July 5, 1999 The Pilot's Lounge #11: LAHSO's Double Secret Probation |
|
The large print giveth but the small print taketh away. So it is with the FAA's policy on Land And Hold Short Operations, or LAHSO. AVweb's Rick Durden discovers an internal FAA bulletin saying that Part 91 operators cannot accept a LAHSO clearance unless they've received approved training. No, there is no new regulation, just an FAA internal pronouncement. As Joseph Heller wrote,
July 5, 1999
 |
 |
 |
| About the Author ... |
|
Rick Durden is a
practicing aviation attorney who holds an ATP Certificate, with a type rating
in the Cessna Citation, and Commercial privileges for gliders, free balloons
and single-engine seaplanes. He is also an instrument and multi-engine flight
instructor. Rick started flying when he was fifteen and became a flight
instructor during his freshman year of college.
He did a little of everything
in aviation to help pay for college and law school including flight
instruction, aerial application, and hauling freight. In the process of trying
to fly every old and interesting airplane he could, Rick has accumulated over
5,400 hours of flying time. In his law practice, Rick regularly represents
pilots, fixed base operators, overhaulers, and manufacturers. Prior to
starting his private practice, he was an attorney for Cessna in Wichita for
seven years.
He is a regular contributor to Aviation Consumer and AOPA Pilot
and teaches aerobatics in a 7KCAB Citabria in his spare time. Rick makes it
clear he is part owner of a corporation which owns a Piper Aztec because,
having flown virtually every type of piston-engine airplane Cessna
manufactured from 1933 on, as well as all the turboprops and some of the jets,
he cannot bring himself to admit to actually owning a Piper.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Hot Fun In The Summertime?
It has been a pretty good month in the
Pilot's Lounge. Summer is here and the airplanes are beautiful. For the second
year in a row we have had great weather, so the old saw, "what comes after
two days of rain in Michigan? Monday" is not holding up. As one of the
pilots in the lounge said, "If this is global warming, give me more."
We sent her out to sweep a hangar.
Some of the folks have been getting in trouble at home because they can't
bring themselves to go home on these lovely, soft evenings. After all, how can
you leave when you see Sandy slipping the Citabria over the trees and gracefully
straightening out during the flare? When you realize you can't tell the exact
moment the tires started rolling on the ends of the grass you just stand
mesmerized. Landings like those, on a perfect summer evening, are something to
be bottled and kept forever. When the snow is blowing and you can't even get to
the airport, pull out the memory and just savor it. No wonder it's impossible
for most of us to leave until it gets dark.
We've pulled the chairs from the Lounge outside where we can watch the
artistry of little airplanes in the sky. We shamelessly indulge in the
time-honored activity of critiquing landings and continue to talk about flying
as we always do. The talk during the month has been about two subjects, one
which pleases all of us and one which is just plain scary because it may be a
tip of an iceberg. The very pleasant subject was some correspondence passed
along to us from the Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC).
Kudos To Atlanta Center
Last month, I was critical of one phase of Atlanta ARTCC's
Catch A Bad Altitude program. That portion was the process of making tapes of
pilots who improperly read back altitude clearances and sending them to their
airline employer. I was concerned that it could result in a job action against
the pilot. To their everlasting credit, Atlanta ARTCC has dropped that portion
of the program.
A Brief History...
To recap, if a pilot misreads an altitude clearance and a controller catches
it and corrects the pilot, it has historically meant that a potential midair was
avoided. As a pilot, I am all for controllers who catch my mistakes before I do
something stupid. Now, Atlanta ARTCC has put up an additional carrot for the
controller. After the correction the controller is eligible for a $50 gift
certificate. That took some creativity and effort on the part of the folks at
Atlanta.
In the last couple of weeks, AVweb received detailed email from Elizabeth
Ray and Mark Ward, managers at Atlanta ARTCC. They have explained the purpose of
the Catch A Bad Altitude program and the fact the sending of tapes was dropped.
In a nutshell, the timing of the program coming just after the FAA issued its
infamous "interpretive rule" on clearance readbacks (making pilots
strictly liable for a mistaken clearance readback if the controller doesn't
catch the mistake) was precisely as we suspected, a coincidence. The FAA in
Washington did not coordinate the interpretive rule with the FAA employees doing
the work of controlling aircraft in the real world. Thus, Atlanta ARTCC was
unfairly tarred for its timing of its program, just when pilots were extremely
suspicious of anything the FAA might do.
The purpose of Atlanta's program is system improvement. They want to see if
they can find out whether the problem of bad altitude readbacks are more
prevalent in particular sectors, or among pilots not wearing headsets or at
particular times of day or if there are some other variables which can be
identified as culprits. They expressed concern because Atlanta generally issues
more holding clearances than other Centers and felt, but had no data, that the
complexity of clearances increased the risk of altitude readback errors. They
want data to work with and this program is a very good way to obtain it.
The Atlanta ARTCC has 300 to 400 erroneous altitude readbacks per month.
That's staggering. The VAST majority of errors are air carrier. Atlanta wants to
reduce the number markedly. The folks there also want your ideas as to how to go
about it. I don't think they have a big budget for the program. So, the idea of collecting tapes and using a computer to distort the voice qualities and
editing out call signs probably wouldn't work. I still think that creating
transcripts of the transmissions with call signs redacted could result in
excellent learning tools for pilots. Circulating the transcripts of several
hundred errors might help us pilots do a better job. We might also identify
circumstances when we pilots are more likely to make errors and be on the watch
for them.
Editor's Note: AVweb has learned that Atlanta ARTCC's Catch A Bad
Altitude program has garnered the attention of the FAA's top brass in the
Flight Standards Division and in its legal department. The issue seems to be
whether Atlanta ARTCC should have developed and implemented the CABA program
without gaining the approval of FAA headquarters.
I'll say it again, Atlanta Center, you are to be commended for your efforts
to improve safety. I firmly believe that the pilot-controller relationship is
one of teamwork and I'm pleased that you have instituted this innovative program
to help the pilot-controller team work even better together.
Now The Bad News
While the habitues of the Lounge discussed the good news coming from Atlanta
ARTCC, one of our regulars, an FAA employee, took me aside for a talk. I was
asked if I had read the material on Land and Hold Short Operations
(LAHSO). [NOTE: An FAA brochure describing the
LAHSO program is available in Adobe's Portable Document Format. The file is
large, around one megabyte.] I
said I'd seen some comments about it in magazines and some pretty negative
editorials and heard some questions about go-around procedures, but simply
hadn't gotten anything official. I'd been offered one land and hold short
clearance but before I'd even been able to respond the controller cleared me to
land on another runway which had no intersecting runway.
The next thing I knew I was handed an internal FAA Bulletin, FSGA 99-02,
"General Aviation 14 CFR Parts 91 and 125 Land and Hold Short Operations
(LAHSO)," effective March 30, 1999. I started looking at the bulletin and
skimmed through the discussions of landing distances for various airplanes and
that neither student pilots nor pilots flying experimental airplanes may
participate. My lips were starting to get tired from all the reading when I saw
something that stopped me cold:
"Title 14 CFR, Part 91 operators (that's us, folks) shall, using one
or more of the Knowledge Based Training Methodologies outlined below, become
completely familiar with and have a good basic understanding of LAHSO
procedures PRIOR TO ACCEPTING A LAHSO CLEARANCE.
Don't Get LAHSO'd
Did you know that you cannot accept a LAHSO clearance unless you have
completed one of four specific types of approved FAA training procedures?
Okay class, show of hands: How many of you flying Part 91 have accepted a
land and hold short clearance? Had you completed the FAA's "Knowledge Based
Training" prior to doing so? According to the FAA's internal bulletin, not
sent out to pilots, you could not legally accept the clearance. Doesn't that
make you feel wonderful?
|
You cannot legally accept a land and hold short
clearance under Part 91 until you have been completed approved training. No,
there is no FAR to that effect, just an FAA internal pronouncement. If you
accept a clearance and blow the landing, then get busted, it is likely the FAA
will also violate you for accepting the clearance illegally. You have just
violated double secret probation. |
Yes, according to my source, the incongruity of the whole thing has been passed
back up the chain within the FAA but there has been nothing rescinding or
amending the bulletin as of yet.
So, pilots have no way of knowing they cannot accept a land and hold short
clearance until they have received the training which will allow them to accept
the clearance and tells them they couldn't accept the clearance before taking
the training. Thanks, FAA, for bringing Catch-22 into the 1990s.
Therefore, until you get the training, don't accept a land and hold short
clearance. You cannot legally do so. By the way, according to the bulletin the
approved training is one of, or a combination of the following:
a. A review of the pertinent sections of the Aeronautical Information
Manual (it was to be revised about the time of the bulletin);
b. Attendance at FAA and/or industry safety education seminars that include
LAHSO as an emphasis topic;
c. Successful completion of a flight review (we used to call it the BFR)
containing procedural guidance on LAHSO operations, and;
d. Successful completion of a flight instructor refresher clinic that includes
guidance on LAHSO operations.
The Bottom Line...
You heard it here first: You cannot legally accept a land and hold short
clearance under Part 91 until you have completed approved training. No,
there is no FAR to that effect, just an FAA internal pronouncement. If you
accept a clearance and blow the landing, then get busted, it is likely the FAA
will also violate you for accepting the clearance illegally. You have just
violated double secret probation. It will be very interesting when the first one
of those violations gets appealed to the National Transportation Safety Board.
It's not often that the NTSB slaps down the FAA for improper actions, but when
it happens, it's fun to watch. The FAA didn't even give lip service to the
requirement for public comment before imposing a new rule on this matter.
I don't know if latter March/early April was a time of increased internal
stress at the FAA, but in a matter of days, the FAA conducted rulemaking by
administrative fiat. It published the horrendous interpretive rule attempting to
change the tenor of the regulations on pilot responsibility for ATC readback
errors and it put out this bulletin requiring a pilot to have specialized
training before accepting a particular type of ATC clearance.
It is bad enough that the FAA seems to be bound and determined to get around the
requirement to submit proposed new regulations for public comment by calling
regulations something else and simply issuing them, but to then make a new rule
and not tell pilots about it is Kafkaesque. Are there other rules in internal
bulletins we don't know about? How big is this iceberg? I guess we are only to
learn of them when we violate one. Law enforcement of that sort is the kind of
thing that starts revolutions.
...The Season Of The FAA's Discontent?
Keep your eyes open; the top folks at the FAA seem to be in the mode of
avoiding public comment and doing end runs around the rule-making process. Most
recently, the FAA attempted to simply issue a very involved AD on turbocharged
twin Cessna exhaust systems without going through the normal Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking by essentially claiming the AD was of an emergency nature. AVweb,
the Cessna Pilots Association and AOPA raised a stink and the AD is now going to
go out for comment for a very short period. The top echelon of the FAA is
ignoring the input of the pilots whom they are supposed to be serving.
Personally, I am glad my EAA and AOPA dues are up to date. When dealing with
a 900-pound gorilla it is wise to have some firepower on your side. The
economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote about countervailing powers some years
back. He was ahead of his time. When individual pilots face a massive
bureaucracy our only hope is to band together in the hopes of having the kind of
power needed to have an effect on that bureaucracy. It also certainly doesn't
hurt to write to your representatives in Congress frequently.
So, say nice things to Atlanta ARTCC, but don't accept any land and hold short
clearances until you've been trained.
See you next month.
|