In Government Executive, the DHS inspector general stated that GA terrorism threat is "mostly hypothetical". Richard Skinner also said "The current status of [general aviation] operations does not present a serious homeland security vulnerability requiring TSA to increase regulatory oversight of the industry".
The key thing to remember is that the backing analysis is attempting quantify risk, making it measurable against other areas of security risk. There is always risk. It is matter of determining the level of effort and cost associated with further mitigation of each risk. Richard Skinner uses the word 'serious' as a very lax reference to the weight associated with the risk. In the end, he provides a distilled conclusion not in opposition what many pilots call 'common sense'.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
132 Ways to Restrict our Freedom
In his New York Time article A Threat in Every Port, Dr. Lawrence Wein provides a summary of his path analysis on bomb delivery to a US city. In his final sentence, he writes:
The second item, monitoring domestic flights by small planes, does not sit equally with the other suggested actions. Consider that land borders are the LEAST controlled elements of our nation. They are hard to secure. Immigrants and illegal substances make it into this country every DAY. Once in, a van can move substances just about every where. For example, it could be driven into a parking garage of a major building in a big city without much notice. A small plane entering class B airspace without a clearance is going to get noticed. Most cities reside under class B airspace. Perhaps he thinks this is an easier target. However, the author states the terrorists will find alternate paths, so easy does not always mean cost effective. Within the last few years, a small plane can not get close to the monuments in DC. A few years ago, a disgruntled citizen drove a farm tractor into the tidal basin, IN THE MIDDLE OF MORNING RUSH HOUR!
I would like to see some domain experts weight the 132 paths. I think it is necessary before recommendations are made. Before this is done, such analysis can only be deemed incomplete.
I can think of quite a few benefits to increasing land border security. It seems to me, this would be a better use of American dollars than going after GA.
This suggestion does not mean GA cannot be involved in the security of America. I have yet to see a comprehensive online training course offered to pilots on how to notice suspicious behavior and provide guidelines on how to help provide security of small air fields. There does not exist a 'hotline' concept or set of procedures for reporting suspicious behavior other than reporting unsafe, accident or incident activities that violate regulations. Let us use the best and most widely spread GA resources, namely FBOs and pilots. Many of resources are already in place to do this. The communication channels and procedure are not!
But its bigger task is to turn that analysis into action, initially by stepping up the screening of air cargo, better monitoring domestic flights by small planes, and improving the ability to detect highly enriched uranium and fissile material at sea.
The second item, monitoring domestic flights by small planes, does not sit equally with the other suggested actions. Consider that land borders are the LEAST controlled elements of our nation. They are hard to secure. Immigrants and illegal substances make it into this country every DAY. Once in, a van can move substances just about every where. For example, it could be driven into a parking garage of a major building in a big city without much notice. A small plane entering class B airspace without a clearance is going to get noticed. Most cities reside under class B airspace. Perhaps he thinks this is an easier target. However, the author states the terrorists will find alternate paths, so easy does not always mean cost effective. Within the last few years, a small plane can not get close to the monuments in DC. A few years ago, a disgruntled citizen drove a farm tractor into the tidal basin, IN THE MIDDLE OF MORNING RUSH HOUR!
I would like to see some domain experts weight the 132 paths. I think it is necessary before recommendations are made. Before this is done, such analysis can only be deemed incomplete.
I can think of quite a few benefits to increasing land border security. It seems to me, this would be a better use of American dollars than going after GA.
This suggestion does not mean GA cannot be involved in the security of America. I have yet to see a comprehensive online training course offered to pilots on how to notice suspicious behavior and provide guidelines on how to help provide security of small air fields. There does not exist a 'hotline' concept or set of procedures for reporting suspicious behavior other than reporting unsafe, accident or incident activities that violate regulations. Let us use the best and most widely spread GA resources, namely FBOs and pilots. Many of resources are already in place to do this. The communication channels and procedure are not!
Monday, June 15, 2009
Ah hah
After a scheduling mishap on Monday, I decided to return the airport on Friday to get some practice time in the pattern. Geoff, my other instructor, wanted me to do no-flap landings. I did not recall doing that, so I invited him up to come up with me after I went out for a 'warm up'. I picked up Geoff after performing 3 short field take-offs and with standard landings. Other than repeatedly forgetting carb heat, I was doing a fine job...until Geoff got into the plane.
I started a normal takeoff with Geoff. We went around and I executed a fine no-flaps landing. I had gone through all the check lists properly (except that carb heat). Geoff was thinking that one more time around would do it since I was flying so well. That is when things went south. On a no-flaps landing, the trim is considerably different. I did not retrim the plan for take-off. So when Geoff asked me to show him a soft field take-off, naturally I botched the procedure. The trim made it difficult to keep the nose down while building up airspeed in ground effect. I had to apply more forward pressure than I was expecting to.
After fixing the trim, I proceeded to do a soft field landing. In prior soft field attempts, I did not have a much of problem. I never bothered to practice them. With higher density altitude and 225 extra pounds in the airplane, I did not demonstrate anything but a THUD. Geoff flew the next round, demonstrating to me what he wanted to see. I watched closely to everything including the power settings. Geoff then had me go around again. In my second attempt, the soft field take-off was fine, with the plane now trimmed properly. The second landing...THUD. So much for soft! At this time, our empty stomachs and the heat were annoying us so we called it a day.
I tried to analyze the situation, asking questions about how much power (1700 RPM maybe) is required for a soft field landind. Geoff kept saying "provide as much power as necessary". I needed to fly the plane on to the runway. It is like flying with the wheels on the ground.
I went out again on Sunday night. This time, the density altitude was higher and the weight was lower. The power setting requirements for a soft field were completely different. It is at this point that the message Geoff attempted to convey to me sunk in. I did not need as much power and my landings were SOFT. I was having a blast, and remembering carb heat.
I was going to go for four landings until bambi decided that 34 Right was a place to park him self. I hear all sorts of deer strike stories. None of them sound good. I kindly notified the tower, waited until they had me and the deer in sight, and then proceeded back to the tie down spot, scaring the deer into grass towards the adjacent runway. I doubt the deer lived past that night. Once deer get into an airport area, they are often terminated.
So, once again, I had some 'ah hah' moments: checklists (keep on them) and do what ever it takes to fly the plane (power, trim, yoke pressures) on to the runway. Obviously, these are broad statements about concepts that I have encountered in prior flights. There comes a time where things start coming together, when the words become actionable, when and a student pilot just 'gets it'. I believe I am at the moment.
I started a normal takeoff with Geoff. We went around and I executed a fine no-flaps landing. I had gone through all the check lists properly (except that carb heat). Geoff was thinking that one more time around would do it since I was flying so well. That is when things went south. On a no-flaps landing, the trim is considerably different. I did not retrim the plan for take-off. So when Geoff asked me to show him a soft field take-off, naturally I botched the procedure. The trim made it difficult to keep the nose down while building up airspeed in ground effect. I had to apply more forward pressure than I was expecting to.
After fixing the trim, I proceeded to do a soft field landing. In prior soft field attempts, I did not have a much of problem. I never bothered to practice them. With higher density altitude and 225 extra pounds in the airplane, I did not demonstrate anything but a THUD. Geoff flew the next round, demonstrating to me what he wanted to see. I watched closely to everything including the power settings. Geoff then had me go around again. In my second attempt, the soft field take-off was fine, with the plane now trimmed properly. The second landing...THUD. So much for soft! At this time, our empty stomachs and the heat were annoying us so we called it a day.
I tried to analyze the situation, asking questions about how much power (1700 RPM maybe) is required for a soft field landind. Geoff kept saying "provide as much power as necessary". I needed to fly the plane on to the runway. It is like flying with the wheels on the ground.
I went out again on Sunday night. This time, the density altitude was higher and the weight was lower. The power setting requirements for a soft field were completely different. It is at this point that the message Geoff attempted to convey to me sunk in. I did not need as much power and my landings were SOFT. I was having a blast, and remembering carb heat.
I was going to go for four landings until bambi decided that 34 Right was a place to park him self. I hear all sorts of deer strike stories. None of them sound good. I kindly notified the tower, waited until they had me and the deer in sight, and then proceeded back to the tie down spot, scaring the deer into grass towards the adjacent runway. I doubt the deer lived past that night. Once deer get into an airport area, they are often terminated.
So, once again, I had some 'ah hah' moments: checklists (keep on them) and do what ever it takes to fly the plane (power, trim, yoke pressures) on to the runway. Obviously, these are broad statements about concepts that I have encountered in prior flights. There comes a time where things start coming together, when the words become actionable, when and a student pilot just 'gets it'. I believe I am at the moment.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Oral Exam Preparation: Day One
Today, I started preparations for the Oral Exam. We started preparations by going over some of questions concerning aircraft maintenance and pilot certification. I even read through a couple A/Ds.
I have been able to take advantage of knowing every maintenance issue with the plane I fly since I am almost exclusively the only pilot using the plane. Any maintenance and A/D compliance does not go unnoticed. However, if I ever rented another plane, I would definitely have to add in extra time to inspect the aircraft logbook. N2229E's log book is organized and without error. I wonder if other logbooks have the same organization and completeness. As with most regulations, compliance can mean many things. In general, compliance does not address intricacies of indexing and organizing records. Rather, it addresses methods of compliance and completeness.
After some ground school, we went flying. It was distracting having an instructor in the plane again. It increased my work load and made me appreciate the work load I will incur when taking on passengers. During the flight we covered the following items.
(1) Slow flight with standard 2 minute turns.
(2) Power-off Stalls
(3) Power-on Stalls
(4) Instrument Flying, with lost procedures, turns to headings, airspeed changes and altitude changes.
(5) Soft Field Take off
(6) Short Field Take off
I made some minor mistakes, listed below.
(1) In a short field take-off, flaps are not required in the 172. The round out (Vr) is 55 KIAS, hold the speed at 59 KIAS as soon as practical until clear of the obstacle. Weight and density altitude determine the length in distance to reach these INDICATED speeds. I used flaps and then needed to apply soft field techniques. This is not a bad thing, as short fields are often soft fields. However, I need to recognize the difference.
(2) When doing pattern calls, saying 'turning to base'. Use 'entering' only when entering the pattern like 'entering at 45 to downwind for runway 22'.
(3) I tend to use long base approaches to establish a nice stable approach. If an Engine fails and there is wind, I will not make it. My instructor wants me to pull it in a bit tighter.
(4) I tend mush around a bit while preparing to make altitude changes. If a altitude change notification is given by 'ATC' to descend or ascend, immediately establish a 500 FPM vertical velocity through power changes and trim. Do not exclusively dive and do not pull up. Both cases change the forward velocity of the plane, faster or slower respectively.
(5) I usually respond to unsighted traffic calls with 'looking for traffic'. The correct phraseology is 'negative traffic'.
If today's flight was my check ride, would I have passed? Yes. However, I am not going to settle for that. I want to be instrumented rated, which requires an increased level of accuracy. As my instructor says, he wants me to "kick some ass". I am on it.
I have been able to take advantage of knowing every maintenance issue with the plane I fly since I am almost exclusively the only pilot using the plane. Any maintenance and A/D compliance does not go unnoticed. However, if I ever rented another plane, I would definitely have to add in extra time to inspect the aircraft logbook. N2229E's log book is organized and without error. I wonder if other logbooks have the same organization and completeness. As with most regulations, compliance can mean many things. In general, compliance does not address intricacies of indexing and organizing records. Rather, it addresses methods of compliance and completeness.
After some ground school, we went flying. It was distracting having an instructor in the plane again. It increased my work load and made me appreciate the work load I will incur when taking on passengers. During the flight we covered the following items.
(1) Slow flight with standard 2 minute turns.
(2) Power-off Stalls
(3) Power-on Stalls
(4) Instrument Flying, with lost procedures, turns to headings, airspeed changes and altitude changes.
(5) Soft Field Take off
(6) Short Field Take off
I made some minor mistakes, listed below.
(1) In a short field take-off, flaps are not required in the 172. The round out (Vr) is 55 KIAS, hold the speed at 59 KIAS as soon as practical until clear of the obstacle. Weight and density altitude determine the length in distance to reach these INDICATED speeds. I used flaps and then needed to apply soft field techniques. This is not a bad thing, as short fields are often soft fields. However, I need to recognize the difference.
(2) When doing pattern calls, saying 'turning to base'. Use 'entering' only when entering the pattern like 'entering at 45 to downwind for runway 22'.
(3) I tend to use long base approaches to establish a nice stable approach. If an Engine fails and there is wind, I will not make it. My instructor wants me to pull it in a bit tighter.
(4) I tend mush around a bit while preparing to make altitude changes. If a altitude change notification is given by 'ATC' to descend or ascend, immediately establish a 500 FPM vertical velocity through power changes and trim. Do not exclusively dive and do not pull up. Both cases change the forward velocity of the plane, faster or slower respectively.
(5) I usually respond to unsighted traffic calls with 'looking for traffic'. The correct phraseology is 'negative traffic'.
If today's flight was my check ride, would I have passed? Yes. However, I am not going to settle for that. I want to be instrumented rated, which requires an increased level of accuracy. As my instructor says, he wants me to "kick some ass". I am on it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
