An Internet Attack On The Federal Air Surgeon

by Dr. Bill Blank, MD
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

Recently I have been getting questions from airmen about changes in the PR interval which the FAA will accept on an electrocardiogram (ECG). The PR interval is the time of electrical transmission during part of each heartbeat. The approved increase is 100 milliseconds (0.1 seconds). Some were concerned that this might indicate a health problem ignored by the FAA. They found this somewhere on the Internet. I discovered that this came from a biased, skewed, internet posting which attacked the Federal Air Surgeon, Dr. Susan Northrup, and advocated her resignation or removal from office. Some questioned whether the increased PR interval was due to the covid vaccine. The change in the acceptable PR interval was instituted in October 2018, well before the first covid vaccine was approved (December 2020). As I investigated this further, I realized that this was part of a long, venomous, vindictive posting with many errors.

The change in the PR interval was made upon the recommendation of a panel of cardiologists who felt that this change would be of no aeromedical significance. The idea was eliminating the need for a full cardiac work up in the absence of any other cardiac issue, thus reducing delays in certification and cost to the airman. This decision was made by the Federal Air Surgeon on the recommendation of cardiologists.

The author of the Internet post also discusses the covid vaccine and blames Dr. Northrup for mandating the requirement for covid vaccination. This was required before she ever became the Federal Air Surgeon. This is part of the author’s justification for demanding her resignation or removal. He blames the covid vaccine for killing several pilots. I don’t believe this. I know of several pilots who had severe covid and were on respirators but recovered. I know of none who died from the vaccine. Neither do any of my Aviation Medical Examiner (AME) colleagues.

I attended several ZOOM meetings with well-respected AMEs to discuss this issue. Covid cases are over-counted. There is a recent Wall Street Journal article on the subject. This makes the disease seem worse than it is. I am not underestimating how serious and deadly it can be, but many people who test positive have mild or no symptoms and recover without treatment. From my point of view, as a physician, that’s a good kind of disease to have! I wish more diseases were like that.

The author of the Internet posting is an MIT graduate, millionaire, and entrepreneur. According to Gary Crump of AOPA, this individual formed a company to identify existing medications to treat Covid-19. He apparently claimed there was a conspiracy against one of the medications causing all of the firm’s scientific advisors to resign. More recently he is reported to have stated that the covid vaccines are toxic. The publication “MIT Technology Review 2021” reported that this individual claimed at a Federal Drug Administration (FDA) public forum “that the vaccines kill more people than they save.” I understand that the board of his most recent startup company, told him he would have to stop making public anti-vaccine statements to remain part of the company. He resigned as CEO and gave up his board seat. This certainly explains to me his point of view and his extreme statements.

I have been an AME for 45 years. In my opinion, Dr. Northrup has been the most forward-looking Federal Air Surgeon we have had since I have been an AME. There have been many improvements in the certification process in the two years she has held this post. She is a pilot and retired U.S. Air Force Colonel. She was a medical officer at Delta Airlines before working for many years as the Regional Flight Surgeon in Atlanta. Her husband is a retired airline pilot. It would be a shame to lose her. I doubt there is anyone more qualified who would be appointed as her replacement. Sadly, she has been “doxed.” For those of you who don’t know the term, it means her home address and phone number have been given out for purpose of harassment. It’s a shame anyone should be subjected to this abuse. She needs our support. One of my patients told me, “Anyone can post something on the Internet and some idiots will believe it.” Unfortunately, this is sometimes true.

For those of you interested in reading more on the subject, here are two links:
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2023/january/25/federal-air-surgeon-takes-on-tough-issues

https://www.avweb.com/uncategorized/are-covid-vaccines-injuring-pilots-you-tell-us/

EDITOR’S NOTE: Columnist William A. Blank is a physician in La Crosse, Wisconsin, and has been an Aviation Medical Examiner (AME) since 1978, and a Senior AME since 1985. Dr. Blank is a retired Ophthalmologist, but still gives some of the ophthalmology lectures at AME renewal seminars. Flying-wise, Dr. Blank holds an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate and has 6000 hours. He is a Certified Flight Instructor – Instrument (CFII) and has given over 1200 hours of aerobatic instruction. In addition, Dr. Blank was an airshow performer through the 2014 season and has held a Statement of Aerobatic Competency (SAC) since 1987. He was inducted into the Wisconsin Aviation Hall of Fame in 2021.

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author only, and readers are advised to seek the advice of others, including their own AME, and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations and FAA Aeronautical Information Manual for additional information and clarification.

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, High On Health | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pardon Our Dust: Annual Airport Construction Update

by Hal Davis
WisDOT Bureau of Aeronautics
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

Paving Runway 01/19 at Price County Airport.
Photo courtesy of Becher-Hoppe Associates, Inc.

Anyone living in Wisconsin, or the Midwest for that matter, knows that the weather dictates many aspects of life. The old joke is, we have two seasons, winter, and road construction. On the airport though, the construction season is year-round. During the warmer months, crews often work into the night to avoid impacting airport users and to get all pavement work done before the days turn cold. Conversely, the cold winter months are the ideal time to tackle tree trimming and removal to ensure approach areas are free from obstructions. The frozen ground minimizes environmental impacts and is healthier for the trees. This past winter, trees were trimmed and removed at Amery, Ashland, Prairie du Chien, Price County, and Tomahawk airports as part of a unique state-funded program to restore and maintain existing instrument flight procedures in conjunction with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) initiatives. In total, the Wisconsin Bureau of Aeronautics (BOA) funded projects at 34 airports last year. Included were 21 construction projects, eight equipment projects, three land projects, four planning projects, and design work for an additional 20 future projects.

2022 Recap

Newly raised and reconstructed Runway 9/27 at Tri-County Regional Airport, along with water management improvements. Photo courtesy of Westwood

In 2019, rumors about closing the often-flooded Tri-County Regional Airport in Lone Rock percolated throughout our Wisconsin aviation community following an especially bad flood. Fortunately, this past summer a major project to alleviate future flooding was completed. The project reconstructed and raised the elevation of Runway 09/27. Perhaps more significantly, several water management improvements were made both on and off the airport to ensure proper drainage.

Perimeter fence at Stevens Point.
Photo courtesy of Westwood.

Elsewhere in Wisconsin, major runway reconstruction projects were completed at Boyceville Municipal Airport, Dodge County Airport, Fond du Lac County Airport, Iowa County Airport, Price County Airport, and Stevens Point Municipal Airport. No matter where you fly in Wisconsin, a freshly paved runway with bright new lights isn’t far away.

After over 10 years or planning and coordination, a 5.5-mile-long perimeter fence was finally installed at Stevens Point Municipal Airport in 2022. The fence should help keep terrestrial wildlife off an airport that has a history of wildlife strikes. The project was especially complicated due to the need to relocate a very popular recreational trail and access road.

Hangar, and hangar area improvements, were also completed at Burlington, Manitowish Waters, and Oconto airports, and fuel farm upgrades were made at Baraboo and Wisconsin Rapids.

2023 Outlook

This summer is shaping up to be as busy as ever with several notable construction projects around the state. Runway rehabilitation projects are expected at Central Wisconsin, Green Bay, Mauston, Merrill, and West Bend. Some readers may recall that Central Wisconsin recently finished reconstructing Runway 17/35. The project will now shift attention to reconstructing Runway 08/26. The project will also decouple the runways by shifting Runway 08/26 further east, thereby fixing an infamous “hot spot,” and improving airfield safety.

Apron improvements are planned for Appleton, Merrill, Monroe, and New Richmond this summer, while hangar, or hangar area improvements, are planned at Chippewa Valley, Kenosha, Lancaster, Platteville, and Wittman Regional Airport in Oshkosh. In addition, the multi-year, $85 million south terminal expansion project at Dane County Regional Airport is expected to wrap up later this year. Meanwhile in Rhinelander, new boarding bridges will be installed.

Many of these projects will result in temporary and long-term runway closures. As always, check Notices to Air Missions (NOTAMs) before your flight to make sure there are no unwelcomed surprises. For more information on past and future airport development projects, including the Bureau of Aeronautics’ Five-Year Airport Improvement Program, visit the Wisconsin Department of Transportation website at wisconsindot.gov and type in “airport five-year plan” in the search bar or call (608) 266-3351.

 

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, Wisconsin Aeronautics Report | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

GAMA President & CEO Testifies Before Congress Regarding FAA Reauthorization & Safety

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On February 7, 2023, Pete Bunce, General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) President and CEO, testified before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in a hearing entitled: “FAA Reauthorization: Maintaining America’s Gold Standard In Aviation Safety.”

In his testimony, Bunce conveyed that all aviation stakeholders need to work together to plot and navigate the industry’s future path for safety and innovation. He also expressed that action be taken to reverse the current trends that are tarnishing the U.S. as the gold standard in aviation safety. The next FAA reauthorization bill should facilitate a robust FAA oversight process that delivers safety and technology improvements in the most effective manner possible. Additionally, he commended Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen for prioritizing the input and work needed to put together an FAA reauthorization bill at the outset of the 118th Congress.

During the hearing, Bunce highlighted a 90-day review of FAA’s regulatory processes to reduce inefficiencies and enhance safety and innovation; investments in FAA’s technical capabilities including training; increased agency focus on aviation safety bilateral agreements and validation delays; business aviation’s commitment to net-zero carbon emissions and the support needed to advance the industry’s sustainability goals; the Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions (EAGLE) initiative to ensure a safe and sound transition to unleaded fuels; improvements to the Notice to Air Missions (NOTAM) system; and efforts to strengthen the industry’s workforce.

Posted in All Headlines, April/May 2023, Government/Legislation, Headlines, Headlines | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Power of Partnerships

by Mark Baker
AOPA President & CEO
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

We all know there is no tighter-knit community than ours in general aviation. We share a great passion for flying, and we have a fierce and common bond to promote and protect this freedom to fly. Wherever we go, we are among friends. There’s simply nothing else like it anywhere.

I have said it many times that there is nothing I love more than to be out and about across this great nation meeting our members, sharing stories of aviation, listening to their concerns, and giving our community an important voice in our work.

But this connection and commitment to GA goes far beyond individual aviators. In my years at AOPA, I have seen first-hand that the strength of our community lies in the power of partnership among like-minded associations and organizations, companies and other groups, all with a collective focus on keeping GA vibrant for years to come.

We may have distinct members and customers, and sometimes even missions, but GA is more powerful when we stand together as partners.

Partnership is a key word for AOPA. Not only do we appreciate our members, who allow us to do what we do, but we treasure the relationships we have with a variety of organizations – all under the banner of promoting and protecting general aviation. Whether it’s our business partners, fellow general aviation organizations, type clubs, local airport officials and those groups with a specific aviation connection – we stand strong as one.

Great partnerships happen when people and organizations are aligned in their values and mission.

I am especially grateful for our business partners at AOPA. With the help of our strategic partners – Aero-Space Reports, Aircraft Spruce, AssuredPartners Aerospace, Boeing, Breitling, California Aeronautical University, PilotWorkshops, SiriusXM, and Sporty’s – our collective goal is to help keep flying safer and a bit more affordable. The support of our other corporate partners, advertisers and event exhibitors, many of whom provide valued member benefits, allows our GA community to stay vibrant and accessible.

General aviation is also much stronger thanks to the sense of community among the major GA associations, all of whom share our strong commitment to the health of our industry. I salute my partners at General Aviation Manufacturers Association, Experimental Aircraft Association, National Business Aviation Association, National Air Transportation Association, Helicopter Association International, American Association of Airport Executives, and National Association of State Aviation Officials for their ongoing commitment to keeping our passion thriving and accessible.

This gratitude also extends to our colleagues at the Federal Aviation Administration. We may not always see eye to eye on important issues, but I know that our partners at the FAA have the best interests of the GA community at heart. We’re aligned on more issues with the FAA than not.

Having flown many different types of aircraft, I have become a member of – and friends with – type clubs that share a passion for a wide variety of airplanes. There’s an airplane for every type of flying, and there’s a type club for virtually every airplane. I invite you to check these groups out and become a part of something special within something special.

Protecting your freedom to fly all comes down to the vibrancy of our more than 5,500 public-use airports across the country. Airport executives – and local officials who support our airports – are great partners in this mission to safeguard GA. We’re only as strong as the health of our local airports, and I thank everyone on the ground for allowing us to explore so many special places by air.

And speaking of local advocacy, I also can’t think of better partners in this passion than our own Airport Support Network (ASN) volunteers. Now well north of 2,000 members – and celebrating their 25th anniversary – our ASN volunteers serve as our eyes and ears at local airports, and are often our early-warning system for emerging issues at many GA airports across the country. An adjunct to the work that our Regional Managers do on a daily basis, the commitment of our ASN volunteer network is invaluable in helping us protect your freedom to fly.

AOPA plays a major role in promoting this wonderful passion we call flying. But we can’t do it alone; our partnership with hundreds, if not thousands, of other constituents makes our job of protecting your freedom to fly that much easier. Blue skies to all!

www.aopa.org                     800-872-2672

Posted in AOPA, April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, From AOPA Headquarters | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Who is the Teacher?

by Dean Zakos
© Dean Zakos 2023. All Rights Reserved.
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

“When one teaches, two learn.” – Robert Heinlein

I am sitting, perhaps a little too casually, in the right seat of a Cessna 172 Skyhawk. In the left seat is a young man about to attempt a power-on stall. We are in the practice area, with the airport we departed from on the distant horizon. After two ninety-degree clearing turns, we remain at 2,000 feet above ground level, with just a few scattered clouds above us on a beautiful, late spring day. I have talked through the procedure numerous times and have demonstrated the maneuver for him just a moment ago. Now, it is his turn.

He reduces the throttle to 1500 RPM. Holding altitude, the airspeed needle approaches 70 knots. I ask him to go to full power, remind him to use some right rudder to maintain heading, and pitch the nose up. The stall warning horn comes on. We see only clouds and sky above the instrument panel. “Keep pulling back,” I advise. There is a buffet, then the stall breaks and the nose slices down through the horizon. The left wing dips. Suddenly, it drops out of sight, and we wing over into a spin.

I did not catch it in time.

Loose objects float through the air. The earth, a patchwork of fields, small ponds, and country roads, now fills the windshield – and it is rotating. Did he apply right aileron hoping to pick up the left wing? Did he intentionally put pressure on left rudder? Using my eyes, I was following through with him on the controls. What did I miss? No time to think about that now.

“My airplane,” I say calmly. “Your airplane,” he blurts out excitedly as he relinquishes the controls. Quickly pulling the power to idle, I return the ailerons to neutral, touch the right rudder pedal to counteract the direction of the spin, and then push forward on the yoke. Once flying speed is regained, I begin to raise the nose of the Skyhawk back to level flight and advance the throttle. We did about a spin and a half before recovering. This does not happen often to me but, over the years, it has happened once or twice before. “Let’s try that stall and recovery again,” I say reassuringly to my student.

I am a Certified Flight Instructor. I am not “building time.” I am not planning on an eventual airline career. I simply want to teach people to fly. I have always wanted to do that. I gladly would do it full time if I could, but I need a job that pays (with benefits) to make life financially stable for myself. So, during the week I am gainfully employed elsewhere, but that vocation allows me to sit in an airplane and instruct on weekends and some evenings. You can guess which job I enjoy more. I have been told it shows.

I have shared with a few close friends that when I started out instructing many years ago, I should have paid my first five students instead of them paying me. I learned that much – and I am still learning with every flight.

I was interested in flight almost from the beginning of my life, starting with small gliders made of styrofoam or balsa wood purchased for me by my grandfather at the local Ben Franklin store. When I was eight years old, I had a paper route that allowed me to make a little money. Naturally, when I saved up enough, I brought home from the hobby shop a line-controlled, gas-powered Fairchild PT19 model with a blue fuselage and yellow wings. Over long summer days, I spun myself dizzy as the small, low-wing aircraft, colorful and noisy against the clear sky, made tethered circles around me in a vacant field. I always imagined that it was me inside the cockpit at the controls of that PT19.

Someday, I thought.

As a sophomore in college, a complete stranger in one of my classes approached me and asked if I would like to go flying. That was my first flight in a small plane. The college offered a flight training program, and I signed up as soon as I could. In fact, I signed up for every aviation class offered. I trained in a Piper Warrior. Received my Private Pilot Certificate in 1980.

In 1982, I ran into a health issue and could not renew my Third-Class Medical Certificate. I bought a kit and built a Rotec Rally 2B+ ultralight, happily operating my “flying lawn chair” to satisfy my aviation fix. In 1990, I obtained my Glider Rating, flying a Blanik L13. I also added a Commercial Glider Pilot Certificate in a Blanik L23. Gliders provided the bridge I needed to continue to fly until my medical could get sorted out.

In 1997, I was able to obtain a Third-Class Special Issuance Medical Certificate. The grounding of all VFR aircraft after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack in New York gave me the incentive to train for my Instrument Rating. That was in 2002. Two years later, I received my commercial ticket, and two years after that, my instructor certificate. I think, in many ways, I have managed to have it all. My day job affords me a living, and my instructing job not only makes flying financially possible, but it puts a little money in my pocket.

I am living the dream whenever I am flying.

Back on the ramp, I talk with my student about the tasks just completed and the series of stalls and recoveries we worked on. We debrief the just-concluded flight, particularly the stall/spin (he did mistakenly jab the left rudder at the stall break), the aerodynamics of the stall becoming a spin, and ways the student can improve performance for the next lesson. The student asks good questions and, despite the unplanned excitement, is engaged and looking forward to going up again.

Flight instructors, over time, should become skilled at reading people, particularly their own students. Not everyone learns in the same way. In addition to understanding the Federal Aviation Regulations, and having the necessary flying skills, a high emotional IQ is a definite plus when teaching someone to fly. What is the personality of my student? How will the student best learn the concepts I must ensure they understand? What motivates him or her? What concerns does he or she have? What do I need to do to see that success is achieved?

I suppose it is similar to being a coach of an athletic team. I have to be perceptive enough to know when someone is on their game or when they are not at their best. I need to give encouragement when deserved and constructive criticism when warranted.

I have taught many students from different walks of life. Although no two students are alike, I can venture to make some generalizations.

Engineers easily “get” the aerodynamics of flight, but sometimes drive me crazy because they are so precise. Where a short answer suffices with most students, engineers want all the details. Dentists are also detail oriented, as are lawyers. Doctors and CEOs have been some of my worst students. Not all. It is a mixed bag. There are those who have college or professional degrees or have attained status in the business world and, sometimes, they want to tell me how to fly. A few want only to meet minimum standards, and quickly, so they can add the Private Pilot Certificate to their impressive list of accomplishments. Young people, especially teenagers, can be the easiest to teach. Whether someone is a plumber or a PhD, if they bring passion and commitment, I can teach them to fly.

Aggressiveness and overconfidence are simple to spot in a student and, often, are correctable. It can be much more difficult for an instructor to recognize fear. A student may be adept, for a while at least, at hiding his or her fear. It can masquerade as a reluctance, or a deferral, or conceal itself behind a false projection of bravado. Often it only makes itself known in the moment, as I step out of the airplane after informing the student he or she is ready to do some take-offs and landings without me sitting at their side; or when performing a stall, when the nose drops, and the student, instead of reacting, curls up into a fetal position in the left seat; or when a student freezes in the landing flare, unresponsive and staring out into space, as we are rapidly losing airspeed and eating up runway eight feet in the air.

I have lost some good pilot friends to accidents over the years. If you fly, you probably have lost some friends too. The statistics, trending over time, show that general aviation pilots are as safe or safer now than they have ever been. However, there will always be risk in flight. It can never be completely eliminated. It can be mitigated but, if a pilot makes a serious mistake, the result can be unforgiving and tragic. I tell my students exactly that.

Risk will not deter me from fulfilling my dream and doing what I love. I do not pretend to understand life’s mysteries or the cruel reality of random chance. I can only control what I can control. I must put my faith and trust in my own knowledge, my flying skills and experience, and the airplane I fly, come what may.

I think the first few lessons are the most critical for my students. Understanding and learning maneuvers – climbs, turns, straight and level flight, and descents – set them up with the fundamentals they need for everything that comes after. I prefer to teach in a tailwheel aircraft or a high-wing aircraft, as it makes it easier for the student to see things like adverse yaw in an uncoordinated turn. Do not get me wrong… I like flying low-wing aircraft. But give me a Piper J-3 Cub or an Aeronca Chief, or a Cessna 152 or 172, for primary instruction.

It is the middle of a Saturday for me, a day that started with my first lesson at 8:00 am and continuing with the current lesson, having commenced at 10:00 am, just concluding now. I am going to grab a bite to eat, and then prepare for the next appointment in the book at 2:30 pm. My wife, who is understanding and supportive of what I do, will meet me at the FBO with a brown bag lunch she prepared. Later in the day, I am scheduled for a Flight Review with a pilot in his beautifully restored Cub flying off a nearby grass strip. If you instruct, you know. There is ample downtime in many flight instructors’ schedules. Equipment failures, 100-hour inspections, weather, scheduling conflicts, and no shows are, if not a constant, at least a normal part of teaching student pilots in the general aviation world.

I enjoy endorsing my students’ logbooks for their checkrides. My pleasure comes from my confidence in, and expectation that, my students will do well. I let them know that the Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE) is not going to be looking for ways to fail them, but for ways to pass them. A DPE should, within the limits of the Airman Certification Standards, want the student to succeed. I certainly do. When one of my students passes the checkride, I want to be able to say to myself, and to know in my heart, that I did all I possibly could to provide that new pilot with everything he or she needs to fly safely and competently.

I am asked to do quite a few Flight Reviews. Tricycle gear, taildraggers, complex, low-wing, high-wing, experimentals, antiques, classics – I have experience in all of them. Generally, I can tell by the time we start rolling down the runway if a pilot is proficient and he or she will meet the standards. Does he use checklists? Does she understand the systems in the aircraft she is flying? Apply right rudder when going to full power? If I ask about airspace or operating regulations, do I receive mostly a blank stare? I can easily decipher who is motivated to become a better pilot, and who is disinterested, seeking only the sign-off, secretly hoping they are quizzed, and pressed, and challenged on the ground and in the air, as little as possible. If a pilot cannot meet the standards, I cannot and will not sign them off.

I am sometimes asked if I ever tire of doing “touch and goes” in the pattern. Here is my answer.

I am sitting in the right seat again. My student is doing touch and goes. We have been practicing them for a few weeks. From her first lesson, she has been eager and capable. She shows up, on time and prepared, and is ready for each anticipated task or maneuver. She has done the homework.

It is late in the afternoon. The setting sun makes long, dark shadows of trees and buildings on the ground below as we fly over. Rays of soft light are illuminating the rear and side windows of the Skyhawk’s cockpit. As we turn downwind, sunlight and shadows dapple and shape-shift as they move around the interior walls and across the instrument panel.

At pattern altitude, there is a little wind from the south, about five to seven knots. Will she notice it? She does. She causes the nose of the aircraft to move to the right a few degrees, crabbing the aircraft into the wind to correct for the drift. Her track keeps the C172 neatly parallel to the runway. There will be a tailwind when she turns base. Will she anticipate it and compensate? She does, making the base to final turn early so that, as she levels out, she is directly on the extended runway centerline. I have not said a word to her but, sitting next to her with my arms folded across my chest, I smiled as she made each correct decision.

On short final, completely in control of airspeed and rate of descent, she says to me over the intercom, “I know I have the runway made. I’m going to close the throttle.” “You are the Pilot in Command,” I respond. She slowly closes the throttle and, a moment later, we are gliding over the runway threshold and into the flare. Left wing slightly low, she uses rudder to stay centered and aileron to manage any drift. She is neither too hurried nor too casual. She allows speed to drain off, then barely increases the pitch angle. The spring-steel mains of the Cessna touch gently and quietly. She holds the pitch angle for a moment, then the nose wheel kisses the pavement’s centerline.

Her pattern, radio work, and landing were close to perfect. I taught her that.

“Okay,” I say. “How about another one.” Flaps up, trim set, throttle deftly to full power, right rudder, we are once again climbing into the early evening sky.

That is why I never tire of pattern work.

When my students are successful, I feel that I am successful. I believe the work I do at my small airport, although often perceived by the public as an incidental and insignificant part of the aviation world, is extremely important. Good primary flight instruction is fundamental to everything a pilot does thereafter. It is the foundation for student pilots – and for the entire GA system. Good skills, good habits, and good judgment start with a primary flight instructor.

Many of my students have gone on to success in aviation – additional ratings and endorsements, commercial or corporate careers, the military, and ATPs flying for the airlines. I know I will never be in the hall of fame, but I am pleased to have chosen to be an essential part of aviation.

Rumor has it that a former student of mine, now flying as a Captain for United Airlines, recently purchased a Fairchild PT19, blue with yellow wings, to have some fun on weekends.

I think I will give him a call and ask if he wants to go flying.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Dean Zakos (Private Pilot ASEL, Instrument) of Madison, Wisconsin, is the author of “Laughing with the Wind, Practical Advice and Personal Stories from a General Aviation Pilot.” Mr. Zakos has also written numerous short stories and flying articles for Midwest Flyer Magazine and other aviation publications.

DISCLAIMER: Mr. Zakos’ articles involve creative writing, and therefore the information presented may be fictional in nature, and should not be used for flight, or misconstrued as instructional material. Readers are urged to always consult with their personal flight instructor and others about anything discussed herein.

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, Flying & Flight Experiences | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Birth of Button-ology

by Michael J. “Mick” Kaufman
© Copyright 2023. All rights reserved!
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

In thinking back to the days of rotating a knob to change a frequency, and rotating the azimuth on a VOR indicator, it really was simple. All VORs were the same regardless of the manufacturer, whether it was King, Narco, Collins or Bendix. I think “button-ology” came upon us gradually. First, there were flip-flop radios with buttons, then CDIs that had digital readouts with buttons to select to or from on. The Loran era is where big changes took place. I installed an Apollo 618 in my Bonanza and, wow, what a device that was. I flew home from the avionics shop thinking I had the world’s most sophisticated airplane.

My next flight with the box was in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) and I could hardly wait! All went well until ATC called “Bonanza 38 Yankee, we have an amendment to your routing… Advise when ready to copy.” After several failed attempts to amend my routing on the Apollo 618, I switched off that marvelous box, set in the proper VOR frequency, and rotated the Omni Bearing Selector (OBS) and it worked! After that embarrassing situation, I spent many hours on the ground learning the box which then served me well for many years to come… I should say instead, until the government decommissioned the Loran system in the U.S.

In a previous issue of Midwest Flyer Magazine, I wrote about working with a BPT client at a clinic. We could not find a menu to switch from GPS to the VOR Localizer (VLOC) to do an ILS approach, and the unit was not configured to auto switch, which is a user selectable item. We finally found the menu item several layers embedded in the Garmin GI-275 Indicator – not in the Garmin 750 Navigator as might be expected. When we talk about button-ology, it must be understood that we have hard keys and soft keys that can be used to change functions or menus.

On the legacy Garmin 430/530, we had a hard key to switch between GPS and VLOC. Having a hard key means there is one dedicated button that does one function. On the new Garmin 650/750 radios, the GPS/VLOC button is a soft key. So, why soft keys? As more menus and functions are added to a device, there is not enough room on the device for more buttons or space is limited on the touch screen display.

The first time I was faced with making the switch from GPS to VLOC on the Garmin 650, I had an issue finding the button as it was not present on its many menus. This is a function that is used a lot, and if Garmin decided to make it a soft key, it should be accessible from every menu page on the radio.

When we were introduced to Loran navigators several decades ago, we started seeing soft keys appearing and many functions were only available from certain menus.

My Bonanza has a Garmin 480 installed, and it has many soft keys and requires a totally different flow when programming, compared to the Garmin 430/530 structure. The 430/530 structure pretty much carried over to the newer 650/750 navigators. The programming structure of the Garmin 480 is based on the Flight Management System (FMS) used in the heavy iron aircraft and is difficult to use by people who normally use the Garmin 430/530 programming structure.

We see pilots continue to upgrade their avionics and to this day, I wonder what they are trying to achieve, aside from bragging rights for having the newest and coolest avionics. The Garmin 430/530 has almost everything that is useful, in my opinion, except for airways and custom-built holding patterns. (The Garmin 480 in my aircraft also has these functions.) We have found that round gauges are easier to use than tapes when hand-flying – a fact that cannot be disputed. So, what are those special items that entice pilots to upgrade their avionics?

First, there is support from the manufacturer. One hates to have a box that cannot be repaired, and we know from experience that this does happen. The Garmin 480 had the end-of-life support from Garmin several years ago. I purchased and still have a spare box in my closet should my unit fail. The Garmin 430/530 boxes are also end-of-life avionics.

There are some true avionics shops that will do field repairs on end-of-life avionics IF parts are available. I owned and operated a two-way radio shop for several years, working on public safety radios, so I have a lot of respect for those shops that can still repair our legacy avionics. Currently, there is a major chip shortage, however. With computer chips in short supply, our avionics shops cannot get radios. This is true with the automotive industry as well. Kenwood, a major manufacturer of public safety and amateur radio equipment, is almost out of business due to the chip shortage. According to a friend of mine who designed chips for a living, it takes about 6 weeks to set up for a chip run at the factory, so a lot of proprietary chips for custom projects are too expensive to duplicate.

Another reason we find pilots upgrading their avionics is for features they “think” they need. Many of these items were available as add-ons to their current avionics, such as “altitude preselect.” I do not have altitude pre-select as I have seen them fail way too often, mostly because of not being set up correctly by the pilot.

Many avionics packages cannot be updated, such as the Garmin G1000 package, which is a system designed to operate together and only minor firmware changes can be made. The advantage of this system is that all components have been time tested and play very well together. The airlines are the last ones to do updates to their fleet and, surprisingly, many of the airlines do not have GPS.

A pilot flying a Boeing 737 MAX can go from one 737 MAX to another, and all of the equipment will be the same. The Southwest Airlines fleet is identical as the airline only flys the Boeing 737, so they do not have the problem many airlines have with larger fleets of both Boeing and Airbus aircraft. Airlines with aircraft from the same manufacturer, like Southwest, greatly simplify training and training costs.

Aircraft owners who do those $100K avionics upgrades, also need to get trained on their new equipment. Where are those menus hidden? How do I do this and that? Did the avionics shop set it up properly? Did I keep that old legacy KFC-200 autopilot to save money, only to find out it does not interface well with my two Garmin G-275s?

Keep in mind from my previous columns in Midwest Flyer Magazine, do not fly in IMC until you totally understand your new equipment or when firmware has been updated.

In my experiences with modern avionics, I do not recall seeing any equipment that has more than four (4) layers of menus. This means when we hit a soft key, it brings up a new menu, and if we push that same button, it brings up another menu. A soft key can be an actual button or an icon on a touch screen.

By using touch screen technology, the avionics manufacturer can display more functions per page, thus requiring fewer layers to find the desired menu. I love touch screen technology for programming on the ground, but during flight in turbulence, it is almost impossible to make changes to a flight plan. Thanks to Avidyne for giving the pilot a choice between dedicated buttons in turbulence and touch screens on the ground.

Once while flying in turbulence, I descended 1000 feet below my assigned altitude while attempting to insert a new waypoint on a touch screen display. It was my determination and frustration to get that waypoint added that got the best of my thought process.

Buttonology is here to stay and as pilots, we need to learn our navigators and autopilots well. Look for a flight instructor who really knows his/her stuff, to help you train on your new equipment, as it is difficult and takes many hours to become proficient enough to fly in hard IMC. The problem is, there are so many boxes and autopilots with different setups on the market, that most flight instructors cannot know all of them, and most avionics shops provide limited instruction.

Please don’t jeopardize safety until you thoroughly know your equipment!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Michael J. “Mick” Kaufman is a Certified Instrument Flight Instructor (CFII) and the program manager of flight operations with the “Bonanza/Baron Pilot Training” organization. He conducts pilot clinics and specialized instruction throughout the U.S. in many makes and models of aircraft, which are equipped with a variety of avionics. Mick is based in Richland Center (93C) and Eagle River, Wisconsin (KEGV). He was named “FAA’s Safety Team Representative of the Year” for Wisconsin in 2008. Readers are encouraged to email questions to captmick@me.com, or call
817-988-0174.

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author only, and readers are advised to seek the advice of their personal flight instructor and others, and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations, FAA Aeronautical Information Manual, and instructional materials before attempting any procedures discussed herein.

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, Instrument Flight | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The balancing act… When should an instructor take the controls?

by Richard Morey
© Copyright 2023. All rights reserved!
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

So often flight instructors (CFIs and CFIIs) will observe their students – whether a licensed pilot or student – make mistakes, or get into a predicament, and rather than allow the pilot time to realize the situation, the CFI – who is paid to observe and educate – jumps in to instantly correct the student, oftentimes disrupting the student’s thought processes, and consequently their learning moment.

If the mistake is not going to result in an accident, especially in the case of training a licensed, highly experienced pilot who is receiving recurrent training (i.e., biennial flight review or instrument proficiency check), maybe it’s better to let the pilot realize their mistake or predicament and work out a solution on their own. I would agree, but life is not always black and white. The decision as to when the instructor should step in is a balancing act. This article will explore the factors that go into an instructor’s decision to take the controls, and when to allow the student time to figure it out on their own. The legality of who is pilot-in-command will also be discussed. Several strategies as to how to get the most out of one’s training will also be offered. At the end of this article, both student and instructor will have tools to make instruction both more efficient and more enjoyable for both parties.

Why would an instructor take the controls?

The safety of the student and instructor takes precedence over all other factors. A flight instructor must take control when in their judgement not doing so will lead to an unsafe situation. This can be as straight forward as taking the controls to avoid flying in close proximity to other traffic. It can also be subtle, and not recognized by the student. Arguing with a student during a flight as to what they should do to avoid a dangerous situation is NOT a good training strategy. There are times when safety requires an instructor to act first and explain latter. An instructor should take the controls when in their judgement there is a good likelihood that not doing so will result in violating airspace, violating regulations, or cause an unsafe situation.

Few would dispute the need for an instructor to keep himself/herself and their student safe, to keep the equipment from getting “bent,” and to avoid violating regulations. Where disagreements can arise is in the instructor’s timing or judgement as to when to intercede.

Factors that go into when a flight instructor takes the controls.

Instructor experience and confidence in a pilot’s abilities are the biggest factors in deciding when he/she takes over the controls. An experienced instructor generally is better at knowing just how far they can let a student go until they must take over. Experience in the aircraft is very important as well. An instructor who knows Cessna aircraft but is now teaching in a relatively unknown Piper or Mooney which is owned by the customer, will not be as comfortable in that aircraft. One hundred (100) hours is about the minimum to really get comfortable in a different aircraft, especially with the variety of avionics now available. Until the instructor reaches that comfort level, they will be more inclined to take the controls, rather than allow a situation to develop into a potential problem.

Student “competence” is a big factor in deciding when an instructor steps in. A pre-solo student will not be allowed to take the aircraft as far into a questionable situation, as will a more experienced pilot whom the instructor has flown with previously. Letting an inexperienced student develop bad habits is not conducive to effective teaching, thus the instructor will step in earlier to demonstrate good practices.

Aircraft “type” is another factor. Consider landings. An experienced instructor might allow much more deviation from good practices in a tricycle gear aircraft than in a taildragger. Twin-engine aircraft are another example of aircraft an instructor should not allow to be flown too far out of good practices. Simply stated, the more difficult/complex an aircraft is to land or takeoff, the less leeway there is available to the instructor. Or to put it another way, if the “disaster factor” is high, then the instructor should take over earlier, than if the consequences of allowing the student to continue, are acceptable. An instructor can accept a poor ground reference maneuver, but not a poor landing.

“Environment” is a factor as well. Landing on a 10,000 ft. runway gives the instructor and student more options, than a back-country gravel strip. Flying instruments on a clearance requires earlier intervention by the flight instructor versus flying the same approach in visual conditions without a clearance. Both students and instructors should keep these factors in mind.

Who is pilot in command?

In a conventional training situation, the flight instructor is pilot-in-command. What that means is that he or she will fill out the accident report in the unlikely event that one is required. In addition, the instructor will face any penalties of violating airspace or regulations that occur during the training flight. This is the case during a “flight review” as well. With these factors in mind, the flight instructor teaches their students. Thus, the balancing act between letting a student gain experience and avoiding a mishap.

At the beginning of any training flight, the student and the flight instructor must both understand that at times the flight instructor may be taking the controls. It must be clear in advance how the transfer of controls will be conducted. Stating, acknowledging, and verifying the transfer is standard, as in “I have the flight controls” by the instructor, followed by “you have the flight controls” by the student who is relinquishing the controls, followed by a verification by the instructor, “I have the flight controls.”

Those words were never better spoken than on January 15, 2009, when Captain Chesley Burnett “Sully” III assumed control of the Airbus A320-21 from First Officer and Wisconsin native, Jeffrey Skiles, after the aircraft departed New York’s LaGuardia Airport and hit a flock of Canada Geese, damaging the engines (US Airways Flight 1549). Capt. Sullenberger successfully landed in the Hudson River without a fatality. See article entitled “Miracle on the Hudson, or Pilot Skill?” by Dave Weiman on the Midwest Flyer Magazine website: (https://midwestflyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/MFM_AprilMay09.pdf). A podcast of that interview which took place on February 20, 2009, is also available on the website: https://midwestflyer.com/?p=753.

When time is critical, the transfer of control may consist of “Your airplane” by the student, followed by “My airplane” or “I’ve got it” from the instructor. In more time-critical situations, the instructor may simply take the controls and explain the reason when time allows.

In theory, letting a student continue with a mistake and letting him figure it out may be useful in training, but in practice, it may not. Beginning students need to have best practices reinforced. Allowing poor and counterproductive practices to continue reinforces mistakes. How the corrective action is applied is perhaps more important than the action itself. Any degrading or shaming action taken by the flight instructor is counterproductive. A student is – afterall – a student. They should be expected to make mistakes and feel comfortable doing so. Gentle/tactful corrections work much better.

For example, during taxiing, a gentle reminder such as “throttle to idle first, then apply brakes” to help correct the normal tendency to ride the brakes with the RPMS at 1000 or greater. Taking over the controls in this situation would probably not be warranted.

If the student has strong feelings as to when and how a flight instructor takes the controls, then it is important that the student bring these concerns to the instructor’s attention. It is much better to discuss how and under what conditions the instructor will take over control prior to the lesson starting, rather than during the flight. If a mutually acceptable agreement cannot be reached, then it may be best to find another instructor.

In choosing an instructor who will be more likely to delay interceding on the controls, consider the following. Generally speaking, the more experience an instructor has in your type aircraft, and the less challenging the teaching environment, the longer the instructor will wait to take the controls.

In summary, it is generally better to allow the student to fly the aircraft, as long as practical before the instructor takes over. If, in the instructor’s judgement an unsafe situation is developing, or a regulation is about to be violated, then the instructor must take over the controls.

An instructor should take the controls to demonstrate proper technique, or to stop bad habits from being developed.

How the transfer of control is acknowledged must be discussed prior to the flight.

The manner in which the instructor takes over the controls matters. It is incumbent on the student to communicate their preferences as to how and when their instructor takes the controls. If the student and instructor cannot agree on the process, or have differences, then it may be best for the student to find a different instructor.

The student should be aware of the balancing act that their instructor must navigate.

When choosing an instructor be aware of the following: When an instructor decides to take over the controls is dependent on the instructor’s experience level, their familiarity with the aircraft being flown, the training environment, and flight conditions, VFR or IFR. It is also dependent on the student’s level of competence. Look for an instructor who will be most comfortable with you in the aircraft to be flown, and you with him/her.

In closing, remember that the vast majority of flight instructors have the student’s best welfare in mind. Instructors want their students – their customers – to progress in their flight training and are doing their best to see this happens. They balance allowing the student to gain experience versus the student and instructor’s comfort and safety.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Richard Morey was born into an aviation family. He is the third generation to operate the family FBO and flight school, Morey Airplane Company at Middleton Municipal Airport – Morey Field (C29). Among Richard’s diverse roles include charter pilot, flight instructor, and airport manager. He holds an ATP, CFII, MEII, and is an Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic (A&P) with Inspection Authorization (IA). Richard has been an active flight instructor since 1991 with over 15,000 hours instructing, and more than 20,000 hours total time. Of his many roles, flight instruction is by far his favorite! Comments are welcomed via email at Rich@moreyairport.com or by telephone at 6088361711. (www.MoreyAirport.com).

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author only. Readers are advised to seek the advice of their personal flight instructor, aircraft technician, and others, and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations, FAA Aeronautical Information Manual, and instructional materials concerning any procedures discussed herein.

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, Pilot Proficiency | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MnDOT Aeronautics Update

by Ryan Gaug
Interim Director
MnDOT Office of Aeronautics
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

It’s hard to believe it has been almost a full year since I was asked to step in as Interim Director of Aeronautics following the retirement of our previous director of many years, Cassandra Isackson. When I last wrote with an update, shortly after being tapped for a stint as interim director, I noted that one of my top priorities while leading the office through a transition was to do some hiring. And while there is still a lot of work to do in terms of recruiting for and filling positions, I am pleased to report that hiring is something we have certainly done. Over the past nine or so months we have welcomed many new faces to our Aeronautics team. And we continue to hire.

Also, at the time of this writing, the three positions at the top of our Aeronautics organizational chart (office director and two assistant directors) are occupied by people in interim roles. While we hope to have these positions solidified with permanent hires in the coming several months, I should note that I am grateful to the two individuals who agreed to step into temporary Assistant Director roles to help provide leadership on key initiatives – Mike Hartell and Kirby Becker. Mike has been with Aeronautics for many years overseeing our navaids technicians and airport inspectors, while Kirby joined Aeronautics from MnDOT’s Office of Transit and Active Transportation, bringing with him an excellent skill set to help address several near-term challenges and opportunities.

Given all these changes, new faces, retirements, and some internal organizational restructuring, I wanted to take a moment to remind our customers and partners how we are organized and point you toward some easy ways to identify an appropriate contact from our Aeronautics team.

One place you can find general contact information for specific MnDOT programs is on our Programs webpage. For example, if you were looking to ask a question about registering your aircraft in Minnesota, you’d contact our long-time expert on these matters, Jana Falde, as shown on the screenshot below.

You may also want to check out our Services webpage that identifies contacts for the various services we provide. This page focuses on the person responsible for overall oversight and supervision of these services, and the teams responsible for working on them.

One more helpful resource I’d like to share may come in handy when you know the name of the MnDOT Aeronautics employee you’d like to connect with, but aren’t sure how to reach them. In those situations, the best resource is our online employee list which provides up-to-date names, numbers, and emails of all staff.

Finally, I noted earlier that when appropriate, we’ve been making adjustments to our overall organizational structure with a goal of promoting better flow of communications and information. If you love a good “org chart” like I do, then feel free to download and peruse the MnDOT Aeronautics org chart.

By clicking that link, you’ll note our office is organized into five sections: Air Transportation (pilots), Airport Operations (more pilots, inspectors, and navaid technicians), Airport Development (engineers and grant specialists), Aviation Planning (planners, of course), and the Aero Business Section.

The Business Section is the group that most pilots, aircraft owners, and businesses located on airports are most familiar with. The MnDOT Aeronautics Business Section staff are responsible for handling all aircraft registrations in the state, so if you own a plane and have questions, they are there for you. When you send a check or are looking for a certificate to be mailed out to you, these are the people who handle it.

Collectively, the Airport Operations, Planning and Development Sections are here to help your local airport plan for the future, build and fund desired infrastructure, and inspect the airport environment to ensure it is safe and in compliance with state and federal rules. To help expedite the flow of critical information across these sections, we’ve further organized each section into regions so airports can get to know their Aeronautics “team.”

For example, an airport manager or customer with a question about an airport in MnDOT’s south region, will have a consistent set of experts to contact, all with experience and knowledge of the airport in question. Here is a link to download a handy map where you can quickly identify the team assigned to any given airport.

Understanding how these teams are set up is helpful should you have a need to work on issues, concerns, or opportunities with our office and the airport. One of the best ways to get started is to reach out to your airport’s regional coordinator (assigned to the Airport Operations Section) and they will assist with any coordination as necessary, depending on the topic. Regional coordinators can be identified on the map above at the “Airport Operations” contact and can also be identified on the all employees’ contact webpage.

Now that you know how to reach us, let me say that we can’t wait to hear from you!

Posted in April/May 2023, Columns, Columns, Columns, MN Aeronautics Bulletin | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Bad Rap, A Nudge… Whatever You Do, Don’t Do It!

by Pete Schoeninger
© Copyright 2023. All rights reserved!
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

Q) I’ve always loved the Cessna 177 Cardinal and wonder why Cessna Aircraft discontinued manufacturing them. Enlighted me, please.
A) Yes, Cardinals are a great bird and I have owned one, and sold several over the years. But a real problem with early Cardinals is that they porpoise terribly. That was, with full flaps and in a specific center of gravity (CG) range, the airflow over the stabilizer during landing flare could exceed critical angles of attack and stall. When that happened, the negative load on the tail normally carried, would almost end, which resulted in a quick and nasty nosedive from a couple feet above the runway. If lucky, only a bounce and often a porpoise followed. But if the landing was hard, you could smack the propeller and damage the firewall, resulting in a sudden stop of the engine.

Cessna realized the problem and immediately (as I think I recall) issued a restriction on flap settings, did some testing, and then put inverse slots in the tail to prevent tail-stalling. This was done most of the way through the 1968 production run, if I recall correctly. They also shipped repair kits to owners allowing field repairs to early stabilators already in use on early serial number planes.

Too bad the aircraft got off to a bad start which otherwise is a good airplane. Cardinals offer much better visibility and more flexible loading with bigger fuel tanks and a roomy cabin. For some reason, I remember flying a Cardinal nonstop from Milwaukee Timmerman Airport or Watertown Municipal to Nashville and having a little bit of fuel still unused. I don’t think Cessna 172s of that vintage could go that far safely.

Q) A friend said there is a link on the internet with compiled information on operating, maintaining, and modifying little 100 hp and lower Continental engines. I am particularly interested in opinions on the use of newer oils in old Continental engines. Can you help me find this link?
A) I suspect your friend was referring to an excellent source from a very knowledgeable A&P mechanic named Harry Fenton, posted on the Internet about 6 years ago. Harry has graciously given me permission to share this link. Do an internet search for “Harry Fenton’s Hints and Tips for small Continental engines.” And when you’re done, consider sending Harry a thank you note for the excellent compilation.

Q) In the February/March 2023 issue of Midwest Flyer Magazine, you suggested a hangar be built on the top of a north sloping airstrip. One reason you gave was you didn’t want to be taxiing downhill on snow and ice and not be able to stop to get into a hangar in the middle or bottom of the strip. Is that really true? Frankly, it sounds like a stretch to me.
A) I should have added the airstrip owner indicated he would be using skis in the winter as conditions permit. Going downhill on skis on a snow and ice-covered runway may be a thrill you don’t want to experience. Thanks for nudging me to clarify this question and answer.

Q) I am on the highway committee for our local township. In addition to public works stuff, we supervise a small airport in our town. After a few FBOs failed, we did find a good FBO who assumed the contract of the previous FBO. This contract expires next year. We very much want to keep the guy we have and not go through the whole open bid process. Any ideas on how to do this?
A) What I have seen done is to negotiate an “extension” to the current contract. You may, or may not, be able to do this legally, but if you can, it is a good way to keep a good tenant. Be sure to check with your town’s attorney.

Q) There is a picture going around the Internet of an airplane in a STOL contest that has a brick attached to the tailwheel spring. Would this be legal to fly an airplane this way? And, legal or not, why do it?
A) Some airplanes used in STOL competitions are souped up versions of Piper Super Cubs or similar airplanes. A bigger engine may be installed, a bigger prop, and bigger tires. All of these parts add weight to the front of the airplane, and thus move the empty center of gravity of the airplane forward, sometimes forward of safe limits. The brick on the tail attempts to negate some of these effects but would NOT be legal on a production airplane with a standard airworthiness certificate. Other ways that have been used to keep the C.G. from moving too far forward is to use a shorter motor mount moving the bigger engine backward a little. Some other things that have been done is to move an oil cooler from the front of the engine to the firewall, the battery moved well aft of the C.G., and a composite prop installed at half the weight of a metal one. Owners are urged to consult with their aircraft technician and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations before having a qualified aircraft technician with inspector authorization make any modifications to any aircraft.

Q) An individual 1,000 miles from me is interested in my 1963 Cessna 182. He is willing to send a deposit to hold the airplane until his mechanic can fly out and look at it. But he is insisting that I send all maintenance records to him for his, and his mechanic’s, perusal before sending his mechanic to make a personal inspection. I have offered to make copies of the last few years of airframe, engine, and prop logs and send them to him via email, but he is still insisting on seeing all original maintenance records at his location. Should I send them?
A) DON’T DO IT! I cannot think of any reason you should surrender your original maintenance records for the last 50 years to someone you do not know. Your offer to make copies of the last few years of entries and email them to him is reasonable. Tell the prospective buyer if his mechanic comes out, you will let that person review all the logs in person. If he balks, don’t worry…there are always buyers for Cessna 182s, and surely many are closer than 1,000 miles.

Q) A friend told me that the Lycoming 0-320 150 hp engine has been in production for more than 60 years. Is that possible?
A) Yes, it’s a good engine, found in many different airframes. My first recollection of them is on the Piper Apache in 1954. That’s 69 years ago! Back then you could get a new Piper Apache with two (2) 0-320 engines for about $35,000. The 0-320 has been offered in several versions, including some with fuel injection, some with turbo charging, some with counter-rotating crankshafts on the Piper Twin Comanches. Cessna went to the 0-320 with the 1968 C-172, replacing an older and heavier 145 hp engine and used it through 1986. The 0-320 was also used in the Cessna Cardinal beginning in its first year in 1968. Piper used the engine in a slew of Cherokees, as well as Tri-Pacers and Super Cubs, and Beech used them in the Beech Sport.

Q) A friend told me he read that if a pilot flies a final approach 10 mph or so faster than recommended, the aircraft could float for as much as 1,000 feet above the runway before touching down. Is that possible?
A) Absolutely correct. If a pilot approaches 10 kts or so faster than recommended, he/she will probably “float” (depending somewhat on flap deflection selected) maybe 5-10 seconds to slow to recommended “over the fence” speed. Do the math. At 70 kts, you are traveling a little over 100 feet per second. Floating over the runway for let’s say 5 seconds at an average speed of 70 kts = 550 feet, but if you float for 10 seconds, you will float about 1,100 feet. On a 4,000 ft runway, you might not notice the difference. But if you’re going into a relatively short strip, you might end up running off the end of the runway if you approach 10 kts too fast.

Q) I saw a picture of a snowmobile somehow attached to the right side of a bush plane. There was also a picture of a bush plane with a bunch of lumber attached to the belly, to be dropped over a remote site. I’ve seen numerous photos of snowshoes and skis and possibly rifles fastened to the outside of airplanes, but never a snowmobile! Is something as big and heavy as a snowmobile legal and safe to carry on an airplane?
A) It can be legal IF the operator has a restricted airworthiness certificate allowing it. There will usually be strict guidelines specifying loads and limits which must be obeyed by. You’ll need permission from the FAA or a Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR).

Q) How about a market update?
A) From what I hear, airplanes are still selling well, but not at the wild pace of last summer. A shortage of inventory continues to be a problem. There seems to be a few less buyers because of higher interest rates, but good airplanes priced fairly are still selling promptly.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Pete Schoeninger is a 40-year general aviation veteran, starting out as a line technician as a teenager, advancing through the ranks to become the co-owner and manager of a fixed base operation, and manager of an airport in a major metropolitan community. Pete welcomes questions and comments about aircraft ownership via email at PeterSchoeningerLLC@gmail.com

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author. Readers are urged to seek the advice of others, including flight instructors, licensed aircraft technicians, airport managers, fixed base operators, and state and federal officials. Neither the author, Midwest Flyer Magazine, Flyer Publications, Inc., or their staffs, employees or advertisers assume any liability for the accuracy or content of this column or any other column or article in this publication.

Posted in April/May 2023, Ask Pete, Columns, Columns, Columns | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MSP Earns Repeat Title As Best Airport In North America ACI ASQ Award is Sixth in Seven Years for Best Airport Experience

Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue

MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL – Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) has been named the “Best Airport in North America” for the second straight year through the Airports Council International (ACI) global Airport Service Quality (ASQ) program. It’s the sixth time MSP has received the title in the past seven years.

MSP earned the ASQ Award for Best Airport in North America for the 25-40 million passenger category for 2022, after receiving the same honor in 2021. MSP was also named Best in North America for four straight years between 2016-2019, earning placement on the ACI Director General’s Roll of Excellence in Airport Service Quality in 2020.

Brian Ryks

“For MSP to be recognized by our travelers as one of the best in the world year after year is a testament to our focus on providing exceptional airport experiences so Minnesota thrives,” said Brian Ryks, CEO of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), which operates MSP. “Our entire MSP airport community – including MAC commissioners and staff, federal agencies, airlines, concessionaires, tenants, Airport Foundation MSP and the Armed Forces Service Center – shares a commitment to creating an excellent customer service culture at every touchpoint of a passenger’s journey through MSP.”

The ASQ awards were based on 465,000 traveler surveys at airports in more than 90 countries during 2022. The surveys cover 30 key indicators that define a passenger’s overall experience, including the ease of finding their way through the airport, check-in, security, cleanliness, shopping, and dining. Nearly 400 airports participate in the program, and more than half of the world’s travelers passed through an ASQ airport last year.

“Putting the traveler at the center is more important than ever, and it is the way forward,” said Luis Felipe de Oliveira, Director General of ACI World. “We are proud of the team at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for winning the Best Airport in North America (award). This shows that the whole airport community has come together to put the passenger first.”

MSP is the 16th busiest airport in North America based on passengers. In 2022, MSP served a total of 31.2 million passengers, an increase of 24% from 2021. This year, MSP will have non-stop service to 156 destinations (127 domestic and 29 international), up from 145 in 2022.

 

About The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)

 

The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) owns and operates one of the nation’s largest airport systems, including Minneapolis-St Paul International (MSP) and six general aviation airports. The MAC’s airports connect the region to the world and showcase Minnesota’s extraordinary culture to millions of passengers from around the globe who arrive or depart through MAC airports each year. Though a public corporation of the state of Minnesota, the organization is not funded by income or property taxes. Instead, the MAC’s operations are funded by rents and fees generated by users of its airports. For more information, visit www.metroairports.org.

Posted in Airports, April/May 2023, Sections, Sections | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment