Category: Flying

“Ethiopian MAX Crash Simulator Scenario Stuns Pilots” (Aviation Week) describes an American crew given a comparatively trivial challenge. They were put into a sim and advised in advance that the MCAS system would go haywire. They started from a 10,000′ moderate speed (250 knots) cruise.

This is analogous to the crews that were given the “Skiles and Sully” US Air 1549 scenario and were able to do a 180-degree turn and land back at LaGuardia on a dry runway.

Piece of cake, right?

What the U.S. crew found was eye-opening. Keeping the aircraft level required significant aft-column pressure by the captain, and aerodynamic forces prevented the first officer from moving the trim wheel a full turn. They resorted to a little-known procedure to regain control. The crew repeatedly executed a three-step process known as the roller coaster. First, let the aircraft’s nose drop, removing elevator nose-down force. Second, crank the trim wheel, inputting nose-up stabilizer, as the aircraft descends. Third, pull back on the yokes to raise the nose and slow the descent. The excessive descent rates during the first two steps meant the crew got as low as 2,000 ft. during the recovery.

(i.e., they would have crashed if they hadn’t started with at least 8,000′ of altitude above the ground)

Related:

• https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2018/11/11/boeing-737-crash-is-first-mass-killing-by-software/
• “Foreign Airline Safety versus U.S. Major Airlines” (a lot of Americans, never short on pride in our unique competence, were blaming the foreign crews that couldn’t recover from American systems and software engineering)

Full post, including comments

Aircraft performance is a function of attitude (pitch and bank) and power. So you’d think that, in an ideal world, these two items would be displayed prominently right in front of each pilot.

This wasn’t possible in the old days because each item was presented on a different instrument. Thus the Boeing B-17 or B-29 cockpit with attitude indicators in front of each pilot and some engine gauges in the middle.

Why not combine this information and summarize it today on the “glass” (LCD) panels that are in front of today’s pilots?

Who does this right? Cirrus! The Perspective system that they co-designed with Garmin for the latest SR20 and SR22 airplanes show percent power at the top left of the primary flight display (regular G1000 does not have this). It isn’t perfect because a lot of space is wasted, e.g., “65% Power” has information only in 2 out of 9 characters, since the “% Power” never varies. I would rather see “65 CRUISE”, “95 CLIMB”, “25 DESCEND”, and “15 APPROACH”.

Who gets this wrong? Boeing, I think. People have wondered why the pilots of the latest B737 MAX to crash didn’t pull the climb power out. One possible reason is that nowhere on the primary flight display (PFD) images that I’ve been able to find is power indicated:

Power is displayed in the Boeing B-17/B-29 location: in the center of the panel (dashboard).

It fascinates me that decades after the obvious user interface became easy to implement (microprocessors have to paint the pixels, so why not put in the information that matters?) we still don’t have the obvious user interface.

Related:

• https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2019/03/20/could-the-boeing-737-max-be-flown-safely-with-a-robot-dome-light-third-pilot/
• https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2019/03/17/certification-process-for-the-737-max-silent-gradual-pusher-system/
• https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2018/11/11/boeing-737-crash-is-first-mass-killing-by-software/

Full post, including comments

“East Brookfield Man Arrested for Piloting Helicopter From Backyard” (NECN):

A Massachusetts man who previously had his pilot’s license revoked after he helped steal a helicopter has been accused of making dozens of illegal helicopter takeoffs and landings from his East Brookfield home.

Antonio Santonastaso, 59, was arrested Wednesday in connection to the unlawful flights, according to U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling. He allegedly made more than 50 flights from his backyard between April and November of 2018.

Santonastso’s pilot’s license was revoked in 2000 by the Federal Aviation Administration because of his participation in the theft of a helicopter from the Norwood Memorial Airport, officials said.

Cue footage of a Robinson R22.

He may face more prison time than served by the typical convicted Nazi or Japanese war criminal:

Santonastso has been charged with flying without proper certification and making false statements to federal agents. If convicted, he faces up to five years in prison, a fine of $250,000 and up to three years of supervised release.

Glad to see it isn’t anyone associated with our flight school!

Full post, including comments

Friends have been asking me about the Boeing 737 that ran off the runway approximately 9:40 pm last night at the Jacksonville Naval Air Station. Here’s the METAR:

KNIP 040153Z 13003KT 2SM +TSRA BR SCT010 BKN021CB OVC035 23/21 A2998 RMK AO2 TSB04 SLP149 FRQ LTGIC OHD TS OHD MOV E T1 SET P0074 T02280206

That’s May 4 at 01:53 GMT. Subtract four hours and we get to 9:53 pm local time, roughly when the crash occurred.

The rain wasn’t all that heavy because the visibility was still 2 statute miles. There was essentially no wind (13003KT = 3 knots from 130, favoring runway 10, which is what was being used). The notes are definitely scary, e.g., “frequent lightning overhead thunderstorm overhead,” but perhaps a Florida-based crew has become inured to this.

The 9000′ runway length is a little longer than standard for a 737.

What wasn’t standard? Unlike almost any U.S. civilian airport that receives commercial jet traffic, the runway wasn’t grooved (compare KNIP to nearby KJAX, for example, or even our flight school’s home airport KBED). A truly flat paved surface makes hydroplaning much more likely. In fact, at our Delta Airlines regional jet subsidiary we didn’t adjust landing distance for rain on a grooved runway. A grooved runway was always considered “dry”.

Full post, including comments

“Two pilots to fly around the globe in Cabri G2” (Vertical) is about a two-seat trainer helicopter that seldom gets farther than 5 nm from its home airport and two French guys who will take it all the way around the world.

(The Robinson R22, despite its challenging low-inertia rotor system and not being designed for training, is a more popular trainer due to its low cost and high reliability. The Cabri costs about the same as a four-seat Robinson R44.)

Related:

• https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2018/08/17/robinson-r66-makes-it-around-the-world/

Full post, including comments

Sharing a “Cirrus SR22T Transition and Engine Management” page in case it is useful to other flight instructors. I found that there wasn’t anything good out there, even from Cirrus, for pilots who already knew how to fly the SR22 and needed differences training for the SR22T.

People are actually buying these $1 million non-pressurized piston-powered machines. That’s the magic of (a) the parachute, and (b) Cirrus’s incremental annual improvements. General aviation would be a lot more popular, in my opinion, if the Piper Malibu had entered true mass production. Passengers want a quieter ride, to be above the weather and not wearing an oxygen mask, to walk up the airstair door, etc. But Cirrus has done amazing by focusing on the pilot. The G6 airplanes, for example, will automatically turn off the yaw damper below 400′ AGL. No more wondering how the rudder pedals got so crazy stiff on landing!

I would love to see Cirrus do a clean-sheet piston-powered airplane that concentrated on passenger comfort: pressurization plus dramatic reduction in interior noise for a start.

Full post, including comments

A two-seat light sport plane crashes near the runway while a 13-knot wind is blowing. The 90-year-old pilot is killed. Who is to blame? Jasmine, the right-seat Labradoodle, according to the NTSB report. The probable cause:

The pilot’s decision to fly with his large dog in the two-seat, light sport airplane, and the dog’s likely contact with the flight controls during landing, which resulted in the pilot’s loss of airplane control and a subsequent aerodynamic stall when the airplane exceeded its critical angle of attack.

Without a cockpit video recorder, how exactly do we know this?

A witness, who was piloting another airplane in the traffic pattern, reported that, while he was on the downwind leg, he saw the accident airplane on final approach to the runway.

Based on available ground track and engine data, the airplane crossed the runway 27 threshold at a calculated airspeed of 48 knots. About 3 seconds later, the airplane turned right away from the runway heading, and the engine speed increased to takeoff power.

Given the ground track and engine data, it is likely that the dog contacted the aileron and/or stabilator controls during landing, which resulted in the pilot’s loss of airplane control and a subsequent aerodynamic stall at a low altitude when the airplane exceeded its critical angle of attack.

Does it make sense to blame Jasmine? She was manipulating the flight controls? Maybe. But wouldn’t a Labradoodle be more likely to push nose-down rather than grab the yoke with her teeth and pull nose-up? And the Labradoodle was also responsible for initiating a go-around by adding full throttle?

(Separately, as is typical with car accidents that kill humans, the supposedly inferior canine more or less walked away:

After the accident, the witness saw the pilot’s dog, who had been onboard the airplane, running out of the cornfield where the airplane had crashed. First responders were able to catch the dog, who was treated for minor injuries by a local veterinarian.

)

Related:

• 2015 crash of same type of aircraft during go-around (no non-humans on board)
• “Trim Use on Go-Around” (Flying): “The possibility for a stall increases during a go-around when a great deal of nose-up elevator trim is dialed in and full power is suddenly applied. With the elevator trim set for approach attitude, the nose-up pitching moment can be very pronounced, leading to trouble in a hurry if you aren’t on top of things.”
• tutorial on the risks and how to train to avoid them (“Landing Accident Is Safer Than A Go Around Accident”)
• Flying Magazine article citing go-around accidents (“The stats also showed that one in 10 of the go-around efforts resulted in a potentially hazardous outcome”)
• French NSTB-equivalent looks at airliner accidents during go-arounds, including stalls (by a crew of two professional pilots in every case; only Captain Sully was able to fly an Airbus solo!)
• TBM stalled and crashed during a go-around

Full post, including comments