Critical phases of flight
2) How to open the doors / evacuate the aircraft
3) Safety belts, and life jackets if applicable.
4) Fire extinguishers
Talking about such topics before the flight can make your passengers feel unsaf, so present these information in a calm environment, not while boarding or taxiing.
About the route
An important point I include in my briefings is a brief description of the route to be flown, and especially the departure procedure. A low level turn after take-off can seem risky to a non-pilot. So if you have to fly such a thing, inform your passengers in advance, so they won't be surprised.
Don't forget that most of time, your passengers are with you for leisure. Let them know that there is no problem to come back at any time if they don't feel good. There is no reason to fly the 2 hours flight you planned if your passenger does not feels well on board, so inform them that you can fly back at any time.
Make the difference
The passenger briefing can play a key role in making the flight enjoyable for the passengers. Missing it can change a stressing event a pleasure. Practice it with fellow pilots if you're not used to it. This will make you a better pilot, even if it has nothing to do with your flying skills.
And if have to cope with a passenger that does not want to get in the plane at the last moment, don't try to force him, he would only get more stressed. Give him as much time as needed to relax, and if the flight is cancelled, don't regret it. It is much better to have a coffee with a stresed person than having to managed a panicked passenger in flight !
Figure not to fly by
Figures everywhere
As pilots, our activity is full of figures. Speeds, altitudes, times, headings, power settings, and so on... We have to manage and know all of them. Some deserve more respects than others. This is even more true for IFR pilots.
I mentionned some above, but two of the most important ones are not in the list: time and money. These two deserve much more attention than the others, in different ways.
Don't respect timing
One of the best way pilots have to put themselves under pressure is self-imposed timing. It is not because you have a flight plan with an EOBT that you have to rush through your checks. A slot is not a valid reason to take-off within a thunderstorm (don't smile, this happend more than you think). If all conditions for a safe departure are not met, ask ATC for a delay.
An additional contributing factor in incident is the presence of passengers paying part of the flight costs. Some pilots feel that as the passengers pay, they HAVE to transport them as promised. This lead them to fly in less than marginal conditions.
Ok, your passengers will be upset if you delay or even cancel the flight. But what about killing them in an accident ?
Respect your money
Don't say I'm crazy. I did not say to rush to shorten your flight in order to save money. I'm sometimes schyzophrenic, but not that much !
The money issue is exactly opposite as time. As soon as money becomes a factor, you should think changing your kind of operation. If your budget is so tight that you need a direct through an hostile region, or that you know you can't afford the cost of a go arround, you should envisage a shorter flight.
At some points in my flying years, I changed my type of operations. A good exampel is the year I got my IR rating. I had to fly an expensive plane for 30 hours of instructions. After that my budget was quite shorter. So instead of flying long IR legs with a single approach at the end, I went for much shorter legs with one or two approaches. Dois so I got more approaches for my money.
It was certainly less appealing, but my currency and proficiency were much better. Later on, when I had more money available, I started long flights again.
Be adaptative
The keyword here is again to adapt what you do to the circumstances. You have low time and money ? Fly circuits ! That's the best way to remain current. You flew less last year ? Don't throw yourself in a long cross-country flight.
Budget is back ? Treat you with some instruction to get that rusty bits off safely. There is no shame in that, but so much in a serious and unexplanable incident.
As pilots, our activity is full of figures. Speeds, altitudes, times, headings, power settings, and so on... We have to manage and know all of them. Some deserve more respects than others. This is even more true for IFR pilots.
I mentionned some above, but two of the most important ones are not in the list: time and money. These two deserve much more attention than the others, in different ways.
Don't respect timing
One of the best way pilots have to put themselves under pressure is self-imposed timing. It is not because you have a flight plan with an EOBT that you have to rush through your checks. A slot is not a valid reason to take-off within a thunderstorm (don't smile, this happend more than you think). If all conditions for a safe departure are not met, ask ATC for a delay.
An additional contributing factor in incident is the presence of passengers paying part of the flight costs. Some pilots feel that as the passengers pay, they HAVE to transport them as promised. This lead them to fly in less than marginal conditions.
Ok, your passengers will be upset if you delay or even cancel the flight. But what about killing them in an accident ?
Respect your money
Don't say I'm crazy. I did not say to rush to shorten your flight in order to save money. I'm sometimes schyzophrenic, but not that much !
The money issue is exactly opposite as time. As soon as money becomes a factor, you should think changing your kind of operation. If your budget is so tight that you need a direct through an hostile region, or that you know you can't afford the cost of a go arround, you should envisage a shorter flight.
At some points in my flying years, I changed my type of operations. A good exampel is the year I got my IR rating. I had to fly an expensive plane for 30 hours of instructions. After that my budget was quite shorter. So instead of flying long IR legs with a single approach at the end, I went for much shorter legs with one or two approaches. Dois so I got more approaches for my money.
It was certainly less appealing, but my currency and proficiency were much better. Later on, when I had more money available, I started long flights again.
Be adaptative
The keyword here is again to adapt what you do to the circumstances. You have low time and money ? Fly circuits ! That's the best way to remain current. You flew less last year ? Don't throw yourself in a long cross-country flight.
Budget is back ? Treat you with some instruction to get that rusty bits off safely. There is no shame in that, but so much in a serious and unexplanable incident.
The clean cockpit strategy
Clean and clean
This is not a post about cockpit cleaning, as I naively hope that any pilots is careful enough not to leave a cockpit dirty after a flight. It is more about the need and way to create good cockpit conditions during the flight.
No argues
The last place where you want an argument to take place is in a cockpit. Whatever the kind of operation, be it single pilot VFR or commercial multi-pilot in solid IFR conditions, any argument does increase the risks dramatically.
This is obviously not the unique factor leading to increased risk. In critical phases of flight (yes, take-off and landing… good guess), any distraction could impair the safety of the airplane and its occupants.
In commercial operation, the crews do establish what is called a “sterile cockpit” for those phases. This includes a closed cockpit door, a restricted number of tasks to be carried, and strict procedures. Even the cabin crew is not allowed to pop in the cockpit during these phases.
Distractions on board
Applying the sterile cockpit strategy in light aircrafts is not as easy as we have no cockpit door, and are usually both flight crew and cabin crew. The biggest distraction is often coming from passengers, and as they are may be paying their share, you can to take care of them.
Nevertheless, as a safe pilot, you have to explain to your passengers that take-off and landing do require all of your attention, and that they should not talk to you at these times, except obviously if they see something critical, like a major fuel leak, smoke, or so.
If your plane is equipped with a modern intercom, it probably includes an “isolated” position. Setting it will have you isolated in a channel with ATC, and your passengers will be able to discuss but you won’t hear them. It could be a good idea to use it at critical times.
The best moment to pass the message about your need for a quiet cockpit during take off and landing to your passengers is during the pre-flight briefing, after all the safety information you give them.
Self distraction
As I mentioned above, a sterile cockpit also means that the number of tasks to be carried on by the flight crew is reduced to its minimum. Don’t distract yourself from flying a proper take-off or approach for non-priority things.
A typical example is forgetting to tune the next frequency in the stand-by window. If you’re on short final and don’t have the ground frequency on stand-by, it’s certainly not the time to tune it. Land, control your speed, vacate runway. Then you will have a more appropriate time to set your frequency. Ok, you will may be a bit slower to switch, but you won’t jeopardize your landing for that.
It’s always surprising to see how much pilots can be disturbing themselves with non critical things. I even saw once someone looking frenetically for a ground chart while on short final !
Clean it before and after
So if you want to be a good pilot, clean your cockpit before critical flight phases. And if you’re a rental pilot, or part owner, clean it also after your flight, the next pilot will appreciate !
This is not a post about cockpit cleaning, as I naively hope that any pilots is careful enough not to leave a cockpit dirty after a flight. It is more about the need and way to create good cockpit conditions during the flight.
No argues
The last place where you want an argument to take place is in a cockpit. Whatever the kind of operation, be it single pilot VFR or commercial multi-pilot in solid IFR conditions, any argument does increase the risks dramatically.
This is obviously not the unique factor leading to increased risk. In critical phases of flight (yes, take-off and landing… good guess), any distraction could impair the safety of the airplane and its occupants.
In commercial operation, the crews do establish what is called a “sterile cockpit” for those phases. This includes a closed cockpit door, a restricted number of tasks to be carried, and strict procedures. Even the cabin crew is not allowed to pop in the cockpit during these phases.
Distractions on board
Applying the sterile cockpit strategy in light aircrafts is not as easy as we have no cockpit door, and are usually both flight crew and cabin crew. The biggest distraction is often coming from passengers, and as they are may be paying their share, you can to take care of them.
Nevertheless, as a safe pilot, you have to explain to your passengers that take-off and landing do require all of your attention, and that they should not talk to you at these times, except obviously if they see something critical, like a major fuel leak, smoke, or so.
If your plane is equipped with a modern intercom, it probably includes an “isolated” position. Setting it will have you isolated in a channel with ATC, and your passengers will be able to discuss but you won’t hear them. It could be a good idea to use it at critical times.
The best moment to pass the message about your need for a quiet cockpit during take off and landing to your passengers is during the pre-flight briefing, after all the safety information you give them.
Self distraction
As I mentioned above, a sterile cockpit also means that the number of tasks to be carried on by the flight crew is reduced to its minimum. Don’t distract yourself from flying a proper take-off or approach for non-priority things.
A typical example is forgetting to tune the next frequency in the stand-by window. If you’re on short final and don’t have the ground frequency on stand-by, it’s certainly not the time to tune it. Land, control your speed, vacate runway. Then you will have a more appropriate time to set your frequency. Ok, you will may be a bit slower to switch, but you won’t jeopardize your landing for that.
It’s always surprising to see how much pilots can be disturbing themselves with non critical things. I even saw once someone looking frenetically for a ground chart while on short final !
Clean it before and after
So if you want to be a good pilot, clean your cockpit before critical flight phases. And if you’re a rental pilot, or part owner, clean it also after your flight, the next pilot will appreciate !
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Know your performance
A plane is not a car
It's tempting to think that you can jump in a plane, start the prop, and go anywhere with any number of passengers on board, within the limits of the number of seats available.
Performance varies from day to day, because of wind, temperature, runway status, and so on. All pilots learn that during the theory training for pirvate pilot licence. I won't give a theory class here.
We all stop doing the performance calculation when operating uncer normal circumstances. If you take-off from your homebase, with your most flown plane, alone on board, you can probably skip the performance study. Nevertheless, you should have your performance table availble when operating outside your usual domain.
Typically, when the warm summer days come (30°C or plus), or if crosswind is strong, or if you have 3 PAX on board whereas you're most used to one, or zero.
If performance is less than usual because of these factors, it is your responsibility as pilot in command to detect it when studying take-off and landing performance. If you don't identify the problem at this stage, you could encounter an aborted take-off, which could be not so easy if runway is short. However, you can be sure that your passengers will remember it for long.
Plane performance is not pilot performance
The performance figures found in the books are sometimes unrealistic in the sense that they come from test made with perfectly new aircrafts, flown by experienced test pilots in optimum conditions.
The pilot influence is by far not negligible. Give the same plane to two pilots, they won't get the same performance out of it. As an example, the take-off distance depends on how quickly after rotation is the speed set to Vx. Let the plane get a bit quicker than Vx during initial climb, and the take-off distance will increase.
The same applies for demonstrated crosswind. Most light aircrafts flying manuals do mention a demonstrated crosswind landing of 17 knots. This is not a formal limitation, but personally I will not try such a landing, except may be on a very long and 50 meters wide runway.
Another factor with a strong influence on performance is how the pilot is feeling... Try to fly once when tired, preferably with an instructor. You will be surprised how bad your technique could become.
At some stage, this can be compensated for by experience, but it is quite hard to evaluate your own experience. A poll in France shown that 85% of the interrogated private pilots do consider themselve as better than average pilots! Hardly true, isnt'it ? Nothing against french pilots here, I'm sure results would be equivalent anywhere.
Legal does not mean easy, nor feasible
It is legal to fly through a mountainous area in Echo airspace with a visibility of 1500 meters, or equivalent to 3o seconds of flight, as long as remaining clear of clouds. Doing so at 500ft above ground level is legal, if the area is not densly populated.
Can you imagine a high performance single (let's say a Bonanza), flying in 1500 meters visibility, 500 ft above ground in an alpine valley, zig-zaging to avoid clouds, at 170 knots ? Legal. That would be really stupid, and infinetly risky, but legal.
Don't expect any legal minimum to be enough for any pilot to be able to fly anywhere.
Have your own minimums
If you don't know your personal minimums for the time being, take time to define them next time you cancel a flight, and have time to spend.
It is not possible to establish GO / NO-GO criterions, because this will vary depending on the type of operation. What I suggest is to have some criterions to define when it is worth to do a deeper than superficial analysis of flying conditions.
My personal list includes specific figures, but also some environmental clues:
1) Any wind above 10 kts
2) Any visibility below 10km
3) Any ceiling below 1500 ft
4) Any temperature above 25°C
5) Clouds moving visibly
6) Birds hovering in wind
Any of this thing would lead me to a deeper analysis of the conditions before starting a flight. Establish your own list, and make it evolve with new experience, and you will simplify your decision making process by having strong basis.
It's tempting to think that you can jump in a plane, start the prop, and go anywhere with any number of passengers on board, within the limits of the number of seats available.
Performance varies from day to day, because of wind, temperature, runway status, and so on. All pilots learn that during the theory training for pirvate pilot licence. I won't give a theory class here.
We all stop doing the performance calculation when operating uncer normal circumstances. If you take-off from your homebase, with your most flown plane, alone on board, you can probably skip the performance study. Nevertheless, you should have your performance table availble when operating outside your usual domain.
Typically, when the warm summer days come (30°C or plus), or if crosswind is strong, or if you have 3 PAX on board whereas you're most used to one, or zero.
If performance is less than usual because of these factors, it is your responsibility as pilot in command to detect it when studying take-off and landing performance. If you don't identify the problem at this stage, you could encounter an aborted take-off, which could be not so easy if runway is short. However, you can be sure that your passengers will remember it for long.
Plane performance is not pilot performance
The performance figures found in the books are sometimes unrealistic in the sense that they come from test made with perfectly new aircrafts, flown by experienced test pilots in optimum conditions.
The pilot influence is by far not negligible. Give the same plane to two pilots, they won't get the same performance out of it. As an example, the take-off distance depends on how quickly after rotation is the speed set to Vx. Let the plane get a bit quicker than Vx during initial climb, and the take-off distance will increase.
The same applies for demonstrated crosswind. Most light aircrafts flying manuals do mention a demonstrated crosswind landing of 17 knots. This is not a formal limitation, but personally I will not try such a landing, except may be on a very long and 50 meters wide runway.
Another factor with a strong influence on performance is how the pilot is feeling... Try to fly once when tired, preferably with an instructor. You will be surprised how bad your technique could become.
At some stage, this can be compensated for by experience, but it is quite hard to evaluate your own experience. A poll in France shown that 85% of the interrogated private pilots do consider themselve as better than average pilots! Hardly true, isnt'it ? Nothing against french pilots here, I'm sure results would be equivalent anywhere.
Legal does not mean easy, nor feasible
It is legal to fly through a mountainous area in Echo airspace with a visibility of 1500 meters, or equivalent to 3o seconds of flight, as long as remaining clear of clouds. Doing so at 500ft above ground level is legal, if the area is not densly populated.
Can you imagine a high performance single (let's say a Bonanza), flying in 1500 meters visibility, 500 ft above ground in an alpine valley, zig-zaging to avoid clouds, at 170 knots ? Legal. That would be really stupid, and infinetly risky, but legal.
Don't expect any legal minimum to be enough for any pilot to be able to fly anywhere.
Have your own minimums
If you don't know your personal minimums for the time being, take time to define them next time you cancel a flight, and have time to spend.
It is not possible to establish GO / NO-GO criterions, because this will vary depending on the type of operation. What I suggest is to have some criterions to define when it is worth to do a deeper than superficial analysis of flying conditions.
My personal list includes specific figures, but also some environmental clues:
1) Any wind above 10 kts
2) Any visibility below 10km
3) Any ceiling below 1500 ft
4) Any temperature above 25°C
5) Clouds moving visibly
6) Birds hovering in wind
Any of this thing would lead me to a deeper analysis of the conditions before starting a flight. Establish your own list, and make it evolve with new experience, and you will simplify your decision making process by having strong basis.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Be the pilot in command - manage your safety pilot
The concept
When operating a single pilot airplane, having a second pilot on board can make the flight safer.
What is the key word in this sentence ? Safety ? Pilot ? Airplane ? No. The keyword is definetly "can".
In some cases, the presence of the second pilot does not improve safety, and it can even increase risk, sometimes leading to incidents. This post will treat of the interactions between the Pilot In Command (PIC) and the safety pilot. These roles have only few in common, and switching from one to the other is not so easy.
The PIC workload is quite heavy, whereas the safety pilot acts as observer only. He then has more time and brain available to analyse the situation, and interveine when he deems necessary. When to say about risk, and how to say it is not easy to define.
Who's the captain ?
Having a safety pilot on board does in no way change the duties of the pilot in command. He is sole resonsible of the safety of the aircraft and its passengers. When flying with a safety pilot, don't see him as an instructor, or a super-pilot able to get you out of any trouble. If you feel unsafe as PIC, don't wait for your safety pilot to ring the alarm bell before acting.
If you're the safety pilot, your role is clearly to draw the attention of the PIC to any risk, and make him understand what your worry is. But you can not expect, or force the PIC to act as you would all the time. Remind that he still is in charge of the flight. You should find a subtle balance amongst both pilots, so as to avoid any argue about the level of safety. A cockpit is not the proper place for that.
Be prepared
One of the key points with two pilots on board is to have a clear view of one's duties. Typically, you could as a PIC ask your safety pilot to manage ATC communication, or to tune frequencies for you. If flying IFR, you can ask him to call for minimums, or simply "runway in sight".
This way of working together must be defined before the flight, not in flight. Once again, a cockpit is not the good place for an argue.
I flew once an IFR approach with a safety pilot. We were VMC the whole approach but I was playing the game, keeping my eyes within. I did not brief my safety pilot before the fly as I should have, and when I was intercepting the track, he called "runway in sight". As a reflex, I had a look outside. Any IFR pilot knows how hard it is to return on the instruments when you looked out and saw the runway.
This call was a distraction to me, and I finished the approach visually. I'm not saying that my safety pilot was wrong on this flight. It was my duty as PIC to brief him on what I wanted him to do and not to do.
Do you hear or listen ?
As a PIC, it is sometimes hard to listen to your safety pilot. There is someting frustrating in the fact that your safety pilot says you're unsafe while you think you still are. Don't feel then that he does not trust you, or he is a coward. This kind of reaction will just anihilate the very reason why you took him with you. Instead, just re-think about what's going on, and check if you still feel safe.
Remind that the safety pilot has more time than you to analyse the situation as he is not in charge of the flight. Once again, you don't have to follow all his advisories, but if you remain deaf and closed to him, why have a safety pilot then ? For this reason, I will never act as safety pilot for some pilots I know, because they won't listen to me.
As a safety pilot, you need to give your opinion at a proper time, not when it is already too late or when the PIC is under heavy workload. Also try to give it in a non aggressive way, to avoid making the PIC upset, or feeling inferior.
The co-macho effect
Something else that can create additional risk when flying with a safety pilot is that if both PIC and safety pilot trust each other, they will both wait on an intervention of the other. This could make a risky situation degenerate to a very bad point.
Conclusions
If you're the PIC:
1) The flight responsibility is still yours, even if you have a safety pilot
2) Brief your safety pilot before the flight, and assign him clear duties
3) Be ready to hear from him, but if you don't feel safe, don't wait for him - do act, as PIC
4) Don't expect more that a warning from the safety pilot. He won't save you if you're doing really bad
If you are the safety pilot:
1) You're not the captain - don't attempt to take over his duties
2) If you feel unsafe, it is time for you to say it. Don't expect that PIC can do better than you
3) Give your opinion at the good time, and in a non-aggressive way
If you observe these tips, you should have lot of fun flying, be it as PIC or safety pilot
When operating a single pilot airplane, having a second pilot on board can make the flight safer.
What is the key word in this sentence ? Safety ? Pilot ? Airplane ? No. The keyword is definetly "can".
In some cases, the presence of the second pilot does not improve safety, and it can even increase risk, sometimes leading to incidents. This post will treat of the interactions between the Pilot In Command (PIC) and the safety pilot. These roles have only few in common, and switching from one to the other is not so easy.
The PIC workload is quite heavy, whereas the safety pilot acts as observer only. He then has more time and brain available to analyse the situation, and interveine when he deems necessary. When to say about risk, and how to say it is not easy to define.
Who's the captain ?
Having a safety pilot on board does in no way change the duties of the pilot in command. He is sole resonsible of the safety of the aircraft and its passengers. When flying with a safety pilot, don't see him as an instructor, or a super-pilot able to get you out of any trouble. If you feel unsafe as PIC, don't wait for your safety pilot to ring the alarm bell before acting.
If you're the safety pilot, your role is clearly to draw the attention of the PIC to any risk, and make him understand what your worry is. But you can not expect, or force the PIC to act as you would all the time. Remind that he still is in charge of the flight. You should find a subtle balance amongst both pilots, so as to avoid any argue about the level of safety. A cockpit is not the proper place for that.
Be prepared
One of the key points with two pilots on board is to have a clear view of one's duties. Typically, you could as a PIC ask your safety pilot to manage ATC communication, or to tune frequencies for you. If flying IFR, you can ask him to call for minimums, or simply "runway in sight".
This way of working together must be defined before the flight, not in flight. Once again, a cockpit is not the good place for an argue.
I flew once an IFR approach with a safety pilot. We were VMC the whole approach but I was playing the game, keeping my eyes within. I did not brief my safety pilot before the fly as I should have, and when I was intercepting the track, he called "runway in sight". As a reflex, I had a look outside. Any IFR pilot knows how hard it is to return on the instruments when you looked out and saw the runway.
This call was a distraction to me, and I finished the approach visually. I'm not saying that my safety pilot was wrong on this flight. It was my duty as PIC to brief him on what I wanted him to do and not to do.
Do you hear or listen ?
As a PIC, it is sometimes hard to listen to your safety pilot. There is someting frustrating in the fact that your safety pilot says you're unsafe while you think you still are. Don't feel then that he does not trust you, or he is a coward. This kind of reaction will just anihilate the very reason why you took him with you. Instead, just re-think about what's going on, and check if you still feel safe.
Remind that the safety pilot has more time than you to analyse the situation as he is not in charge of the flight. Once again, you don't have to follow all his advisories, but if you remain deaf and closed to him, why have a safety pilot then ? For this reason, I will never act as safety pilot for some pilots I know, because they won't listen to me.
As a safety pilot, you need to give your opinion at a proper time, not when it is already too late or when the PIC is under heavy workload. Also try to give it in a non aggressive way, to avoid making the PIC upset, or feeling inferior.
The co-macho effect
Something else that can create additional risk when flying with a safety pilot is that if both PIC and safety pilot trust each other, they will both wait on an intervention of the other. This could make a risky situation degenerate to a very bad point.
Conclusions
If you're the PIC:
1) The flight responsibility is still yours, even if you have a safety pilot
2) Brief your safety pilot before the flight, and assign him clear duties
3) Be ready to hear from him, but if you don't feel safe, don't wait for him - do act, as PIC
4) Don't expect more that a warning from the safety pilot. He won't save you if you're doing really bad
If you are the safety pilot:
1) You're not the captain - don't attempt to take over his duties
2) If you feel unsafe, it is time for you to say it. Don't expect that PIC can do better than you
3) Give your opinion at the good time, and in a non-aggressive way
If you observe these tips, you should have lot of fun flying, be it as PIC or safety pilot
Cleared for take-off
A long long time ago, I can still remember, I entered an aero-club, as a total newbie. 6 years and 300 hours flying hours later, I'm starting this blog to share some points about how safe this activity is, and what could be done to make it safer, if possible.
Beside that, I also developped quite a big interest about safety, safe and unsafe attitudes, inspection of incident / accident reports, and so on. I hope this experience and knowledge could be valuable to other pilots, and this is why I start this blog.
1) Know your performances and those of your aircraft
2) Manage weather and unusual conditions
3) Train enough to avoid getting rusty4) Collaborate with ATC the smart way
5) Resist the temptation6) Learn outside the cockpit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
