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

  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A

EAA and AOPA have filed formal comments with the FAA that raise questions about the agency’s proposed Airworthiness Directive regarding certain NavWorx ADS-B units. AOPA asked the FAA to provide more information about the unit’s reported deficiencies, and to better explain the necessity for the proposed AD. “The safety benefits offered by UAT [Universal Access Transceiver] technology, along with the cost of compliance, is leading to confusion and concern,” said Justin Barkowski, AOPA director of regulatory affairs. AOPA and EAA also questioned why the AD applies to units installed in both certified and experimental aircraft. “An airworthiness directive is not appropriate to address such an issue regarding a part that was never intended for installation in a type-certificated aircraft,” said Sean Elliott, EAA’s vice president for advocacy and safety.

EAA asked the FAA to withdraw the AD for the ADS600-EXP and instead communicate safety concerns through non-regulatory special airworthiness information bulletins (SAIBs) or safety alerts for operators (SAFOs), which is the usual procedure. As it exists now, EAA said, the FAA’s proposal would set a “troubling precedent” regarding FAA oversight of non-certified parts commonly used in experimental aircraft. The FAA has said it is concerned that some NavWorx ADS600-B units may contain an internal GPS chip that does not meet the FAA’s minimum performance standards for transmitting an aircraft’s accurate location. NavWorx has not denied that there is a problem with the units, but claims the FAA caused the problem by changing its ADS-B technology, and then was uncooperative with the company in trying to find a solution. Last month, the FAA told NavWorx to stop manufacturing the disputed units.

Suhkoi’s Superjet RRJ95, a regional airliner, has been grounded by aviation authorities in Russia and Mexico after inspectors found metal fatigue near the tail in one of the planes. The fleet is fairly new, having entered service in 2011. All of the airplanes must be inspected, and records made including photographs of the suspect parts. If any cracks are found, the “aircraft operation must be terminated,” according to the Russian Federation’s air transport agency. The order doesn’t seem to include any instructions for repair or return to service. Sukhoi Civil Aircraft authorities said on Tuesday they had completed the inspections, but the company didn’t say how many airplanes were found with anomalies. Even if there is a problem, the company said, “the issue is not a critical situation.” The jet features a multi-level redundant structure and has a safety margin which is more than twice the operational loads, according to Sukhoi.

The announcement disrupted air travel in Russia. Aeroflot canceled 21 flights on Saturday, according to The New York Times. In 2012, a Superjet crashed into a mountain in Indonesia during a demo flight, killing everyone on board — 37 aviation executives and journalists, and eight crew. An investigation cited pilot error. The mid-range Superjet, which entered service in April 2011, is the first completely new passenger jet produced in Russia in the post-Soviet era. It carries up to 98 passengers for flights up to 2,800 miles. The project is a joint venture between Sukhoi, of Russia, and Italy's Alenia Aeronautica.

Give the Gift of ForeFlight - Buy Gift Certificate

A Chinese official told local reporters last week that researchers are moving forward with plans to build a four-engine tiltrotor aircraft capable of speeds up to 310 mph, substantially faster than other heavy-lift helicopters. The Blue Whale project was first reported on about three years ago, so last week’s announcement seems to signal a commitment to the ambitious project. "We will design two variants of the Blue Whale — a medium-duty type and a heavy-duty one,” Wu Ximing, chief helicopter designer at the Aviation Industry Corp of China, told China Daily last week. “The medium-duty model will have a maximum takeoff weight of 20 metric tons (22 tons), and the heavy-duty model 40 tons (44 tons).”

The Blue Whale will have four rotating propellers, set on the tips of two parallel wings. Officials have said they plan to have a flying prototype by 2018. Meanwhile, Sikorsky is continuing to develop the S-97 Raider, which first flew in May 2015, for the military market. The Raider, which flies with two counter-rotating rotors plus a horizontal pusher prop at the tail, is expected to reach speeds of about 250 mph.

Sponsor Announcement
AEA Pilots Guide to Avionics 2016-17 Edition || Aircraft Electronics Association
Request Your 2016-17 Pilot's Guide to Avionics
The 2016-17 edition of the Aircraft Electronics Association's Pilot's Guide to Avionics is now available. The publication is a consumer's directory loaded with educational articles about the avionics industry, its products, and its people, which helps pilots and aircraft owners make better buying decisions and locate nearly 1,300 AEA member companies, including government-certified repair stations around the world. To request a complimentary copy, visit AEAPilotsGuide.net.

Colombia’s accident investigation team has released its preliminary report on last month’s fatal air charter crash, and confirmed that the LaMia Avro RJ85 crashed due to fuel exhaustion. The investigators said they found no technical fault with the aircraft, and no evidence of sabotage or a suicide attempt. Twenty-three investigators, including 10 from Colombia, formed the accident investigation team. “Based on the preliminary analysis, the accident investigation continues and will focus on aspects such as organization, operational surveillance and supervision, fuel planning, decision making, and survival,” the civil aeronautics agency said in a statement. The final report is scheduled to be completed in April. Seventy-one passengers and crew died in the crash, and six people survived.

The investigators said the airplane’s flight recorders were recovered and have been analyzed. The team put together a 24-minute video featuring audio from the flight and images showing flight plans and other documents, as well as the final flight path. There was no fire, but the crash had a “minimal survival capacity of both crew and passengers,” the investigators found. The aircraft was 1,000 pounds overweight at takeoff, and the fuel on board was near capacity. “The flight crew was conscious of the fuel limits and that they did not sufficiently have what was needed,” said Freddy Bonilla, head of the investigation team, at a news conference on Monday.  

The captain and first officer discussed the possibility of landing to refuel but decided to continue toward Medellin, Bonilla said, citing the audio recordings. He added that headwinds may have caused the aircraft to use more fuel. The crew asked for priority landing at their destination, Bonilla said, but did not declare an emergency. Just two minutes before the crash, he said, they reported “a total electric failure without fuel." Both Bolivia and Colombia have suspended LaMia’s operating certificates.

Sponsor Announcement
ALT
Over 25,000 Happy GAMIjectors® Customers Can't Be Wrong!
GAMIjectors® have given these aircraft owners reduced cylinder head temperatures, reduced fuel consumption, and smoother engine operation. GAMIjectors® alter the fuel/air ratio in each cylinder so that each cylinder operates with a much more uniform fuel/air ratio than occurs with any other factory set of injectors. To speak to a GAMI engineer, call (888) FLY-GAMI, or go online for complete engineering details.

Our best stories start with you. If you've heard something the flying world might want to know about, tell us. Submit news tips via e-mail here. (Or send them direct to Newstips at AVweb.com.)

Sponsor Announcement
Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance || Available at AVwebBooks.com
Human Factors for A&Ps
A unique book focusing on human factors in the MRO or line maintenance environment but applicable to any team-building situation where the actions of one affect the results and performance of others. Covered in depth are physiological, psychological, and communications factors which affect individual and team performance, thus helping to reduce workplace errors and injuries and ultimately increasing the safety and productivity of the industry. Meets all FAA, ICAO, and EASA standards.
Human Factors: AMT Certification Series
book $ 32.95
e-book $ 29.95
book/e-book bundle $ 39.95

For more information, call (970) 726-5111 or click here.

A couple of years ago, flying into ZRH (Zurich, Switzerland), just the day after the landing fees increased once more, we heard the following conversation while on hold between a Cessna 172 on final and the controller. It was a busy day with lots of commercial traffic.

Controller: Cleared to land runway 28; winds calm, please expedite and can you make it a short landing to the first exit?

Cessna: Negative, we pay for the whole runway, we use the whole runway!


Paulo de Moura

 

 

Sponsor Announcement
Subscribe to 'IFR' Magazine and Test Your Skills
Ready for a Challenge? Test Your Skills with IFR!
Guaranteed important reading for every instrument-rated (or soon to be rated) pilot, IFR speaks your language, understands your concerns, and shares your excitement for flying. It's the only no-holds-barred resource for pilots who have earned their instrument ratings. So get the one magazine written by, and for, instrument-rated pilots — IFR! Click here for details.
Forward this email to a friend
Tailor your alerts!
Click here to update alerts preferences.
AVweb Insider

The other evening I was returning from a flight to the east coast of Florida in an aircraft Sarasota Avionics kindly loaned me for the day. I landed just past dusk when, rare for Florida, the temperature and dewpoint came together and as I was tying down, the fog was forming. We occasionally get marine layers off the Gulf, too, but if that happens four times a year, I’d be surprised.

The best the approaches into Venice can do is 360-foot MDAs and a mile of required visibility. It’s unlikely they’d be of much help in dense fog. For the past three days by early evening, the ASOS had been reporting 200 feet and a ¼ mile, if not indefinite. I’m glad I made it in before it got worse. “Well,” my friend Dan mentioned half seriously, “you’ve always got the synthetic vision.”

True enough. The airplane has a pair of Aspen EFD1000s, with synthetic vision. My initial reaction was that I’d never use syn vision to land or carry on below MDA, but after I thought about that, I asked myself why. The kneejerk answer is that FAR 91.175 is so baked into to me and as an instrument instructor I’ve taught its thou-shalt-not religion for so long that I don’t know anything else. In case you’re rusty on your FARs, 91.175 requires the runway or its environment to be in sight before descending below MDA or DH.

There are technical reasons the regulation is worded the way it is and it isn’t based on some bureaucratic capriciousness. Instrument approaches are designed to be and are 100 percent guaranteed safe if you fly them exactly the way they’re charted and if the equipment you’re flying is functioning correctly. The obstacle clearance is carefully considered with margins for system and human error. The FAA routinely flight checks procedures looking for anomalies. But once you depart the black lines, you’re on your own.

To find a runway out of the clag, however, you necessarily have to fly down a funnel to the minimum obstacle clearance at which point you’re supposed to be able to see the runway visually and land safely. For a standard CAT I ILS, that’s only 200 feet and some GPS approaches offer MDAs nearly as low as that. Two hundred feet isn’t much, which is why instrument pilots who hope to survive to a long and rewarding career best not make a habit of busting DA/DHs and MDAs.

On conventional instrument approaches, the actual statistical risk of busting descents is one of those ineffables. Where and how you do it and in what conditions drives how risky it really is. It’s one thing to burn 50 feet on a needles-centered CAT I ILS, but another to dive out the clouds from a GPS MDA with nothing showing but faith and hope. Yet pilots do it, although I suspect not routinely.

I was once at a Connecticut airport standing outside the FBO shack in dense fog with an instrument student. We were waiting to get at least a half mile to depart on a training flight. We heard one of the local jet operators check in, inbound on the ILS. I told my student he’d get to at least hear a genuine missed approach. As we stood outside on the sodden gray ramp, waiting to hear the roar of spooling engines, we heard instead the unmistakable double squeak of tires on pavement. The lineman shrugged. No way they had the required minimum vis of a mile. It was RVR weather. At least it was an empty leg.

When staring at the digital glory of synthetic vision on a PFD, the temptation to do this routinely must be overwhelming. In really low weather, the runway may not be visible out the windshield, but it’s bigger than hell right there on the PFD. What’s the risk of just going for it if you don’t see anything at DA/MDA? Probably not that much, although I doubt if there’s any meaningful data to put a number on it. Synthetic vision doesn’t depict close-in obstacles off the end of runways, but a runway with an instrument approach isn’t likely to have meaningful close-in obstacles, at least from the missed approach forward to the threshold of the runway. But this varies by approach.

I’ve flown dozens of visual approaches in airplanes with synthetic vision and never noticed one in which the runway wasn’t where it was supposed to be or was misaligned enough to detect, but I also wasn’t looking for apparent misalignment. Even the synthetic centerline matches the real world view, which is impressive when you consider that synthetic vision is doing that with WAAS GPS matched to a terrain database. We’ve come to take this level of performance for granted without thinking about how well it works. 

I haven’t tried landing under the hood with just synthetic vision because it doesn’t provide the necessary depth perception clues. But in low vis, you could certainly use it to get close enough to acquire the runway visually then land normally. I’d guess that would work in quarter-mile visibility or a little less. Are people actually doing it, despite the lack of legal framework, to bend FAR 91.175? No one I know has confessed, but human nature being human nature, I’d be surprised if someone hasn’t done it and if some aren’t doing it routinely—homegrown CAT II.

I’d like to see some system reliability and accuracy data on synthetic vision, but I think it’s time to allow its use for descent and visibility credit for not-for-hire operations. Sure, there’s risk in doing so, but let pilots assume it if they want. The fact that we’re not doing it already probably has more to do with legal inertia than technical considerations. I asked Garmin if they had synthetic vision in mind for this kind of upgrade and they declined to comment. I take that as a yes.

For years, the transport industry has used head-up displays to qualify crews for lower landing minimums or at least to smooth the transition from the gauges to the visual. I flew on in an Alaska Airlines simulator 20 years ago. I’ve poked around to find some data on how widespread HUDs are in airline use, but I can’t get an accurate sense of market penetration, but it’s probably the majority of the fleet. On a recent Southwest flight, the captain told me the entire fleet is HUD equipped and he liked it and used it on every approach, including visuals.

Periodically, we see attempts to offer HUDs for light GA aircraft but they never seem to gain traction. We reported on the latest offering in this video. MyGoFlight says it can integrate synthetic vision, but I’m not sure what that would look like.

HUDs have proven expensive and cumbersome, requiring a combiner-type display to be positioned in front of the pilot’s eyes only when needed. The military is way ahead on this technology and now projects it in a helmet display or, before that, on a mounted combiner that’s permanently in view in the pilot’s sightline out the canopy.

And for GA, how often would a HUD matter? How many pilots fly weather that requires bitter-end transition from the gauges to the visual and how much good would a HUD really do?

Not much, I ‘d guess. Or maybe not enough to justify spending $10,000 to add it. This is a rarified risk area in which there are too few accidents to make much sense of the probabilities. In the aviation press, we write evergreens with tips about how to transition from the gauges to the visual as though it’s fraught with hazards and tricks. It isn’t. Just look out the window.

The Southwest skipper told me he saw benefits in using it for visuals because it gave good windshear cures and made staying on speed easier. Fair enough. But little airplanes are still hand-eye machines and that’s why a lot of us still fly them. Do we really need or even benefit from so much technology just to land a Bonanza? Would it help?

If the FAA ever approves synthetic vision for approach mins credit, I think it would be festooned with so many system and certification requirements that it would be impossible to certify. But then at one time, I thought that about GPS approaches and non-TSO’d gyros too. Maybe the very act of my thinking this will cause it to become true. We can only wish.

Tecnam has been selling the Astore LSA for a while now and long enough for it to have become a best seller. In this video, AVweb's Paul Bertorelli took the airplane for a flight trial.

Cash Back Returns from Aspen Avionics

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.

TKM Avionics || MX170C & MX300 || Direct Slide-In Replacement Nav/Comms You Can Install Yourself in Minutes

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

Contributing Editors
Mary Grady
Elaine Kauh

Contributors
Rick Durden
Kevin Lane-Cummings
Paul Berge
Larry Anglisano

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: