The Hunt

While a directionally challenged pilot from Maine blundered into the SFRA without authorization with his small Cessna, bringing fear to Washington DC and forcing a military confrontation of grand proportions, I was hunting for grass runways. The poor guy at TRACON must have thought I was nuts, zig-zagging all over the place. I met the guy from TRACON assigned to my sector a week before. I aim to bring amusement.

So what's with the hunt? Well, it is a lesson in diversion if required, such as mechanical problems or other such matters such as closing down airports or airspace due to crisis. Grass strips are not easy to see from the air. Below is the sectional with the strips I needed to find. I found 4 out of 5. I am determined to go back and find the other one. I snapped a couple of pics also shown below. I included Airlie, even though it was not one of the five I needed to find.

Sectional

AVIACRES

Horse Feathers

Airlie

This adventure was great. I used may skills: pilotage, dead-reckoning, instruments, slow flight, and steep turns. I used the VOR quite a bit. I first dialed up 270 on the Casanova VOR to find Horse Feathers. When I passed and did not see it, I headed up to Airlie and then headed south (190 degrees magnetic) till I found Horse Feathers. Airlie was easy to find and acted as great starting point. Once I found Horse Feathers, the other two neighbors were easy to see. Warrenton has nice big checkered red and white roof on a nearby hanger.

To find the southern airports, I first centered the needle on the Casanova VOR (TO) and flew until the TO went to FROM (passing over the VOR). I then headed 215 degrees magnetic to find Pleasantdale (using the VOR 'FROM' on the 215 radial). I missed it and circled a few times before giving up. I then went after Berryvale. The way I found that was interesting. I found Culpeper and then flew 280 degrees until I saw the radio tower and then looked around the tower. The sectional shows the little Tee-Pee looking mark near the airport.

The sectional also has a circle on the NAILR NDB. The point of this exercise is to fly with the ADF needle pointing up (to 0 on a ADF without a compass card) until the needle flips to point behind the plane. Done!

My adventure was near the SFRA line! Did I blunder? No! Sorry Mr. Maine pilot. I know our government is over-zealous in their expensive response to your ingress into the SFRA (there is no easy way to call you up and inquire about your intent). However, most people in this country do not see it that way. Most people instead look at you, Mr. Maine pilot, as the problem. That means that your mistake puts a blight on the general aviation industry. At this time of economic crisis and a country on the verge of pushing legislation for GA user fees, such mistakes have huge ramifications.

PLEASE! Pilots flying in or near the SFRA, pay attention. If unsure, turn around and LAND!

Potomac TRACON Operation Raincheck & ADIZ/SFRA

My son and I went to the seminar last Saturday. Any event with donuts and hotdogs is a great event in my son's eyes. When flying out of Manassas in the SFRA, sometimes I feel Potomac is a barrier to entry. My instructor keeps telling me that Potomac is a service like other Tracons around the country and should be treated as such. He is right. Ultimately, Potomac Tracon keeps the skys and the underlying greater Washington DC area safe. With respect to the FRZ, I have no desire to fly over monuments. Even if it was allowed, it seems like it would be an awfully congested airspace with Reagan National traffic and all the other potential sight-seeing pilots.

Part of the presentation included numerical facts about number of accidents and number of deviations over that last five years. As one would hope when such a service is put into place, the numbers went down drastically. Part of this is due to better pilot education. Part of this is due to improvement of the service. Part of this is due to fear of the SFRA.

When it comes to the SFRA, I think I am not alone when I question the amount of freedom within the zone that is granted after a flight plan is filed. My plans usually entail a direct ingress or egress through Fluky. What if I want to squeeze between class B and the FRZ to go north? What if I wanted to fly east, squeezed between class B, FRZ and some restricted areas? After the seminar, I feel that these routes are possible with a proper a plan and communication. Although, Tracon will not route GA traffic between class B (Dulles) and the FRZ during peak times.

Most of the time, VFR traffic is handled by two or three dedicated stations. This makes me feel that, if I needed the service, I should not hesitate for a flight following. From what I could tell, during a peak Saturday morning time, the controllers are well within their capabilities to handle it. The controllers were friendly, professional, relaxed and very efficient. Even the hand-offs were a work of art. I have experienced hiccups in the service, even with my low time in the plane. That never gave me warm fuzzies about how things are handled. Now, I feel a bit relieved, meeting the controllers and watching them work.

I noticed a few funny things that seemed odd to me. The ticket dispensers at each station are not used. There is still a set of professionals that handle the clearance calls (IFR and VFR), get the ticket and WALK it over to the controller who handles the sector that plane flies through. I also noticed that, for VFR traffic requesting ingress to the SFRA, the DEN mother needs to be consulted if a plane does not call to open a plan within 15 minutes of the SFRA flight plan start time. The DEN mother needs to look up the N number, as it is not directly available to the controller. This means walking away from the station. It is only a few steps away and the radio is never left behind. Still, odd. After letting these observations stew a bit, I realized that this is not all bad. Technology is not everything. These direct interactions may dispel some confusion and are less likely lead to issues of when pressing the wrong buttons.

Dual Cross Country Radio Mishaps

My instructor and I flew from Manassas to Chesterfield County and back. It took me a while to figure how to summarize what I learned from this experience. Most of the 'problems' involved the radio and communication. The flight started with my instructor's headset jacks malfunctioning during the initial startup procedures. He spent the whole flight giving me hand gestures and listening to the speaker.

The next issue was a strange conversation with ground. I did everything right at the time, so I was confused why the conversation had so much confusion. I had radioed ground, detailing who I was, where I was, and what I wanted to do. The ground ignored the 'where' and the 'what' for a moment to inquire about my equipment code. I replied Uniform. This means I have a transponder with encoding altimeter. Ground then asked in a excited voice of disbelief: 'You do not have transponder'? Weird. I replied, 'Yes, I have a transponder with altimeter encoding'. The reply: 'You do not have altimeter encoding?'. Me: 'Yes, I do have a transponder with mode C' (same thing). Ground: 'You do or do not?'. Me: 'Do!'. Silence. Then ground replied with frequency and transponder code. I replied with the verification and then questioned ground if they cleared me to head to the runway. Once again, ground barks at me that they have not granted me clearance to taxi. I could not remember with all the confusion, so I asked. Ground apparently did not like that. What a mess!

Why did this happen? Well, it took sometime to put the pieces together. The mistake was partially mine. When filing the SFRA flight plan, I forgot to mention to FSS that I had a pre-stored plan. The stored plan had the information, including equipment code, for the plane. FSS created a new plan but DID not inquire about the equipment. Had they inquired, I would have caught on to the mistake. So the new plan was submitted without the equipment code. I later learned that there was an error in the prestored plan as well. It contained an equipment code Golf (for GPS). This is due to maintaining compliance with SFRA procedures when flying out of Leesburg.

The radio issues did not end here. Chesterfield County radio was out along with their ASOS. I used Richmond's ATIS for surface information and then picked the runway I liked the best, making the appropriate pattern calls. No one was responding.

Coming back into Manassas, we were an hourly early. It took me a few times, stating 'we are an hourly' to Approach, before Approach found the return SFRA flight plan and cleared me to enter. I explain why in a future blog. I always notify them around Warrenton. It is a good place to land if clearance is not granted. It is close to Manassas, so I could get a ride back.

Crosswind Landings

I soloed today for the second time. After all the crosswind work in the past, my instructor raised my limitations for flying in wind to 15 KTs and 10 KTs crosswind maximums. During my flight, winds were at 13 KTs with variable direction changes resulting crosswind components between 8 and 11 KTs. Very close to my limits!

I went around the pattern once, landed and called it a day. One landing was enough. My landing was fine. With the higher airspeed, I had to hold the plane in ground effect longer, with the wing banked into the wind, as the plane slowed down.

This flight was sort of a test. My instructors were watching from the ground. The test was NOT to see if I could fly a pattern in this weather. The test was to see if I new when to call it quits. I did. I passed.

Some other tidbits:

• There was a larger multi-turboprop engine plane in the runup area. I pulled into the runup behind but off to the side of the plane to accomplish three goals. (1) The pilot of the other plane could see me. (2) I was no where near the prop blast. (3) I did not get in the other planes path to the runway.
• Airspeed must be maintained in winds. I kept the flaps at 10 degrees until just about crossing the threshold. I had plenty of runway and I was go to use whatever I needed. I never exceeded 20 degrees of flaps. My airspeed at the time of crossing the threshold was still 70 KIAS. Ground speed was a but slower due to the wind.
  
• Good communication avoided any confusion about changes to my pattern today. Ground control directed me to 16L. When ready to takeoff, the tower asked if I was using right or left traffic. I stated left. The tower then cleared me to cross 16L to hold short of 16R. I verified this clearance. When cleared for takeoff on 16R, I reaffirmed with the tower that I was going to use 'right hand' traffic pattern, as I am now taking off from the other runway. Tower kindly explained that they would direct me to 16L for landing, using right hand traffic. Good to go!
  

Thoughts about the Stolen Canadian Cessna Lands In Missouri

Lots of noise about this recent incident. It looks to me like the system worked. No one was hurt physically and the problem seems to be adequately assessed by our military. Sure it is expensive. What is the alternative? We have freedoms in this country we need to protect. Canada has similar freedoms to protect. In the USA, TSA is already requiring more documentation and more controls for smaller airports and the planes stationed there. The new procedures are a preventive strike against an incident which has yet to occur since 9/11--someone using a small plane as a destructive weapon. The line on how much security and infrastructure is needed is subjective at this point: cost vs. freedom vs. tangible threat is hard to balance here.

Can security from small aircraft threats be trusted on the vigilant GA pilots? In many cases, yes. A watchful eye is maintained by many pilots. Pilots are trained to be observant. They are protecting themselves, their planes, their passengers and their freedom. We do not hear about all the incidents adverted by GA pilots in the news. Boring stuff. Instead, news jumps on incidents such as the this latest one that required military involvement. I can tell you that FBO personnel at airports are watchful and observant. Many times it is out of pure curiosity. Either way, they see things. That's what we want. That is what TSA is asking FBOs and pilots to do. It is being done. It is working.

Now, let me address a few crazy comments found in the news with no factual basis.

Why are some people even suggesting this a government sponsored test? It serves no purpose to speculate in this direction without sufficient evidence. It's pure paranoia.

Based on scientific evidence, the FAA has established that oxygen is required by pilots at altitudes greater than 12000 feet for over 30 minutes. This guy was way above that for longer. Seems like oxygen deficiency is plausible. Why do some people doubt? This guy obviously had a deficiency of some kind, regardless of oxygen. In a stressful situation, the pilot practically shutdown mentally.

Why are some people complaining about the key left in the plane? If someone really wanted to take a plane of this size, a key is not required. The key is a simple deterrent. That's all. It is fairly simple to 'hot wire' a Cessna 172.

Could an explosive be placed on plane like this? Yes. Nothing of great size. Hopping a fence with a 100 pound bag is hardly easy; it's a bit risky if the intent is too complete an act of violence. Heavily loaded, chances are the plane of this size would not have made it to any critical destination with a heavy load. I would think that a terrorist organization would take an approach that has better chances of success than a guy hoping a fence to steal a little plane. Maybe I am wrong.

In the end, I can understand not leaving things to chance. I understand the show of concern. But we should look at the problem objectively. The best thing to improve is educate pilots and FBO personnel on what looks suspicious. I would not mind having a training like that. I do feel empowered to stop any threat to property or persons. As a pilot, safety in all aspects of aviaition is tantamount.

Why did I not fly today?!

It is not that windy: KHEF 071255Z AUTO 29009G14KT 260V320 10SM BKN065 05/M05 A2955 RMK AO1

I have been having trouble sleeping so I have been staying in bed longer. This has cost me two opportunities to fly this week already. With these fast moving fronts, the opportunities requires me be ready to get the airport when on short notice. I just want to fly the pattern. Sunday was a beautiful day to fly. I designate most Sundays as family day and I have not flown on Sunday as of yet.

The weather man last night stated that the low pressure area in the north east was pushing wind down to the Mid-Atlantic region. Normally, low pressures tend to suck the wind into the center from the tracks parallel to the isobars, not pushing it out. However, the weatherman said something about rapid heating and cooling of the ground that results in a change to the direction of the wind. My guess is the lifting action of the heat from the ground is offsetting the wind. It is pretty dry here so the cloud cover is high and sparse, allowing more sun to penetrate the atmosphere and reach the ground. The thunderstorms have been quick and weak. I think the high winds has helped keep the tremendous updrafts of thunderstorms to a minimum. I remember hearing recently that thunderstorms do not occur if the rising moisture cannot reach to -10 degree Celsius point in the atmosphere.

Anyway, I plan on flying the next two days: solo pattern work and a cross country to Chesterfield County, VA. Stay tuned.

Did Eric B or Eric Bruce ace the PPA knowledge test?

Depends on the perspective. My Medical Certificate, my Birth Certificate AND my US Passport claim that Eric Bruce passed. Since I only entered my middle initial when applying for my Virginia State Driver's Licence, my driver's license and my FAA knowledge test results claim that Eric B passed. What's the difference? The FAA clearly states ( in the last three weeks or so ) that exam proctors must only present the knowledge test to the person whose name EXACTLY matches the name on the presented form of picture ID. Today, that was my driver's license.

What happens next? Not sure. Probably nothing, but I am irritated. The posting page for the exam results CLEARLY request Middle Name, not Middle Initial. This is consistent with the FAA Medical Request Form. But, my proctor MUST match the name EXACTLY to my ID. So, we were FORCED to change Bruce to B. I now have a smaller middlename according to the FAA. Identify Theives!!! Leave it to another technocratic government body to further confuse the issue.

I am a software programmer by trade. I spent two years cleaning up data for a data warehouse. I understand the need for clean consistent data. But there comes a point where simple cleansing rules are required, such as matching the initial B to Bruce. Now, if I decide to become Eric Bruce again, the paper work would be enormous because the FAA cannot hire a descent engineer to write a routine that says IF the user provides ID with an INITIAL for the middle name and the initial matches the presented Middle Name, then consider this individual identification as consistent. Duhhh!!

Anyways, I passed, and I am relieved that this part my journey is over. I just want to apply my knowledge now. I found both ASA Prep Ware and Sporty's $10 online test and practice tools instrumental in my success. Those tool's rock!


My family was happy for me, making me a nice card.

Bird Smells

After cleaning out the bird nest in the empennage, I was able to fly three times in the pattern. Even though I wore rubber gloves, I could smell bird on me the rest of day.

The flying felt great, so it was a fair price to pay. The wind was 8 to 12 knots and the direction was variable from 300 to 350. Fun stuff. My instructor pulled the mixture abeam the numbers for a simulated engine failure. I had no issue landing in this scenario. It was my best landing out of the three. I had to consult to POH upon completion for verification. I was under the impression that the 65 KIAS was applicable to 'best glide' at 10 degrees of flaps. It is not. 60 KIAS is used for up to 20 degrees of flaps.

When establishing 'best glide', it is best to avoid flaps until the landing point is picked and assured. Up to 15 degrees of flaps is mostly lift. After that, it is pretty much all drag.

I also worked on soft field take-off. It just feels so odd to push the nose down when flying so close to the ground. The idea is to stay in ground-effect waiting until the speed reaches 61 KIAS. It is more pressure on the yoke than I expect. I will get used to it.

My instructor and I postponed the night excursion. Bill needed to get current. We thought about having Bill make three full stop trips around in the pattern and then picking me up. With sunset at 7:30 PM EST, regulation mandates that he not take off until 8:30--one hour after sunset. The means we cannot start flying until 9:00. That is a bit late.

Another good day for crosswind landings

My intention for flying yesterday was simple. I wanted to solo in the pattern again. This is confidence boosting exercise as much as it is practice. With winds at 10 to 12 knots and gusts up to 20 knots, this outside my comfort zone to fly solo. Luckily, Instructor Geoff sat with me. No earth shattering lessons to report on cross wind landings. Been there, done that. Just need to firm up the skills as expected. Just a few tidbits to remember, as follows:

(1) Announce to the tower the intention to land, even in the pattern, as soon as mid-field. I tend to wait till the plane is abeam the numbers.

(2) If I am in the glide slope, do make power changes until over the threshold.

(3) Do not be so quick to add 20 degrees of flaps until on final when a strong wind is present. Judge the ground speed (as it is slower) and the glide slope. Just make sure the the altimiter is in the green (65 knots) but do not assume it is correct (TAS) with a wind.

That is pretty much it. All my landings were safe. The last one was a bit odd, as I reduced power too soon and rapidly lost airspeed in the flare. Luckily, I recovered fairly well with a firm (no bounce) landing 5 feet off the center line.

A have minor correction for a previous post. I mentioned, on an ILS approach in IMC, the copilot takes control of the plane once the runway is in sight. I investigated this procedure further and it is not a strict procedure. It depends on the airline or organization. For example, military pilots do not do this. The reason, I am told, is that the copilot may trim the plane differently, and unless they have flown with the same PIC along time, they would need to adjust. This is not a good thing 600 feet above the ground in a jet at 150 KIAS. It was funny, because I noticed my instructor trimmed the plane different than I. I tend to add a little more elevator trim so I can fly in 20 or 30 degrees of flap, and gain airspeed quickly. With Bill's trim, I felt the need to use 40 degrees of flaps to get the plane to 60 KIAS. My reasoned approach to trimming the plane comes from two considerations: (1) most planes do not have 40 degrees of flaps and (2) one should never retract flaps once added in order to gain airspeed. The risk of losing lift at the same time can and often does have detrimental effects.

First ILS Approach

I know what some pilots may be thinking. Why is a twenty-some hour student pilot flying an ILS Approach? Well, my enthusiasm and my instructor's optimism got the better of us today. FSS declared 'VFR not recommend'. The fog looked like it was burning off quickly, we had 5 plus SM visibility at the airport and a thin layer of fog above us. We could see the Sun poke through. We decided to go flying. Now, I could pin this on my instructor as his misjudgement. But, at twenty some hours, the student has to start learning to be firm with his decision making. I should have called off the flight.

So the 0.6 hour flight was short. After taking off from Manassas and turning to our Westerly heading towards Fluky, I climbed to FL020. What I saw for many miles was a blanket of white. Not even a spec of ground. Disorienting? Somewhat. I kept thinking that I was flying to far South and had this strong desire to turn right. Before we reached the edge of the SFRA, my instructor radioed approach control for an ILS approach back to Manassas, confirming that the plane is instrument certified.

The conversation between us and Potomac Approach was a series of exchanges, confirming altitude and heading changes. At the time we were west/south-west of Manassas, having taken off from 16L (heading 160 degrees for non-pilots). We were vectored northward (360 degrees) climbing and holding FL027. My instructor, Bill, maintained 105 knots, keeping the carb heat on. Speed is important since we were the slowest thing out there. To not hold up traffic, Approach brought us in tight to DORGE ( the middle marker ). I am not entirely certain of the distance but I believe we picked up the localizer for 16L at around 3 to 4 miles out, so we intercepted the glide slope pretty close to DORGE. That leaves plenty of time for a small slow plane to nail the glide slope at FL027. Since we were vectored into the proper altitude on glide slope, we did not need to dial up ARMEL on the 227 radial for positioning.

The fog was breaking at around 700 AGL. On a faster plane, the PIC is flying instruments while the copilot is looking for the runway. As soon as he sees it, the copilot takes over so the PIC does not have to readjust his vision ( a couple seconds at this point is too long ). Although not as smooth, Bill and I did roughly the same thing. Once I had the runway in sight, I took control. Bill had plenty of time as we are SLOW. It is more a matter of learning crew resource management.

In crew resource management, I did not sit idle while my instructor followed vectors to the glide path. I looked up the localizer frequency, kept checking the directional gyro, looked for traffic, and made sure the checklists were followed: carb heat on and landing lights on.

All in all, still a good lesson.