Forward This E-mail | Edit Email Preferences | Advertise | Contact | Privacy | Help

  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A

The FAA has delayed for a year the implementation of much of its revision of rules governing helicopter operations to allow operators, and itself, time to adopt the many changes. The final rule was published Feb. 21 and was to take effect on Tuesday but it was apparently too soon for all involved. "Since the publication of the rule, it has become evident that this effective date does not allow certificate holders sufficient time to complete all the necessary steps to implement the new rule," the postponement rule says. However, a little farther down, the FAA admits it isn't ready either. 

"In addition, the FAA has determined that the April 22, 2014 effective date does not provide sufficient time for the FAA or the regulated community to implement the other operational rules which are currently scheduled to take effect on that date," the new rule says.  Some of the rules were already delayed and they won't be delayed any further. The FAA says it will have the time to get ready for them so the operators will be expected to, also. Most of those cover the most expensive compliance measures, including the installation of avionics, emergency equipment and the creation of operations control centers, all of which will have to be in place between over the next four years.

Sponsor Announcement
ALT
No One Knows Your Factory Engine Better than the Factory That Built It in the First Place
Only Lycoming can rebuild your engine to factory-new specifications that come with a zero-time log book, a two-year factory warranty, and increases to your airplane's value. There is no comparison. Visit your local distributor or call Lycoming at 1 (800) 258-3279 and ask how you can save up to $5,000 on a rebuilt engine. Learn more at Lycoming.com.

Photo: Jeff Templin

A somewhat clearer photo of a so-far unidentified aircraft has emerged, this time from Wichita, and it shows a little more detail of the delta-shaped flying wing. The photo was taken by Jeff Templin in February, a few weeks before two photographers in Amarillo, Texas, got images of what may be the same type of aircraft. The pictures have caused a stir because the planform of the aircraft appears to be different than any known civilian or military plane. That has led to speculation that it's a stealthy new addition to the U.S. military and/or surveillance fleet but if that's true then it begs the question of why it has been so blatantly visible on at least those two occasions. 

In both cases, the photos were taken on severe clear days with the aircraft in full view of anyone with a telephoto lens. In the Wichita incident, Templin reported his eye was drawn to the aircraft because it was doing sharp S turns over Wichita, leaving a telltale trail of contrail vapor. "Right over the city, clear as a bell. Anyone that was looking up would have seen it," Templin was reported to have written in his account of the sighting. "You don't usually see military or even civilian aircraft's jets that leave contrails making those kind of severe departures off of the given route." So far there has been no word from the Air Force concerning the identity and purpose of the aircraft.

Despite strict economic sanctions in place against Iran, a U.S.-registered Bombardier Challenger, N604EP, was spotted on the ramp at Mehrabad Airport in Tehran earlier this week. Who is traveling in it and who is flying it are mysteries as the jet is registered to the Bank of Utah as trustee for the investors who have a financial stake in the airplane. The Bank of Utah is shown as the trustee for over 1000 aircraft on the federal aircraft registry. The New York Times is reporting that it interviewed a Bank of Utah executive, Brett King, who explained about its ownership as trustee and said that the bank has no idea why the airplane was in Tehran and that it was investigating further. Iranian officials have declined to comment on the purpose of the jet’s visit or the identities of the occupants, as has the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, the government’s primary enforcer of sanctions against Iran.

With “plane spotting” especially popular outside the U.S., and enthusiasts posting images of arrivals and departures of aircraft, it is no surprise that N604EP has been tracked, with reports of it in Zurich near the time of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last January and departing from London for Ghana last October. Of course speculation is rife that a single financial mover and shaker is behind the flights to Iran, Switzerland and Ghana, there is currently no information as to the occupants on each. The open presence of the jet is an indication that its flight was approved as part of a legitimate business trip; plus it is said that an easily identifiable aircraft is unlikely to be part of a diplomatic mission. King went on to say that “The Bank of Utah is very conservative, and located in the conservative state of Utah. If there is any hint of illegal activity, we are going to find out and see whether we need to resign as trustee.”

Sponsor Announcement
Bringing You Information to Keep You Flying || GlobalAir.com
GlobalAir.com Has Aircraft for Sale, Current FBO Fuel Prices, Aviation Weather, and More!
Whether you are buying or selling aircraft, need the latest FBO fuel prices, downloading approach plates, wanting local or national weather, or looking for an aviation event closest to you, GlobalAir.com has it all. Why use 3, 4, 5 different websites when you can use just ONE. Keeping you up to date with 3,000+ FBO fuel prices, METAR's, TAF's, NOTAMS, aircraft library, or just like looking at what's available for sale. Since 1995, try us today!

Air Canada says it will fire two baggage handlers caught on video dropping carry-on items from the top of a stairway into a bin 20 feet below last week. Passenger Dwayne Stewart shot the video last Thursday at Toronto's Pearson International Airport as he and his incredulous seatmate watched through the window. The flight was full and some passengers had been required to gate-check their carry-on luggage because the bins were full. Rather than carry the bags down a flight of stairs to the baggage cart, the two workers set up a relay with the ramp worker at the gate level tossing the bags into a bin where the second worker transferred them to the cart. Stewart told CBC News he and his seatmate at first didn't believe what they were seeing.

 "We were pretty shocked to see it happening. We actually laughed initially. We didn't think it was real," Stewart said. The baggage handler on the ground was not entirely without empathy for the fate of the contents of the freefalling bags. After several bags had tumbled onto those that had fallen before, the worker put a bunched up tarp in the bin to cushion the fall of the remaining bags. It probably won't be enough to save his job, however. Stewart, who was on his way home in British Columbia via Vancouver on the flight, posted the video, which has more than 500,000 views on YouTube. He said "embarrassed" Air Canada officials have contacted him saying their actions don't reflect the attitudes of the airline's other 27,000 employees. Air Canada issued a statement on Saturday confirming it is now in the process of identifying the workers so they can be given their walking papers.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association recently held its annual Archie League Medal of Safety Awards, honoring controllers who have kept their cool in dangerous and challenging circumstances. There were controllers from each of the FAA's nine regions honored, including those on duty when Asiana Flight 214 crashed short of the runway at San Francisco International Airport last July 6. But most of the incidents didn't make headlines, simply because the drama in the air ended with a safe landing. Typical of those incidents was the dangerous situation that unfolded over western Washington on a stormy February night last year. 

Phillip Bush took off in a Piper Seneca from Spokane on Feb. 22 for Boeing Field and after bouncing through mountain waves he started his descent and encountered icing. Seattle TRACON controller Jared Mike noticed the twin was having trouble maintaining altitude and called Heard. He then vectored Bush through mountain valleys to keep him away from terrain that was higher than his icing aircraft could maintain until the pilot was out of cloud and in temperatures warm enough to start shedding the ice. 

Sponsor Announcement
Avidyne's IFD Series GPS/NAV/COM - Attend a Webinar!
Everyone's Talking About the IFD440 & IFD540!
Join us every Thursday at 5:00pm EDT to learn more about Avidyne's IFD440 & IFD540 GPS/NAV/COMs, the plug-and-play replacements for G430/530-Series navigators! Learn how such features as Hybrid Touch, GeoFill™, and Procedure Preview can make your flying easier, safer, and more enjoyable.

Click here to sign up for an upcoming webinar!

The Federal Aviation Administration has released the EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2014 Notice to Airmen (NOTAM - PDF), featuring arrival and departure procedures for the Experimental Aircraft Association’s 62nd annual fly-in convention July 28-Aug. 3 at Wittman Regional Airport in Oshkosh. The NOTAM, which is in effect July 25-Aug. 4, outlines procedures for the many types of aircraft that fly to Oshkosh for the event, as well as aircraft that land at nearby airports. It was designed by FAA, in partnership with EAA, to assist pilots in their AirVenture flight planning.  While the overall procedure is similar to past years, there are some changes compared to the 2013 version and updates on many of the NOTAM’s 32 pages.

Some of those changes include:

  • Fond du Lac ATIS changed to 121.1
  • Expected Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) for Wittman Regional Airport on Aug. 1-3
  • Closed Runway 4/22 at Wittman Regional Airport is now 5/23
  • Air show waiver times changed on Sunday, Aug. 3

A high influx of VFR arrivals is expected to begin at Oshkosh on Saturday and Sunday, July 26-27.  Besides following the published arrival and departure procedures in the AirVenture NOTAM, pilots should maintain high vigilance in watching for other aircraft.  Pilots are expected to have a copy of the NOTAM available for in-flight reference.

By the time a person finishes training for a pilot certificate, he or she has gotten a good introduction to a small corner of the FARs, has probably learned nothing about what’s involved in buying or owning an airplane and had an immersion in aviation Old Wives’ Tales (OWT) regarding legal obligations and potential liabilities as a pilot. This article is to briefly look at some of the legal issues a pilot might face, outline how to approach them and try to debunk a few of the OWTs that are still floating around. We’ll take a look at how to deal with a ramp check, group aircraft ownership, care of aircraft logbooks, declaring an emergency, what to do if ATC gives you a phone number and asks you to call, what to do after an incident or accident, landing on a taxiway and flying over gross.

This article isn’t legal advice; all situations are different, for advice for a specific situation you face, please contact an attorney.

Ramp Checks

The idea of having an FAA inspector walk up and announce a ramp check generally gets a pilot’s adrenalin level up to where it’s spraying out of his ears. Naturally, it’s the subject of a lot of conversations, Internet drama, false information and misleading advertising by companies trying to sell a gadget or an app.

To start with, the FAA has the authority to conduct ramp checks. The Federal Aviation Act of 1958, which created the FAA, requires it to scrutinize the aviation community for the purpose of safety. One way it does so is via ramp checks.  

The purpose of a ramp check is limited: to see if the pilot’s and aircraft’s documents are in order. That’s all. It is not an investigation into what the pilot has been doing.

The usual procedure is for the FAA inspector to approach a pilot who is near an airplane, introduce him or herself, show ID, announce that a ramp check is being conducted and ask to see the aircraft’s documents and pilot’s certificates.

In my opinion, the best way to handle a ramp check is to simply provide the requested documents while behaving professionally. I suggest you write down the inspector’s name. Inspectors are human, the vast majority that I know are good folks (most of whom hate doing ramp checks), but there are some who feel the need to hassle pilots. 

Don’t be chatty; pilots who run their mouths have a strange tendency to admit to doing something stupid with an airplane and thus turn a ramp check into an investigation.

Don’t be a jerk; that sets off alarm bells for inspectors—you might as well as be announcing that you have something to hide. It’s an effective way to turn a two-minute event into an unpleasant, long lasting episode with the FAA.

Don’t worry about handing your certificate to the inspector—the Internet fables about the inspector keeping it and claiming you had surrendered it are indeed fables. The surrender of a pilot certificate is governed by FAR Part 61.27. It must be in writing and contain specific language or it is not effective. An FAA Regional Counsel once told me that if an inspector tried to hang onto a pilot’s certificate during a ramp check the inspector would be lucky to keep his job and his next assignment would be in Nome.

You are required to provide: photo ID, pilot certificate and medical (driver’s license if Light Sport), the aircraft’s airworthiness certificate, registration, weight and balance/limitations documents (in the POH if the airplane has one, separate weight and balance paperwork if the airplane does not). You may be asked to show the aircraft logs. They should not be in the airplane (they’re too valuable, more on that below). It’s rare that an inspector makes such a request; if it is made, the appropriate response is to schedule a time and place where you can provide them for review.

You do not have to: let the inspector get into the airplane (Part 91), do a weight and balance calculation for a flight you’ve made or answer any question about what you’ve been doing.

You do not have to have current, or even any, charts in the airplane under Part 91. 

The moment an inspector asks you about something that happened in the past, even one second ago, it’s no longer just a ramp check, it’s an investigation. The FAA is supposed to tell you when it’s doing an investigation, but sometimes an inspector slips up. You do not have to answer investigation questions. If you are asked about something in the past, my suggestion is that you politely say that it sounds like this is becoming an investigation and that you will speak to your attorney before you answer any further questions. That is your right and inspectors are used to such an answer.

Group Aircraft Ownership

Every once in a while you’ll hear a pilot say that she’s protected herself from liability in the event she crashes her airplane by having the airplane owned by a corporation or L.L.C. It won’t work. If her sweaty hands were on the yoke when airplane crashed and she caused it, how the airplane is owned won’t protect her in the event she is sued.

Nevertheless, when an airplane is owned jointly, the method of ownership can matter. If the owners have formed a partnership to own the airplane, the general rule is that each owner is personally responsible for the negligence of the other partners. When a corporation or L.L.C. owns the airplane, the shareholders of the corporation or members of the L.L.C. are not individually liable for the negligence of the other shareholders or members, particularly the one who was flying the airplane at the time of an accident.

Forming an L.L.C. or corporation for group ownership of an aircraft may have other benefits. That is especially true if one person wants to sell his share as it may simplify the process and may save on sales or use tax in some states. An airplane isn’t cheap; in my opinion, it’s worth consulting with an attorney in your state with regard to the best way to set up ownership.

Nevertheless, when it comes to liability risk, the best way to handle it is to insure the risk, not try to set up some dodge that your hangar neighbor’s uncle came up with that’s “utterly foolproof.”

The same rule applies for buying a share of an airplane as it does to buying the entire thing: never do it without having a pre-purchase examination performed by a mechanic you chose who knows the type of airplane involved.

Aircraft Logbooks

The aircraft, engine and prop logbooks for your airplane are worth from 10 to 20 percent of the aircraft’s value. Take a moment and think of that in cash. That’s the general rule for how much will get knocked off the sale price of your airplane if you lose those logs. It’s a fact of aeronautical life.

That means you should probably have a digital copy of the logbooks with the originals locked up someplace safe, not sitting on a shelf at your favorite maintenance shop. After all, would you leave a several thousand dollars in cash on that shelf?

When you have maintenance work done on your airplane, have the mechanic record the work done on a sticker that you put into the log. You then copy that page and add it to the digital record of your logs.

There is no requirement of any sort that a mechanic ever see the originals of your aircraft logbooks before doing maintenance or an inspection on your airplane. For your protection, and for the protection of your mechanic, provide either a digital copy or print out a hard copy. That way neither you nor your maintenance technician runs the risk of losing valuable documents.

I’ve also seen logbooks held hostage by a shop when there was poor communication between the shop and the aircraft owner over what maintenance was authorized and what the price was going to be. Owners have had to sue shops to get logbooks back—not a good thing for anyone involved.

Emergencies and Paperwork

For reasons that seem to relate to old John Wayne movies, some pilots think that if they declare an emergency they’ll have to deal with endless paperwork afterwards. That simply is not true—that OWT may well be responsible for fatal accidents because pilots shut up when they might have gotten help.

FAR Part 91.3 says that a pilot may deviate from any regulation in an emergency. It goes on to say that if the pilot does violate a regulation he or she will have to provide a report to the FAA if the FAA requests one. Think about what it says—there is the potential for having to file a report, but only if you have to violate a regulation in the process of dealing with an emergency. From what I’ve seen, that’s rare.  The FAA figured out some years ago that pilots are overly hesitant to admit they have an emergency, so the fact that you declare does not trigger any reporting requirement.

If there’s something wrong, it’s the pilot’s obligation to use all of the available resources to deal with the problem—and those may include getting ATC on your side. I read of one situation where a pilot had to shut down an engine on a twin and couldn’t hold altitude. He was talking to ATC but refused to declare an emergency so ATC had to route him around two restricted areas. He barely made the runway. That’s foolish. Had he simply declared ATC could have cleared him straight to the airport.

Failing to declare an emergency when one exists may also increase the risk a pilot will be found negligent in a post-accident lawsuit. In most states, the law gives a person dealing with an emergency a lot of latitude; there’s less second-guessing. However, if the pilot didn’t declare, why is the jury going to believe there was an emergency? Also, if the pilot didn’t declare, then she or he didn’t use all available resources and could potentially be considered negligent.

Besides, if you’ve got a problem, it’s better to have the Crash Fire Rescue (CFR) crews waiting for you and not need them than to have them cutting the grass when your airplane catches fire during rollout after the fuel odor that was puzzling you ignites.

Please Call ATC

You’re flying along, minding your own business, when ATC calls you, gives you a phone number and asks that you call after you land.

You probably aren’t about to be told that you’ve won the lottery.

Should you call?

Maybe. (How’s that for a lawyer’s answer?) If you do, only do so after you’ve taken the time, after landing, to consider the situation and talk with your attorney. You don’t get any points for calling in quickly, so take time to maturely consider what triggered ATC’s desire to speak with you further.

Most of the time the whole thing started because you erred, or at least ATC is convinced you did. If you call, remember that the call is recorded. Plus, you will identify yourself as the person flying the aircraft. On top of that, ATC keeps getting less and less discretion as to what it can do when there is a pilot deviation. The chances that you have a friendly conversation, admit you messed up, promise not to do again and the tower or Center says, “OK, don’t do it again,” and closes the file on the subject are low.

However, the FSDO that is going to be processing the deviation has the discretion to let you off with a warning or have you do remedial training rather than hitting you with a violation—therefore, the polite, “I messed up” phone call to ATC could swing matters over to the warning side of the scale downstream.

So—there is no hard and fast answer to the question of whether to make the call.

There are, however, three hard and fast rules to follow if ATC asks you to call:

  1. Never argue with ATC on the frequency.
  2. Think before do anything about the request that you call ATC.
  3. File an ASRS (NASA) report immediately—if you do get a violation, you won’t have your certificate suspended.

Accident Reporting

You’re going into the short strip near the vacation lodge and forget the gear. Ouch. You’re taxiing over to the pumps to fill up, misjudge, hit a post with the wing of your Piper Dakota, open up the tip tank, fuel gushes out, ignites and burns up your Dakota, a King Air and a Gulfstream. Wow.

To whom do you report the accident? NTSB? FAA?

You don’t report it to either one; they are not reportable accidents under Part 830 of the NTSB regulations.

In the first example, a gear up landing almost never does enough damage to meet the reporting threshold of Part 830. In the second, the aircraft has to be moving for the purpose of flight. Taxiing to the fuel pump isn’t moving for the purpose of flight.

An accident is reported to the NTSB. While the NTSB may tell the FAA, the regs call for the notification be made to the NTSB.  The NTSB may delegate the investigation to the FAA; nevertheless, the notification is to the NTSB.

If you are involved with an incident that does not meet the definition of an accident, there is no reason to burden the NTSB or FAA with the time, effort, cost and paperwork involved with carrying out an investigation—they don’t want to do it. However, if someone reports it, an investigation has to be conducted, and that may mean that the FAA looks at the pilot for a potential violation it might not otherwise have even known about.

Again, before doing anything, stop and think. Remember, even if the event is a reportable accident, which requires immediate notification under Part 830.5, you have to determine if it is reportable, so don't just pull out your cell phone and call the NTSB.

Aviation insurance companies know about the NTSB threshold reporting requirements, so just because you damaged your airplane, you don’t need to report it to the NTSB for your insurance to pay for the repairs.

If you bend an airplane, I suggest the following checklist:

  • Care for anyone who is injured
  • Call your attorney
  • Determine whether the event is reportable under Part 830
  • If it is a reportable accident, notify the NTSB immediately
  • Contact your insurer

Landing on a Taxiway

A few years ago, I looked at a four-fatality accident where a pilot elected to land despite a crosswind that was near the demonstrated crosswind velocity for the airplane. He lost control on rollout. What struck me was that the airport had a long taxiway that was oriented into the wind. There is nothing in the FARs that prevents a Part 91 pilot from landing on a taxiway at a non-towered airport. I kept asking myself why the pilot didn’t land into the wind. There were no buildings or obstructions near the taxiway and taxiways are often used as runways during runway construction.

A crosswind that is at the edge of the pilot or the airplane’s ability to handle it can have ugly results—general aviation has an unpleasantly high rate of runway loss of control accidents. While it would be wise to divert to an airport that has a runway more into the wind, fuel onboard may preclude such a diversion. It’s certainly not common, but landing on a taxiway isn’t prohibited by the FARs and landing into a strong wind on an unobstructed taxiway well clear of people and buildings may be far, far safer than trying to tackle that same wind when it’s blowing from the side.

You may never have good reason to land on a taxiway, but don’t omit it from your bag of tricks because you think it's not legal when conditions make it sensible.

Flying Over Gross

As America gets fatter, it seems to me that there is an increasing willingness of pilots to fly their airplanes over gross. One of the OWTs I hear is that while it may be foolish to fly over gross, it’s not illegal. It’s true that it’s foolish, however, it’s also illegal—Part 91.9 requires complying with the airplane’s operating limitations.

Flying illegally, intentionally, is your call. However, if the fact the aircraft is over gross has some relation to the cause of an accident, say hitting an obstruction on takeoff or an inadvertent stall, you may find yourself short of defenses should you be sued. In some states you may be facing an automatic finding of negligence. Your insurance should still cover you—violation of a reg is generally not reason for an insurer to deny coverage—but you may have crippled your defense.

Conclusion

This article hasn’t touched on all the legal issues a pilot may face, but I hope it’s targeted some of the more common—even if space has precluded it from dealing with them in depth. In my opinion, the important thing for a pilot to remember when coming up against a legal issue is to take some time to think before acting. The AOPA legal services plan pays for consultation with an aviation attorney on most aviation legal issues—in my opinion that’s worth the price of admission. You worked hard to acquire the expertise to fly; when you need expertise on legal issue in aviation, it makes sense to contact someone who worked hard to gain it rather than make a quick decision you may regret.

Rick Durden is an aviation attorney, holds an CFI-AI an ATP with type ratings in the Cessna Citation and Douglas DC-3 and is the author of The Thinking Pilot’s Flight Manual, or How to Survive Flying Little Airplanes and Have a Ball Doing it, Vol. I.

Sponsor Announcement
Safelog || The World's Most Trusted Electronic Pilot Logbook System
Safelog Is the World's Most Trusted Electronic Pilot Logbook System!
Suitable for student pilots through senior captains, Safelog features legendary flexibility and ease of use. Available for PC, iPhone, iPad, Android, web, Mac (through emulation), and more. Stuck with some underperforming other logbook? Join thousands of others by taking advantage of our complimentary transition service and step up to the power, value, stability, and professionalism of Safelog. Try a demo or learn more at Checkride.com.

Over the North Pacific in the middle of the night, we were catching up to a slower aircraft below us as we were coming up to a position-report waypoint. We listened out on the HF, and it was a MAC flight.  He was obviously listening out as we gave our position report, and, shortly after, he came up on the air-to-air frequency.

He asked:
"Hey, what kind of an aircraft do you have with such a small amount of fuel?"

We replied:
"It's an A340 metric airplane, and the fuel is in kilograms."

He said:
"Oh. Now that makes sense."


David Lamb
via e-mail

Heard Anything Funny on the Radio?

Heard anything funny, unusual, or downright shocking on the radio lately? If you've been flying any length of time, you're sure to have eavesdropped on a few memorable exchanges. The ones that gave you a chuckle may do the same for your fellow AVweb readers. Share your radio funny with us, and, if we use it in a future "Short Final," we'll send you a sharp-looking AVweb hat to sport around your local airport. No joke.

Click here to submit your original, true, and previously unpublished story.

Meet the AVweb Team

AVweb is the world's premier independent aviation news resource, online since 1995. Our reporting, features, and newsletters are brought to you by:

Publisher
Tom Bliss

Editorial Director, Aviation Publications
Paul Bertorelli

Editor-in-Chief
Russ Niles

Webmaster
Scott Simmons

Contributing Editors
Mary Grady
Rick Durden

Avionics Editor
Larry Anglisano

Contributors
Kevin Lane-Cummings
Paul Berge

Ad Coordinator
Karen Lund

Click here to send a letter to the editor. (Please let us know if your letter is not intended for publication.)

Comments or questions about the news should be sent here.

Have a product or service to advertise on AVweb? Your advertising can reach over 225,000 loyal AVwebFlash, AVwebBiz, and AVweb web site readers every week. Over 80% of our readers are active pilots and aircraft owners. That's why our advertisers grow with us, year after year. For ad rates and scheduling, click here or contact Tom Bliss:

Forward this email to a friend
Tailor your alerts!
Click here to update alerts preferences.
AVweb Insider

Back when I was actively flight instructing and overseeing a small FBO flightschool in Connecticut, I used to think that how a CFI dressed mattered a lot. I still think that, but perhaps deleting “a lot.” This came to mind with this week’s news report that one Mitchell Casado, the plaid-wearing sim instructor CNN used in its non-stop coverage of the MH370 story, had been fired. Ostensibly, part of the reason for his dismissal was his…umm, casual sartorial habits. I suspect there’s more to the story than that, but it does raise the issue of how pilots ought to dress and how instructors ought to present themselves, if not to TV audiences, then to customers.

I used to do the shirt and tie thing, but got out of that habit because I despise ties as the most useless clothing accessory ever invented. Besides being uncomfortable, ties are impractical in the cockpit and more so at lunch, where they’re bound to collect the salsa or act as an unintended bib. But cutoffs, jeans and open plaid shirts over white t-shirts go too far in the opposite direction, so I settled on business casual; suit-type slacks and a polo shirt or sweater will do fine. Here in Florida, CFIs run the gamut of dress, but I don’t see many wearing shorts and flip-flops. I never wear shorts in an airplane because I worry about the fire risk. Cotton or non-synthetic pants give you at least a little protection.

We’re beginning to see an influx of foreign students in Florida again and I saw a gaggle of them walking down the street to lunch yesterday, all in white shirts and black ties. Please, someone go ahead and entertain me as to how this improves learning by demonstrating seriousness. I’m sure that’s right behind the law of primacy or something. I’ve never been good at that sort of theoretical musing.

But back to Casado. This guy was on CNN practically 24/7 when the news network was driving its ratings with wall-to-wall MH370 coverage. The first time I saw him in basic Gangsta casual, I didn’t think much of it, but by the third or fourth time, I was wondering…isn’t anybody going to clean this guy up a little? It’s not like they didn’t have time, as CNN was driving the sim coverage onto live air three or four times an hour for three weeks. Claudio Teixeira, owner of UFly, whose 777 “like” sim CNN was using, said Casado “shamed Canadians” by dressing so poorly.

A little strong, maybe, but why didn’t the owner insist on a wardrobe change? Or CNN? Even for the crummy little web videos we do, I have people change clothes, remove hats and sunglasses and generally try to keep them from embarrassing themselves.

While CNN’s coverage of MH370 was annoyingly overplayed, the 777 sim coverage was, in my view, good television. Those brief glimpses showed a general audience how airplanes work, how automated they’ve become and what the crew might have been seeing. One thing they did which I found interesting was to simulate fuel exhaustion to see how the sim would behave. There are worse things to do with air time.

Television always involves some sleight of hand and what wasn’t obvious to the casual viewer was that the sim isn’t the level D, motion-based equipment used to train professional pilots, but a “flight experience” device open to the general public. Think of it as an amusement ride and Casado’s style of dress makes a little more sense, although not much. It didn’t occur to me to examine this until the news story that he had been fired appeared. I suppose like others in the aviation audience, I was wondering what flight organization would put up that level of unprofessionalism and the answer is probably none.

The takeaway? Not much of one, except if you’re instructor or professional pilot, pause to ask how you might look to others. I think my slacks and polo shirt are okay, but let me know if that’s not the case. I think I still remember how to tie a tie.

Join the conversation.
Read others' comments and add your own.

Bad Elf Cable for Lightning Connector || Available Now at Bad-Elf.com or Amazon.com

Finding a reliable and skilled paint shop is a daunting challenge for many aircraft owners.  If you've had your aircraft painted within the past few years, the editors at Aviation Consumer magazine want to know about your experience.  Please take this brief survey, and the staff will report on the results in an upcoming issue of Aviation Consumer.

Tachometer Replacement || CGR-30P from Electronics International

At Aero 2014, a German company called E-volo drew lots of attention with its unique Volocopter, a multiple rotor electric helicopter design that flew unmanned last fall.  The next step is to improve battery capacity and perhaps design a hybrid version.

Tempest Plus || Selected by the Gold Standard, Continental Motors

At Aero 2014 in Friedrichshafen, the Italian manufacturer Tecnam introduced a new aircraft model equipped specifically for disabled pilots.  The company's Fabio Russo gave AVweb a peek at the airplane.

Aircraft Spruce & Specialty Co. || Proud Distributor of Redbird Flight Simulators

At Aero 2014 in Friedrichshafen, Germany, the Italian company Vulcanair announced a new model called the V1.0 that's meant to be positioned between light sport aircraft and the Cessna 172.  At a $250,000 projected price, it's far less expensive than the Skyhawk.  Vulcanair's Remo De Feo gave AVweb a briefing on the new model.

At Aero 2014 in Friedrichshafen, Germany, Piper introduced its first diesel, the Continental Centurion-powered Archer DX.  AVweb talked to Piper CEO Simon Caldecott and Continental's Rhett Ross about the new DX.

FAR/AIM 2014 || ASA - Training Starts Here
Picture of the Week
Picture of the Week

While we haven't caught up to the blood moon pics from this past week, the silver lady is on our minds this week, which could explain why we're leading offing this edition of "PotW" with a shot from Brian Buck of Irmo, SC. Click through for more reader-submitted photos.