Pilot suicides

Yesterday’s revelation that the recent crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 was caused by an apparent pilot suicide shocked the world. First Officer Andreus Lubitz reportedly locked the captain out of the cockpit and calmly flew the airplane with its 150 passengers into the side of a French mountain, killing everyone on board.

The act of suicide by an airline pilot while flying is not common, but has happened more than most people think. The most well-known suicide pilots, the Japanese kamikazes of World War II, carried no passengers, although the September 11 suicide hijackers did. The Aviation Safety Network lists nine crashes dating back to 1976 that were confirmed to be suicides. Additionally, ABC News notes that a Japan Air Lines pilot crashed his DC-8 in 1982, killing 24 people, but surviving the crash himself. Last year’s disappearance of Malaysia Flight 370 is widely believed to have been due to a pilot suicide as well.

Airline suicide crashes are usually not well known because they have primarily occurred in the third world. The sole suicide crash before Germanwings that affected a Western country was EgyptAir 990, which crashed off the island of Nantucket, Mass. in 1999. The American NTSB determined that a relief first officer crashed the plane into the ocean, killing all 217 people on board, but Egypt disputed the conclusion.

For most people, there are strong psychological barriers against killing oneself or others. A pilot who intentionally crashes his plane has obviously overcome these strong taboos against killing and suicide. While pilots are normal people with normal problems, few people who commit suicide do so while taking hundreds of other lives at the same time. Nevertheless, one study cited by Air & Space Magazine found that suicide was suspected in .33 percent of fatal crashes over 20 years. This is slightly more than one crash per year, mostly involving small airplanes.

Flying is a high stress occupation. Being an airline pilot involves long periods of time away from home and family, which leads to a high divorce rate. The airline industry is often unstable and furloughs (layoffs) or demotions can come suddenly and last years, leading to financial problems. Add to that a grueling schedule with irregular work hours, regular flight tests and medical exams that can quickly end a career, and the knowledge that a momentary lapse can kill or lead to a violation by regulatory authorities and it is easy to understand how a pilot could suffer from depression or substance abuse. In spite of the stress, suicide is not demonstrably higher for pilots according to most studies.

“It's a special job. You are working at irregular times; if you have a family, you are often not there [or] may be at home when everyone is at work,” said Dr. Andre Droog, president of the European Association for Aviation Psychology on Voice of America. “If you are flying intercontinental flights, you may build up jet lag and fatigue and of course you have to manage your life very well.”

In spite of policies at many airlines that encourage pilots to self-report addiction or mental health issues, many pilots are fearful that doing so will cost them their jobs. In 2010, the FAA changed its policy to allow pilots to take antidepressants for mild to moderate depression, but the current policy stipulates that approval is on a case-by-case basis and requires successful treatment for six months, during which time they would not be legal to fly. This effectively means that pilots have to either forgo treatment, fly illegally, or take a six month leave of absence.

In Asia, where several suicide crashes have taken place, many airlines now subject their pilots to psychological testing. “They ask about your mental health, about events that could affect you psychologically,” one captain from an Asian airline told CNBC. “But who willingly admits to anything that could lead to a suspension of their license? I won't. I need my job.”

Since airline crewmembers know each other best, flight crews are encouraged to report any potential problems that they observe. In the United States, many pilot unions have professional standards committees to help resolve interpersonal conflicts. Concerned crewmembers can talk to representatives on these committees without involving company representatives and threatening jobs.

“Never leave a person alone - that's probably the most effective suicide prevention technique there is," said Tony Catanese, a clinical psychologist at Glen Iris Psychology in Melbourne on CNBC.

Federal aviation regulations already require that both pilots remain in the cockpit, but contains an exception for “physiological needs.” For flights lasting from six to eight hours, it is unrealistic to assume that neither pilot would ever have to visit the lavatory. On most flights, there are no relief crews to fill the empty seat for a few minutes. Cockpit doors have been strengthened since the September 11 attacks to resist forcible entry, making it difficult for the second pilot to break back in.

One solution might be for a flight attendant enter the cockpit when one pilot leaves. The Flight Attendant would probably not be able to wrestle the controls from a suicidal pilot, but might be able to at least prevent him from locking the other pilot out.

Ultimately, there is no way to effectively prevent any possibility of future airline pilot suicides. At present, even though the shock of the Germanwings crash is still fresh, the problem of suicides by pilots is a tiny statistical blip. The vast majority of airline pilots around the world are professionals who have learned to cope with life’s problems and keep them out of the cockpit.

 

Read the full article on Aviation Examiner

Flying the Lear 45

The Lear 45 is a light business jet that first flew in 1995. A follow-up to the popular Lear 35 series, the Lear 45 was the first airplane produced after Bombardier purchased Learjet in 1990. At corporate airports around the country and all over the world, the Lear 45 is a common sight.

The Lear 45 is a capable performer. Normally configured, it can seat eight passengers plus two pilots. A belted lav seat can bring the total passenger count to nine. Red line speed is 330 knots or .81 mach. Service ceiling is 51,000 feet.

Sitting on the ramp, the Lear 45 looks fast. Standout features are the large, tinted windscreen, swept wings and turned up winglets. The airplane sits low to the ground, which makes loading passengers and bags easy.

Early 45s configured with –AR engines are somewhat limited when it comes to hot and high operations from short fields. One summer flight from Albuquerque (KABQ) with temperatures approaching 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26 degrees Celsius) required a field length of almost 7,000 feet, compared to a typical required runway length of around 4,000 feet. Newer Lear 45 XRs with –BR engines perform much better under hot and high conditions. The difference is very noticeable on almost any flight that goes into the flight levels with –BR airplanes encountering a shorter time-to-climb and having the ability to maintain higher airspeeds in the climb. An upgrade to –BR engines is available for older aircraft.

One of the most daunting things about the Lear 45 for new pilots is the door. The main cabin door is a clamshell door in two pieces. The lower half descends to become a stair, while the top the half lifts up. Opening or securing the door requires manipulating two separate handles and a latch. While the process seems confusing at first, it quickly becomes second nature.

From a pilot’s perspective, the Lear 45 is a joy to fly. Controls are somewhat heavy without a hydraulic boost, but the airplane is solid. On takeoff, acceleration is normally quick both on the ground and in the early stages of the climb. There is no tiller for control on the ground. Taxi steering is accomplished by rudder pedals as in a light Cessna or Piper.

Avionics are primarily Honeywell Primus Epic with a four screen setup. There are two primary flight displays (PFDs), an EICAS (engine instrument and crew alerting system) screen, and a multifunction display (MFD). The PFDs place the information of the traditional “six pack” instruments, as well as some navigation information, on one screen for each pilot. The EICAS gives a digital representation of engine and system instruments. The MFD normally shows a map screen, but can be used to show PFD or EICAS information in the event of a screen failure. Additionally, both the MFD and the EICAS can show individual pages with information on specific systems such as fuel, pressurization or hydraulics.

Typical for a 20 year old airplane, the avionics suite looks somewhat primitive when compared to the Garmin display in a Cirrus. The newer Lear 75, which has replaced the Lear 45 in production, has replaced the Primus system with Garmin G5000 displays and FMS.

An experienced pilot will quickly notice a peculiar thing about the Lear 45 panel. Even though the EICAS includes the ability to receive CAS messages about system abnormalities, the panel also includes an older-style panel of warning lights. This panel, located in the center of the cockpit above the MFD, duplicates red warning CAS messages. While not readily apparent to the new pilot, the function of this crew warning panel (CWP) is to provide the crew with warning notifications in the event of a total electrical failure in which the display screens are turned off to save battery power.

The real chink in the armor of the avionics system is the Universal UNS-1Ew FMS. The UNS-1 is vastly different from other FMS’s in logic, which can make the transition difficult. The introduction of more and more RNAV arrivals and departures shows the weakness of the Universal. The RNAV arrivals that I frequently fly into Houston contain numerous crossing restrictions where the airplane has to be within a window of about 3,000 feet. Most FMS’s compute a flight path that will put the airplane through the middle of the window and smooth out the descent. In contrast, the Universal defaults to the lowest allowable altitude at each fix. This often translates into steep descents over a short distance. Descending earlier often means using more fuel and a rougher ride for passengers.

Two other quirks of the Lear 45 are repeated in the new Lear 75. First, the APU is limited to ground operation only in both aircraft, which means that it is unusable inflight in a generator or engine failure or for pressurization or climate control. Some early Lear 45s were actually delivered without APUs at all. Second, the spoilers cannot be used with flaps extended. This requires extra planning for some descents and “slam dunk” approaches.

Landing the Lear 45 is a breeze. The airplane handles well, even in a crosswind. The short wingspan and tail-mounted engines mean that pilots can use the same wing-low crosswind technique that is common in light piston airplanes. Trailing link landing gear makes for soft touchdowns. The Lear 45’s reference speed (Vref) for approaches is in the 120 knot range, but its excellent brakes and thrust reversers make stopping easy.

Total fuel capacity is 6,062 pounds (904 gallons). There are two wing tanks and a fuselage tank, the “trunk,” which is located aft of the cabin. Fuel planning can estimated at 1,800 pounds for the first hour, 1,200 pounds for each hour at normal cruise and 1,000 pounds for the last hour with the descent. This would place normal endurance at about four hours with reserves. Maximum range, depending on winds, is approximately 1,500 nautical miles with reserves.

Except for the shortest flights, the Lear 45 is normally operated at 40-41,000 feet. This altitude put the airplane above most airline traffic and allows frequent direct routings. It also gives efficient fuel flows, typically around 600-650 pounds per side per hour. Operating in the low 40s also allows the airplane to maintain a fast cruise, often bumping against the redline of 0.81 mach.

The Lear 40 is a shorter variant of the Lear 45. The Lear 40 is two feet shorter and carries about 700 pounds less fuel, which leads to a somewhat shorter range. The Lear 40, and the follow on Lear 70, are intended as short-range business jets for a small number of passengers.

With the collapse in business jet prices since the onset of the Great Recession, there are many good deals on used Lear 45s. The airplane’s performance and comfort will make sure that the 45 is a staple of corporate flight departments for years to come.

 

Read the full article on Examiner.com

How to annoy your First Officer

My career as a pilot involved spending more than a decade as a First Officer, a copilot to those not initiated into the terms of aviation. After more than ten years and 4,000 hours of flying as an FO at four different companies, I am uniquely qualified to speak on behalf of FOs everywhere and explain to captains what rubs their second-in-command the wrong way. Read on and discover how to annoy your FO.

1. Keep your hand on the flap handle on an approach. This is a common move for both experienced and inexperienced captains. While flying an approach, when the captain feels that it is time to lower the flaps, I would often notice the captain place his hand on the flap handle, just waiting for the second when I, as the flying pilot, would call for the flaps.

I don’t know whether they thought I would forget to call for the flaps, wanted to give me a subtle reminder, or just wanted to keep themselves from forgetting. Regardless, I found it annoying and would often delay calling for the flaps just make them keep their hand in an uncomfortable position.

If the landing checklist is completed properly, the flaps will not be forgotten. As long as flying pilot complies with aircraft limitations and company standard operating procedures, the flying pilot has discretion on when to call for the flaps. If the nonflying pilot believes that the flaps have been forgotten, a better way to remind them is verbally, stating, for example, “We are still at flaps 20.”

2. Never let him fly. FOs are qualified pilots. Often, since aviation new hires typically go to the bottom of the seniority list, the FO might even be more qualified than the captain. The vast majority of FOs are more than capable of safely flying the airplane.

FOs are supposed to be able to land the airplane successfully, not just lower the landing gear and work the radios. Nevertheless, flying is a perishable skill. How can an FO improve and stay current if he never touches the controls? Your life may one day depend upon your FO’s ability to fly an approach to minimums or land in a strong crosswind.

As an instructor, I saw a number of pilots who had logged hundreds of hours in an aircraft type, but who had very little actual experience flying it. This caused difficulty and more than a few problems in simulator training when a First Officer upgraded to captain.

The captain who never lets his FO fly or only rarely throws them a bone with a short leg does his fellow pilots a disservice. The fairest way to divide legs is the way that most airlines do it, by alternating each leg. This helps both pilots to maintain proficiency and interest.

3. Don’t keep him in the loop. CRM (cockpit resource management) is not just three random letters from the alphabet. If your FO going to effectively back you up, he needs to know what’s going on. This includes planning items like changes to flight plans and weather forecasts as well as more basic things like announcing what switches you are flipping. Particularly if the captain is the nonflying pilot, it matters if you do something like switch the anti-ice on or off. Don’t just do things and expect your FO to automatically know what you’re doing and thinking.

Most FOs can’t read their wife’s mind; they certainly can’t read yours.

4. Don’t start a radio conversation and expect him to finish it. Many times, even though the FO is the pilot monitoring, the captain will initiate a radio conversation with ATC. This in itself is not a problem. Sometimes it is simply more expedient to say something yourself than relay it through your fellow pilot.

The problem comes when the captain initiates an exchange and then fails to follow through. Often the initial exchange is followed immediately by an altitude or frequency change, leaving the FO to wonder “will he respond or not?” Usually there is a pregnant pause while neither pilot answers and the FO scrambles to acknowledge the instruction. It would be much easier for the captain to respond since he was already talking to the controller.

5. Don’t share the paperwork. Typically programming the flight plan is an FO duty, but how can he put in an “as filed” route if you squirrel away the flight plan in an undisclosed location on the left side of the cockpit? Further, as mentioned earlier, the FO cannot cross check the captain if he doesn’t know what the captain’s plan is. For example, without the flight plan or dispatch release showing the amount of fuel required for the flight, the FO cannot verify that the aircraft is properly fueled.

A good captain puts the paperwork in the middle where both pilots can check it as needed. A great captain makes the FO his own copy. Captains who don’t print out flight plans make FOs want to pull their hair out.

6. Act like a check airman. The captain and FO may not be equals, but it is not the captain’s job to test my knowledge. The FO not required to let you quiz him on memory items and aircraft limitations. I have learned a lot from some great captains, but they didn’t act like instructors, let alone check airmen. If every flight feels like a checkride, the crew is going to have a miserable time together. Unless you are a check airman, don’t act like one.

7. Try to do his job. A competent FOs knows his flows. He can run a checklist. He is trained to program the FMS and work the radios. Let him do his job. Don’t try to do it for him. CRM teaches that both pilots have their role and should stick to it.

When you try to do the FO’s job as well as yours, you break his routine and increase the chance of errors and mistakes. Do you really want the FO to try to race you to retract the flaps after landing? There are very few things that need to be done quickly in an airplane and having both pilots competing to reach the same control first is a recipe for disaster.

The other extreme is the FO who will let the captain take his duties. This may work well until the first time the captain misses and item and the FO, who is now simply along for the ride, doesn’t catch it either.

8. Use nonstandard procedures. You will be captain on the next trip, but odds are that your FO will be flying with a different captain. Make it easy for him. Use standard procedures. If he spend several days getting used to your nonstandard way of doing things, he’s going to have to relearn the right way to do things next week or next month.

The whole idea of standardization is that everyone does things the same way and that any two crew members can be comfortable together without a long period of adaptation. Keep it standard. He’s an FO, not a chameleon.

9. Shut him down. Your FO your backup. His job is to question you when something seems amiss. This requires open lines of communication. Countless airplanes and lives have been lost because First Officers didn’t speak up. In some cases, captains intimidated their First Officers into silence. CRM has been around for nearly half a century, but there are still captains with this sort of god complex.

It is in your interest for your FO to speak up. It requires teamwork to safely and efficiently fly a turbine airplane. If you intimidate your crew into silence, you may both pay the ultimate price.

10. Lose his trust. Both crewmembers are professionals. Our wellbeing and careers depend upon a certain level of competence. Everyone makes mistakes, but if you repeatedly get your FO into trouble he will spend more time crosschecking you than doing his own job. This is just as bad as when the captain tries to do both jobs.

To be an effective captain, the captain must be familiar with basic knowledge items such as aircraft limitations and FARs. NOTAMs should be closely checked before each flight in addition to the weather. Before flying an arrival or departure procedure, check the plate closely and be sure to look for notes, crossing restrictions and speeds. The captain should also possess basic airmanship skills. This may seem basic, but it is the cause for many mistakes and violations.

If the crew is to be an effective team, both pilots need to be able to depend on each other. If you and your FO have a long history of filing NASA or ASAP reports, you probably need to evaluate our performance as a team.

When considering how to treat your FO, it is important to ask yourself how your actions affect safety and CRM (for more information on CRM, consult GlobalAir.com’s Aviation Directory for courses on cockpit resource management). While safety is paramount on any flight, it will normally be enhanced by making FO more involved in the decision making process and showing that your value and respect his opinion and skills.

Read the full article on Aviation Examiner

Prospective airline pilots can save $1000s by taking ATP test before August

Time is growing short for prospective airline pilots to take the written test for the Airline Transport Pilot license without taking a course that includes 10 hours of simulator training. As detailed in Examiner, on August 1 candidates for the written test will must have a graduation certificate from an approved course that will cost $15-20,000.

As Rick Durden pointed out on Avweb, the regulations as currently written provide a last chance for prospective airline pilots to take the ATP written without enrolling in the approved simulator course. As Durden points out, FAR 61.156, which spells out the requirements for the written test (“knowledge exam” in FAA parlance), does not contain any prerequisites for the test until after July 31, 2014. This means that a pilot who does not yet meet the requirements for the ATP can still take the test before August 1.

Once a candidate passes the written test, the results are good for two years. If the pilot met the flight experience and eligibility requirements within two years, he could take the checkride (“practical test”) and earn the ATP license without passing the FAA-approved simulator course. If the written test expires, the pilot must then pass the new ATP simulator course in order to retake the test.

The changes to the ATP are likely to exacerbate the pilot shortage that regional airlines are already experiencing. As the need for qualified pilots becomes more pronounced, Congress and the FAA are likely to issue regulatory changes to make it easier for pilots to qualify as ATPs. These changes are likely to be long in coming, however, and pilots who are close to meeting the requirements would be well advised to take the written test before August 1 if at all possible.

There are several traditional study methods for FAA knowledge exams. There are books available that familiarize test-takers with the questions in the FAA written test bank. There are also computer training courses that simulate taking the actual test on your own computer. Many vendors for these test prep services can be found on GlobalAir.com.

Given the short amount of time left to take the test, a classroom seminar might be the best solution. These courses often last one to two days and are essentially cram sessions for test-takers. ATP Flight School is one of several companies that offer one-day test preps at locations around the country. These “quickie” courses are perfect for busy professionals who don’t have a lot of time to study.

It is possible that the shortage of qualified pilots will force the FAA to change the regulations regarding the ATP, but there is no way of knowing how long those changes will take. In the meantime, a pilot who has already passed the ATP written may very well have an advantage in getting hired by the airlines.

Read the full article on Aviation Examiner

New FAA ATP rules will reshape airline hiring

On August 1, 2014, a new FAA regulation goes into effect that will reshape the way that airlines hire pilots. The Colgan Air crash in 2009 led to changes in the requirements for airline first officers. Previously, FOs were only required to hold a commercial pilot license. Under the new rules, effective in August 2013, first officers were required to hold an Airline Transport Pilot License. The last phase of the regulatory change, coming in less than two months, will change the requirements for the ATP.

The changes were detailed by Aviation International News last year. Under FAR 61.156, ATP candidates must graduate from an FAA-approved course that includes a minimum of 30 hours of classroom instruction covering a variety of aviation and airline topics and 10 hours in a FSTD (flight simulation training device) before taking the written exam. At least six of the simulator hours must be in a Level C (full motion) simulator that replicates a multiengine turbine airplane with a maximum takeoff weight of more than 40,000 pounds. This is equivalent to the size of a regional jet. The flight simulator requirement is going to cause problems for both airlines and pilots.

The combination of higher licensing requirements and low pay for entry-level airline pilots has already created a pilot shortage at 11 of 12 regional airlines according to the Wall St. Journal. According to the laws of supply and demand, when a commodity, in this case qualified pilots, becomes more scarce, the price, in this case wage, of the commodity goes up. So far, this has not happened in the airline industry, partly due to the prevalence of union contracts.

One airline that has been feeling the pinch is Great Lakes. The regional operator of 31 turboprop airliners that typically fly into small airports, Great Lakes Airlines pays its new first officers $16 per hour according to Airline Pilot Central. This isn’t as much as it sounds because pilots are typically paid by the flight hour. Great Lakes guarantees its pilots only 75 hours per month for a gross monthly paycheck of $1,200. This is the equivalent of $14,400 annually. To make matters worse, Great Lakes pilots are not paid at all during new-hire training, a process that can last up to three months. They also incur a training contract that requires them to pay $7,500 if they leave the company within 15 months.

The economic reality is that there are too few pilots who are willing to work for the wage that Great Lakes is offering. In March, USA Today reported that the airline was suspending flights to some destinations due to the shortage of pilots. In spite of this, the airline and the pilot union cannot come to an agreement on raising contractual wages.

Great Lakes is not alone. A Wall St. Journal analysis found that the average regional airline first officer earns $22,400. Five years later, if the pilot is still a first officer, the average base pay would only be $35,100.

This brings us to the question of the flight simulator training to earn the ATP. AIN estimates that the new training rule will cost ATP applicants “thousands of dollars.” In truth, the cost will be probably be on the order of $20,000. Simulators are not plentiful and they are not cheap. The obvious question is why any pilot would pay $20,000 for a job that only pays $15,000.

The most obvious answer is that airlines should hire pilots who meet ATP requirements and provide them with the training required to pass the ATP written test and checkride as a part of the new-hire curriculum. After all, airlines are providing new hires with simulator training already. The problem is more acute for airlines like Great Lakes that operate airliners that weigh less than 40,000 pounds.

Minimizing the impact of the changes to the ATP is only half the battle. To attract new hires, regional airlines will be forced to raise wages to compete with other industries. To gain the experience and flight time needed to earn an ATP will still take years and thousands of dollars in training costs. Many of the traditional “time-builder” flying jobs, such as flying checks, no longer exist. It will be difficult and costly for neophyte pilots to gain the 1,500 hours required for the ATP. The entry-level jobs at the airlines will have to become more attractive to encourage prospective pilots to make the commitment in time and money.

There are several possible outcomes to the airline pilot crisis. One is that Congress will issue a legislative fix when the problem becomes so extensive that airline lobbyists and passengers alike demand a solution. An easy way to fix the problem would be to expand the restricted ATP license. Currently, the restricted ATP is available only to graduates of specific “institutions of higher education” or military training. Congress and the FAA could expand the list of acceptable institutions to include FAR 141 training schools. The unrestricted ATP could be earned after being hired by an airline and passing the initial simulator training.

Another helpful fix would be to eliminate the requirement to train on a 40,000 pound aircraft simulator for pilots who will fly smaller airliners. There is no reason that pilots of airplanes like the Beech 1900s that are operated by Great Lakes would need to train on a high performance jet that is more than twice the weight of the plane that they will actually fly in airline service.

If congressional help is not forthcoming, there is little doubt that the changes will drive up airline ticket prices. Regional airliners are already more expensive to operate than larger planes on a per seat basis. As ticket prices increase, more passengers will elect to either drive to their destination or to a major airline hub where fares are lower. This will lead to less airline service into many smaller destinations.

As regional airlines are squeezed by increasing labor costs on one side and shrinking revenues on the other, they may become targets for takeovers. One possibility is that regional airliners will be absorbed into the major airlines that are now their code share partners. It might make more sense for the name brand airline to control the hiring process and establish pay scales for regional jets and turboprops than to keep outsourcing to third parties. This would also allow the airline to exercise more quality control over its brand and customer service. The change would require agreement of pilot unions and the adjustment of scope clauses in their contracts. Absorption of regional jets into mainline carriers could introduce a new golden age of regional jets.

A final possibility is that some airlines will consider ab initio (“from the beginning”) training. The concept of hiring prospective pilots and training them from zero hours to the cockpit of an airliner is one that has been used by the U.S. military and some foreign airlines for years. Lufthansa operates a flight school in Goodyear, Arizona to train prospective pilots for airline service. Boeing is currently partnering with Emirates Aviation College in Dubai on an ab initio course that will take cadets from zero hours to an ATPL in 16 months. Ab initio training would allow airlines to utilize long-term planning for personnel needs rather than scrambling to hire pilots as positions become open.

The future of airline hiring and the ATP license is uncertain, but the airlines definitely need qualified pilots. The need is immediate and will persist for the foreseeable future. The new ATP requirements make the pool of available and qualified pilots smaller, which will have the effect of making the pilot shortage worse. If corrective steps are not taken, canceled flights will soon become much more common.

 

Read the full article on Aviation Examiner

Pilot’s rules of thumb

Aviation is as much art as science. In many aspects of aviation, math is needed to precisely fly the airplane. Few pilots want to constantly do calculations with an E-6B flight computer or handheld calculator. Fortunately there is an easier way. Over the years, many rules of thumb have been developed to help pilots fly with more precision, but without the hassle. Here are a few that I frequently use flying jets. Many can be used in piston airplanes as well.

One simple rule of thumb is how to smoothly level off from a climb or descent. When changing altitudes, lead the level off by 10 percent of the vertical speed. If the airplane is climbing at 500 feet per minute, start the level off 50 feet before the altitude is reached to avoid an overshoot or undershoot. If the thought of percentages is daunting, just drop the last zero from the rate of climb.

Similarly, a good rule of thumb for planning a cruising altitude is to use 10 percent of the trip length, multiplied by a thousand. If the flight is 200 miles, an efficient cruising altitude would be 20,000 feet. Obviously, the service ceiling of the airplane becomes a limiting factor as well. No matter how long the trip, a Cessna 172 is not likely to climb into the flight levels (18,000-60,000 feet).

It can be helpful to know how fast your airplane is traveling in nautical miles per minute to determine how quickly you will arrive at a fix. To determine your speed in miles per minute, simply divide the speed in knots by 60 minutes per hour. Some commonly used speeds in jets are 200 knots (3.3 nautical miles per minute) and 250 knots (4.1 miles per minute). A piston single that flies at 120 knots is also traveling at two miles per minute.

The figure above can be used in the formula, distance = rate x time, to determine the time to a fix. Time would be equivalent to distance divided by rate so the piston airplane traveling at 120 knots would take 50 minutes to fly to a fix 100 miles away (100 miles / 2 miles per minute). A jet flying at 250 knots would cover the same ground in about 25 minutes. (To make the calculation even simpler, round 4.1 miles per minute to four. The answer using 4.1 is 24.39 minutes. Twenty-five is close enough for government – or pilot – work.)

Descent planning is a common math problem in airplanes. In modern airplanes, the flight computer (FMS) can be programmed to initiate a descent, but it never hurts to double-check the computer. The first step in the process is to determine how much altitude the airplane will need to lose. In my Lear 45, we commonly cruise at FL400 (40,000 feet). If we were planning to descend into a sea level airport such as our home base at Houston Hobby, we would need to lose 40,000 feet. For airports at higher elevations, (such as Aspen, Colorado, field elevation 7,820 feet), we would need to plan on losing about 32,000 feet (40,000 – 8,000). Airport elevations are recorded in heights above mean sea level (MSL) and can be found on charts or websites such as Globalair.com’s airport directory.

One you have determined how much altitude to lose, divide that number by 300 to determine how far out to begin a descent in order to maintain a typical three degree glide path. This means that the airplane would be descending about 300 feet per nautical mile. To descend into Aspen, we would want to start 106 miles from our destination (32,000/300). To make the calculation easier, you can drop the last two zeros from both numbers (320/3). The longer descent into Houston would require 133 miles.

Now that we know how far out to start the descent, we need to know what rate of descent will yield a three degree glide path. This number varies with groundspeed, which in turn is affected by the winds aloft. The simple way to determine a three degree rate of descent is to multiply the groundspeed (typically read directly from cockpit instruments) in knots by 5. For example, if the airplane has a groundspeed of 450 knots, the descent rate must be 2,250 feet per minute (FPM) to maintain a three degree glide path.

Because ILS (instrument landing system) approaches are also based on a three degree glide path, this rule of thumb can also be used to determine what rate of descent will keep the airplane on the ILS glideslope. If you plan to fly the approach at 100 knots, you should plan to descend at about 500 FPM.

Since official weather reports and ATIS broadcasts give temperatures in Celsius, another useful rule of thumb helps to convert Celsius temperatures to the more familiar Fahrenheit temperatures for briefing passengers. Start with the Celsius temperature from the ATIS, 34 degrees today in Midland, Texas where I am writing this, and double it (34 x 2 = 68). Next, subtract 10 percent of the result (68 – 7 = 61). The final step is to add 32 to the result of the second step (61 + 32 = 93 degrees Fahrenheit). With a little practice, this conversion can be done easily in your head.

When considering fuel performance, jet pilots generally think in terms of weight rather than gallons. This can be confusing because most airport fuel trucks pump fuel by the gallon. There is a rule of thumb to help pilots quickly determine how much fuel to order so that they don’t buy too much or – worse yet – not enough.

To start the planning, two pieces of information are needed: the fuel required for the trip and how much is already on board the airplane. A one hour flight in the Lear 45 can be expected to require approximately 1,700 pounds of jet fuel. (This number is obtained from aircraft performance data and flight planning sources available online). If the airplane already has 1,000 pounds on board, we need to buy at least 700 pounds of fuel to complete the flight.

 

Don’t stop there though. We don’t want to land with no fuel left in the tanks!

The FARs (federal aviation regulations) and company procedures specify that pilots must carry reserve fuel. A typical fuel reserve for the Lear 45 is 1,500 to 2,000 pounds. We should also plan for APU (auxiliary power unit) fuel usage of about 100 pounds. Therefore, the total fuel needed is 3,800 pounds (1,700 + 2,000 + 100). We would need to purchase 2,800 pounds since we already have 1,000 on board.

 

To convert jet fuel weight to gallons, divide by 6.7 pounds per gallon. This means that we would need to order 418 gallons from the fuel truck. A quick and dirty rule of thumb is that 150 gallons of jet fuel is approximately 1,000 pounds. This method can be used to check your math or for a quick estimate.

One last rule of thumb is that no rule of thumb that goes unused will be remembered. Practice using rules of thumbs to crosscheck the automation on every flight in order to keep yourself sharp.

Read the full article on Aviation Examiner

Pilots face increased risk of skin cancer

“I’m referring you to a dermatologist,” the doctor said. “It’s probably nothing, but I don’t like the looks of this mole on your back.”

My employer’s insurance company was requiring employees to get preventive physicals. After the revelation of my mother’s sudden diagnosis with colon cancer a few months earlier, the idea of a physical to get a clean bill of health actually sounded like a good idea. With no health complaints, I didn’t expect any problems to arise. After all, I was seeing an AME twice a year for my first class physical and if there were any serious problems, he would have found them. Right?

I didn’t hurry to the dermatologist. I had a few moles, but didn’t really worry. They weren’t irregular and they didn’t get larger. A couple of months later, I found time to make the appointment.

When the doctor looked at the mole on my back, a mole that my AME had seen at least 12 times, he promptly announced, “We’re going to take that off right now.” He said that the small, black mole could be an early stage of melanoma. Literally before I knew that he had removed it, the mole was gone and I was going home to wait on a biopsy.

As I waited, I learned that there is a strong link between pilots and skin cancer. In 2000, Yahoo News reported on an Occupational and Environmental Medicine study that found that airline pilots have up to 25 times the normal rate of skin cancer. The most common type of cancer among pilots was malignant melanoma. Melanoma represents about ten percent of skin cancers, but accounts for 75-85 percent of skin cancer deaths. The scientists at the University of Reykjavik in Iceland who authored the study found that Iceland Air pilots flying international routes had skin cancer rates 15 times higher than expected. For pilots who typically flew across more than five time zones, such as flying from Iceland to the United States, the rate was 25 times higher than expected.

There have been a number of similar studies, the most recent published in 2009 in Occupational Medicine surveyed members of the Air Line Pilots Association in the United States. Many of these other studies also show an elevated skin cancer risk for pilots, but not as high as the University of Reykjavik study.

It seems to be common sense that pilots would be at an increased risk for skin cancer. Pilots spend a lot of their working lives in the sun. Airports are almost devoid of shade and the sun can beat down mercilessly on a pilot performing a preflight inspection. When pilots are flying, they are above much of the atmosphere that protects surface dwellers from harmful solar rays. Few, if any, airline pilots slather on sunscreen before climbing into the cockpit.

As with the general population, there are other factors that lead to an increased risk of skin cancer. These risks apply to pilots as well. The Skin Cancer Foundation lists five factors that increase the risk of melanoma. First, both blistering sunburns as a child and cumulative exposure to the sun can increase risk. The more moles a person has, the greater the risk of melanoma. Dysplastic nevi, atypical moles, can be precursors to skin cancer. People with fair skin are more prone to skin cancer. A personal or family history of skin cancer also means an increased risk for future cancers. People with weakened immune systems, from chemotherapy or HIV/AIDS for example, also have an increased risk. As with other types of cancer and heart disease, smoking also dramatically increases the risk of skin cancer.

Among pilots, flying at higher altitudes and the higher latitudes near the poles presents the greatest risk. According to the Health Physics Society, the amount of cosmic radiation at the poles can be two to three times greater than the radiation at the equator. This is because the Earth’s electromagnetic field helps to block this radiation. The field is strongest at the equator and gets progressively weaker towards the poles. Science Daily notes that the radiation is on par with an x-ray or CT scan, but frequent exposure by flight crews that fly hundreds of hours each year can lead to increased effects. Solar storms, like the one that diverted flights in 2012, also mean increased dosages of radiation. The ionizing radiation of solar flares cannot be avoided by flying at night or wearing sunscreen.

Robert Barish, a physicist and author of “The Invisible Passenger: Radiation Risks for People Who Fly,” told Science Daily that professional flight crewmembers are exposed to more radiation than any other occupation, even nuclear plant workers. “People who work in the nuclear power industry on an average basis are getting 1.6” [milliSieverts of radiation per year], he said. “There are people who fly in airplanes who are getting 2 or 3 or 4 milliSieverts per year. So they are truly radiation workers.”

The fact that the University of Reykjavik study examined Iceland Air pilots who customarily fly in far northern latitudes may explain the extremely high incidence of cancer among these pilots. Flying at high altitudes near the North Pole for the long time periods associated with oceanic flights, Iceland Air pilots would be subject to all of the highest risk factors associated with skin cancer.

Other factors might be at work as well. Several of the studies indicate that some of the increased risk for pilots may be due in part to disturbed sleep patterns. “The excess of malignant melanoma among those flying over five time zones suggests that the importance of disturbance of the circadian rhythm should be taken into consideration in future studies,'' Dr Vilhjalmur Rafnsson said on Yahoo News. Rafnsson speculated that the disturbance of circadian rhythms could affect the production of melatonin by the body.

The American Cancer Society notes that recent studies have shown that low melatonin is linked to higher risks of some cancers, but that some studies have shown that melatonin supplements were beneficial to cancer patients while others show that it made no difference. Melatonin is available over the counter as a natural sleep aid. According to the FAA website, melatonin “appears to be beneficial in alleviating jet lag” and its use “is not proscribed” but “care should be taken to avoid entering duty status with any residual effects.”

Pilots are not the only people at risk from high altitude radiation. Flight attendants and frequent flyers share the same risk factors. Travelers who fly more than once or twice per week are at the greatest risk according to Science Daily. Occasional airline passengers or general aviation pilots who typically fly at altitudes of less than 6,000 feet do not have an elevated risk.

The risk of radiation is not limited to skin cancer. As far back as 1992, the FAA published a report, “Radiation Exposure of Air Carrier Crewmembers,” that addressed the possibility of genetic defects to a child whose parent had been exposed to high altitude ionizing radiation. The unborn child of a pregnant woman who is part of a flight crew is at the greatest risk of severe health problems ranging from mental retardation to childhood cancers. Women are also at high risk for breast cancer according to WebMD.

To minimize their risk of skin cancer or other radiation-induced problems, pilots should follow the prevention guidelines of the Skin Cancer Foundation. Avoid sunburns by wearing hats and sunglasses and seeking the shade, especially between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. (Indoor tanning booths are also bad.) Use sunscreen with an SPF of 15 for everyday use. For extended outdoor activity, SPF of 30 or higher should be used. Sunscreen should be applied 30 minutes before going outside and reapplied every two hours (or immediately after swimming or sweating). Self inspections of your skin on a monthly basis and yearly medical checkup are also recommended.

Pilots can also avoid taking heavy doses of solar radiation by flying at lower altitudes or taking more southerly routes (in the northern hemisphere) to remain at lower latitudes. An FAA report, “What Aircrews Should Know About Their Occupational Exposure to Ionizing Radiation,” sets a recommended maximum level of radiation and gives estimated dosages for a number of typical flights.

My dermatologist also recommended Heliocare, an oral over-the-counter sun protection supplement available on BetterSkinByMail.com. Used with sunscreen, Heliocare helps to prevent sunburns and repairs previous sun damage to skin.

In the end, my skin story has a happy ending. The biopsy revealed that the mole was not a melanoma, but an atypical mole. Nevertheless, I will have several smaller moles removed as well and will incorporate routine visits to the dermatologist into my health care routine.

 

Originally published on Aviation Examiner

Globalair.com introduces new mobile site for pilots

Globalair.com has introduced a new mobile version of its website for pilots. The site is free, but resembles many downloadable applications in both appearance and utility. The site contains a wealth of information for pilots and can be a valuable resource. Additionally, the site can be easily used by nonpilots since it does not require a pilot license or any login information.

The mobile site, which was introduced to the public at Oshkosh, contains three sections, which are selectable from the home page. Users can choose from “Aircraft for Sale,” which lists aircraft classified ads. The “Airport Resource Center” provides pilots with access to airport, airspace and weather information. The “Aviation Directory” contains listings for a variety of aviation businesses.

Clicking the “Aircraft for Sale” button takes the user to a listing of broad categories of aircraft such as “jets” or “single engine pistons.” Selecting the desired category will open a menu of manufacturers, which can then be opened into that company’s various aircraft types. Many of the listings include pictures as well as buttons to send an email to the seller or to call the seller’s phone number with a single touch.

Realistically, most people probably will never buy an airplane, but it can be fun to browse the listings and dream. For example, what red-blooded pilot wouldn’t be tempted by the listing for a 1945 North American P-51 Mustang (dual controls, based in Texas, with only 135 hours since major overhaul on its Rolls Royce Merlin engine)? If you have $2.1 million, it can be yours. (Have you bought your lottery ticket yet?) The stunning photos of this beautiful warbird alone are worth scanning the listings.

Another interesting find is a 1967 Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed. This former Soviet jet fighter, which now lives in California, can be acquired for the bargain price of $79,500. This is cheaper than many single-engine propeller planes.

Speaking of single-engine piston airplanes, pilots looking for a trainer or a family airplane won’t be disappointed. There are myriad listings for more traditional airplanes such as Cessna, Piper, Cirrus, Beechcraft, and the like. Many of these smaller airplanes will fit even limited budgets, such as the 1970 Cessna 150 that lists for $20,500.

The “Aviation Resource Directory” section contains listing for many aviation related businesses and organizations. The listings contain links to websites as well as phone numbers. There are numerous categories (and subcategories) so that users can find whatever service they are looking for. Business owners and organizations can also submit their own company information for a free listing.

Probably the most useful aspect of Globalair.com’s new mobile site for the pilot on the go is the “Airport Resource” section. This section allows the user to search for a variety of aviation facilities by state or by name. Unlike many websites or apps, Globalair.com allows the user to refine their search to seaplane bases, heliports, balloon ports or STOLports.

When a facility is selected, the information about the airport is available to the user. This includes common items such as an airport diagram if available, runway information, weather, terminal procedures and an airport business directory. Globalair.com also goes a step further by including a phone numbers and directions for nearby hotels and restaurants for those pilots seeking the proverbial “$100 hamburger.” The listings even include nearby golf courses.

Users can also use the Globalair.com mobile site to look up airspace fixes. In the age of GPS when going direct to a fix is often the primary means of navigation, Globalair.com is an easy way to find important details about fixes such as latitude and longitude, the chart where it can be found, the controlling air route traffic control center, and nearby airports.

Globalair.com also provides weather information to the pilot’s smartphone or tablet. In addition to METARs and TAFs, Globalair.com includes aviation weather charts that are often not found on other weather sources. There are the expected radar and satellite weather maps, but also turbulence and icing potential charts, convection outlooks, winds and temperatures aloft, and significant weather prognostication charts. The lack of ability to zoom may affect the utility of some charts for users with devices that have small screens, but in general pilots and weather fans will appreciate the availability of so much information in one place at no cost. A local radar map is available on the airport resource page.

One of the most unique and useful aspects of Globalair.com’s site is the ability to compare fuel prices. In addition to listing fuel prices in the airport information section, the site has the ability to map fuel prices over a geographic area. The feature can be used for either jet fuel or 100 low-lead avgas. Think Gas Buddy for airplanes.

For example, suppose a flight crew will be flying the boss to a meeting in Denver. The meeting is downtown so the boss doesn’t have a preference on which airport to use. If the captain searches for Denver area fuel prices on Globalair.com, he would see a map of the Denver area with airports labeled. The pilot could then touch each airport to go to the airport resource page for the most recent fuel prices and other information.

Scrolling to the bottom of the map yields a list of the 10 lowest fuel prices for airports within a 50 nautical mile radius. In the case of our hypothetical flight to Denver, the cheapest jet fuel can be found at Denver’s Centennial airport (KAPA) at $4.31 per gallon. A minor drawback is that the fuel prices on the “10 cheapest list” are by airport only. The user must click the airport name on the list or icon on the map to find out which FBO has the best price. On the airport resource page, the pilot finds that Tac Air is currently the home of Denver’s cheapest jet fuel.

Because the Globalair.com is a mobile site rather than an application, it functions well for either Apple or Android products. Much of the information available on Globalair.com would cost several dollars for an app and perhaps more for a subscription. The Globalair.com site is totally free and users are not even required to log in. Users seeking the full functionality of Globalair.com can also choose to view the full site on their mobile devices.

Pilots and nonpilots alike will enjoy Globalair.com’s new mobile internet site. Whether perusing the catalog of aircraft for sale, planning a flight or checking the weather, Globalair.com provides a wealth of useful information for users.

Originally published on National Aviation Examiner

New FAA copilot rules in effect

A new Federal Aviation Administration rule that requires copilots on U.S. airlines to have additional training and flight experience is now in effect. The final rule, required by the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010, was published in the Federal Register on July 15, 2013.

Previously, first officers on scheduled airline flights were only required to hold a commercial pilot license. The commercial license requires a total of 250 hours flight time. Under the new rule, airline first officers are required to hold an airline transport pilot license. The ATP requires 1,500 hours of flight time. Pilots must be at least 23 years old to earn an ATP.

The rule also includes provision for some pilots to obtain a restricted ATP with fewer than 1,500 flight hours. To qualify for the restricted ATP, pilots must be at least 21 years old and must either be a military trained pilot or hold a bachelor’s or associate’s degree in an aviation major.

There are other requirements in the new rule as well. First officers in scheduled airline service must also hold a second class medical certificate. If the aircraft requires three or more pilots, the first officer must also have a type rating for the specific aircraft type to be flown and a first class medical certificate. Airline captains were previously required to hold an ATP, a type rating, and a first class medical certificate. A new requirement under the rule is that captains must have a minimum of 1,000 hours in air carrier operations.

The new rule was passed by Congress after the February 12, 2009 crash of Colgan Airlines/Continental Connection Flight 3407 in Buffalo, N.Y. The NTSB report faulted pilot training at the regional airline as a factor. The new rules also come in the wake of the July 6, 2013 crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214 in San Francisco. Although the NTSB is still investigating the accident, early indications are that the crew training may have played a role in the accident according to Politico.

Kevin Kuhlman, professor of aviation and aerospace science at Metropolitan State University of Denver, is not sure that the rule change will be worthwhile. “It seems logical that more hours equals safety,” he argues in the Denver Post, “but the reality is that it is the quality of the training not the quantity that matters. That’s what the (Asiana Airlines) and Colgan accidents really show.”

Kuhlman also is concerned that the new requirements may lead some pilots to falsify their flight times. Pilot flight times are maintained largely by an honor system in which pilots log their flight hours in a personal log book. It is only when pilots are finally hired by commercial operators that their times are tracked by others. Even then, the company only keeps track of flight time earned by the pilot while at that particular company.

Another potential problem is that the more stringent requirements for an airline career may dissuade people from beginning an aviation career, especially after a decade of wage and benefit cuts for airline employees. When paired with looming retirements as hundreds of airline pilots reach age 65, the new rule may trigger a severe shortage of pilots qualified to fly airliners.

Originally published as National Aviation Examiner

Things you might see on a jet (not counting gremlins on the wing)

Everyone is familiar with the basic parts of an airplane. Wings, tail and fuselage are easily recognizable as are propellers and jet engines. A modern jet aircraft contains many other parts that are not so well known.

Flaps

Flaps are a moveable section on the rear of the wing that are used for both takeoff and landing. They droop down to change the shape of the wing. This allows the airplane to fly slower without approaching its stall speed. Flaps can be found on many small general aviation aircraft as well as the largest transport airplanes.

Underside of the flaps showing the runners which guide them into place. Flaps can be moved to several different positions. Landings are usually made with full flaps and takeoffs are made with a partial flap setting.

Slats

Slats are similar to flaps, but are found on the leading edge of the wing. They are typically found only on larger high performance jet aircraft. Like flaps, slats allow the airplane to fly slower without stalling. They are used primarily for takeoff and landing and are retracted during cruise flight.

Forward view of the slats. The slats run along the leading edge of the wing and are normally deployed for takeoff and landing. The inboard section of the wing is not movable.

This is a view of the underside of the deployed slat. The slat can be heated with air from the engines to prevent ice buildup. This is accomplished through the duct in the foreground.

Winglets

Winglets are curved up devices on the wingtips of many new jet aircraft. They reduce drag by helping to reduce the turbulent air left as the wing generates lift. Winglets also have the effect of adding length to the wing without requiring additional strengthening. This additional lift translates into fuel savings and longer flight ranges.

Static wicks

Static wicks are protruding wire-like devices that stick out from the trailing edge of the wing. They help to dissipate the static electricity that builds up on an airplane as it flies. The wicks also help to protect the airplane from the electricity of a lightning strike.

Spoilers and speed brakes

Spoilers and speed brakes are rectangular plates on the upper surface of the wing. As their name suggests, they spoil the lift being produced by the wing. Spoilers are used to slow the airplane quickly and can be deployed both in the air and on the ground.

Pitot tubes

A pitot tube provides the airplane’s instruments with information that allows the plane’s airspeed to be calculated. The tube takes a sample of the ram air pressure and compares it to the static pressure of undisturbed air. The difference is the plane’s speed through the air.

Pitot tubes can be mounted on the fuselage or the wing, but on most jet aircraft they are mounted on the nose section of the fuselage. Most jets have three pitot tubes, one for each air data system (one for each pilot plus a standby).

AOA and Temperature probes

Other probes on the airplane include sensors for angle of attack and temperature. The upper sensor is the angle of attack probe, which determines the difference between the where the wing is pointed and the air moving over the wing. This is important because exceeding the critical angle of attack causes the wing to stall or stop producing lift.

Temperature probes are used to determine the outside air temperature. Temperature is used by the air data computers to determine speeds and performance. It also helps the pilots to determine when it is necessary to activate the airplane’s anti-ice systems.

 

Originally published on Examiner.com:

 

http://www.examiner.com/list/things-you-might-see-on-a-jet?cid=db_articles

Armed pilots provide roadmap for securing schools

When, in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre called for armed security guards in schools, he faced widespread criticism from liberals who believe that fewer guns, not more, are the answer to the problem of mass killings. On the other side of the political spectrum, some conservatives argued that the cost of placing police officers in every school across the nation was too costly for a federal government that is already running trillion dollar deficits each year.

The concept of armed guards at schools was proven on Jan. 31, 2013 when an armed officer stopped a shooting at Price Middle School in Atlanta. A student had smuggled a gun past metal detectors and opened fire in the courtyard of the school, wounding a 14-year-old student in the neck before the officer was able to get the gun away from him according to CBS News.

Even though armed guards are effective, they are also prohibitively expensive for many school districts. According to Craig Steckler, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, as quoted in the Wall Street Journal, the average salary of a police officer is $55,000. There are 98,817 public schools in the United States. According to the Department of Education, about 25 percent of these already have armed security officers on campus at least once per week. The cost for providing officers for the remaining 74,113 schools would be more than $4 trillion. In spite of the recent high profile school shootings, fewer than two percent of all youth homicides occur at or on the way to school.

The school protection dilemma is analogous to the problem of protecting airline flights in the wake of the September 11 attacks. One proposal was to put Federal Air Marshals on all flights, but with tens of thousands of airline flights each day the plan was prohibitively expensive. Training enough air marshals to guard these flights would also have taken years.

An alternative solution was to create the Federal Flight Deck Officer program. This program took volunteer airline pilots and deputized them as federal agents to protect their airplanes. The volunteers were issued pistols and then trained to use them effectively. The volunteers received no federal salary or extra pay from their airlines. Instead they use vacation time to travel at their own expense to the federal training center where FFDO training is conducted. They even paid for the training themselves.

The number of FFDOs is secret, but since the program’s inception in 2003, there have been only two public incidents involving FFDOs who caused safety issues with their guns. In 2011, NBC News reported that a passenger mistakenly picked up a bag containing a JetBlue pilot’s gun. More seriously, in 2008, a US Airways pilot accidentally fired his gun in flight according to Reuters. The aircraft landed safely and no one was injured.

The FFDO program has been spectacularly successful in terms of safety, cost and fulfilling the mission of protecting airline flights. Federal Air Marshals, full time agents, are used as well, but are deployed on flights deemed to be at high risk for attack.

A similar approach could be used in schools to allow volunteer teachers and school employees to become “Federal Classroom Officers.” As with FFDOs, the teachers would be federal officers and would be exempt from local gun ordinances that prohibit gun ownership. As with other law enforcement officers, they would also be allowed to carry their guns in the “gun free” school zones.

Teachers would not be forced to carry a weapon. The program would be for volunteers only. Teachers who do not like guns would be free to choose to remain defenseless. Those who prefer to be able to defend themselves and their students would be issued a weapon and trained to use it safely. They would be required to demonstrate competency with their gun at regular intervals to maintain proficiency.

Teachers who choose not to take part in the program would still benefit from it. First, they would be the direct recipient of protection from the Federal Classroom Officers in the event of a school shooting or terrorist attack. Second, the mere presence of Federal Classroom Officers might well deter many prospective murderers from attacking the school. In the past, many mass murders have taken in place in areas that were deemed to be “gun free.”

There is no doubt that many will oppose the idea of bringing guns into schools. Many of the same arguments that will arise were presented against the idea of arming pilots 10 years ago and have been refuted by the success of the FFDO program.

In reality, guns are already present in our schools. Thousands of schools are already patrolled by armed officers. Federal Classroom Officers would have the same training in firearms that these school security officers receive. All too often others, people like Adam Lanza, bring other guns to school when police officers are not present. In the end, that is why teachers should be given the option to arm themselves. There is no foolproof way to keep bad guys with guns out schools, but we can give our teachers and students a fighting chance.

 

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/experience-with-armed-pilots-can-help-secure-schools

FAA to ban pilot use of electronic devices

On Tuesday, the Federal Aviation Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register which “would prohibit flight crew members in operations under part 121 from using a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer for personal use while at their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated.” The rule was prompted by a 2009 incident in which a Northwest Airlines crew flew for 78 minutes and 150 miles past their destination without talking to air traffic controllers. It was later revealed that the crew became distracted with their laptop computers while in cruise flight. Additionally, the first officer of the Cogan Airlines flight that crashed in Buffalo in 2009 had sent text messages while the plane taxied out for takeoff.

There has long been a “sterile cockpit” rule in which flight crew members are prohibited from engaging in nonessential activities that could cause distractions in critical phases of flight such as taxi, takeoff, landing and operations below 10,000 feet except for cruise flight. The NPRM notes that the new rule would expand the ban for “personal wireless communications devices and laptop computers to all phases of flight.”

There would be several exemptions to the new rule. Pilots could use their personal communications devices or laptops if the use is “directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related communications and the use is in accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.” In other words, pilots can make calls related to flying the airplane, aviation emergencies (personal emergencies are specifically excluded), or if they need to call their company for an operational reason. The rule would also exempt companies that have FAA approved programs that use electronic devices such as laptops or tablets for flight operations. In recent years, several airlines have been approved to use iPads in place of paper charts and manuals.

According to the NPRM, the rule “includes, but is not limited to, devices such as cell phones, smart phones, personal digital assistants, tablets, e-readers, gaming systems, netbook computers, and notebook computers.” Under the new rule, pilots could not legally listen to music or podcasts on their iPods or read an email on their phone during any phase of flight. Ironically, although pilots would be able to legally read a newspaper after the airplane is established in cruise flight above 10,000 feet, they would not be able to read a newspaper downloaded to a tablet application or browse a newspaper site on the internet.

While well intended, the new rule may have the unintended consequence of making pilots more fatigued and less alert. In jet aircraft, some flights can be very long. A typical flight from New York to Los Angeles can last from five to six hours and transoceanic flights are normally even longer. After the airplane takes off and reaches its cruising altitude, there can be little to do for long hours. Sitting still and staring out the window with nothing to do for extended periods can be very fatigue inducing. This is especially true when the flight is a “red-eye” that is conducted on the “back side of the clock,” when the airplane is being operated during nighttime hours when the crew is normally sleeping. During such flights, having a diversion such as a newspaper, crossword puzzle, or an electronic device with music, a podcast, or an ebook can keep the crew member mentally stimulated while conducting intermittent crosschecks of the autopilot and aircraft systems.

If electronic devices are banned from the flight deck, pilots will resort to old fashioned methods of passing the time. USA Today, delivered to nearly every hotel room in the country and stocked with crossword and Sudoku puzzles, is a traditional means of passing time on long flights behind a closed cockpit door. Many flight bags contain a deck of cards, a magazine, or a paperback novel. Pulling pranks on flight attendants is also a time-honored tradition of airline pilots. If all else fails, even in the age of GPS, most airplanes are still equipped with an automatic direction finder (ADF) that is more useful for listening to Rush Limbaugh on AM radio than for navigation.

The proposed rule is not yet in effect. The FAA has established a comment period that is open until March 17. Comments can be delivered electronically via a link on the Federal Register page where the proposed rule is published. A direct link to the comment form can be found here.

Originally published on Examiner.com:

http://www.examiner.com/article/faa-proposes-ban-on-pilot-use-of-electronic-devices?cid=db_articles

American Eagle offers signing bonus as pilot shortage looms

In an email to prospective job seekers on Friday, American Eagle Airlines announced that it is offering a $5,000 signing bonus for newly hired pilots. At present, Eagle plans to hire 600 new pilots in 2013. New FAA rules require that new airline pilots meet Airline Transport Pilot license standards.

American Eagle notes that American Airlines, its parent company, is planning to hire 2,500 pilots over the next five years. Approximately half of the current list of Eagle pilots is expected to be hired by American or other major airlines.

The $5,000 bonus is paid at the beginning of training and requires a two year commitment to Eagle. According to Airline Pilot Central, American Eagle’s first year pay is $25 per hour with a 75 hour reserve guarantee. This works out to about $22,500 for the first year, not including the bonus. Pay is relatively flat for turboprop first officers, but FOs on jets, the majority of the fleet, will see an increase to $34 per hour and about $30,600 annually for the second year. Currently, the most junior captain has a hire date of May 2006, but as the major airlines ramp up their hiring, upgrades could potentially move much faster.

Last month, Aviation Week reported that an industry coalition has requested that the Government Accountability Office study the looming pilot shortage. The combination of increasing airline retirements and decreases in the number of pilots trained by the military and civilian schools is leading to a shortage of trained and experienced pilots that is first being felt by the regional airlines.

The shortage may force regional airlines to increase their pay to try to lure pilots away from more lucrative charter and corporate jobs. The signing bonuses may be the first attempt of the regionals to do so without having to amend union contracts.

Originally published on Examiner.com:

http://www.examiner.com/article/american-eagle-offers-signing-bonus-as-pilot-shortage-looms

Med Express now required for FAA pilot medicals

The next time you go for a flight physical, you will be required to fill out the application online at MedExpress.FAA.gov. The old paper application for an FAA medical certificate is no longer being used. The site is now also used by student pilots who wish to apply for a combination student pilot certificate and medical.

To apply for an FAA medical certificate, pilots must first create an account. To do this, go to the Med Express home page and click the button in the grey box that says “request an account.” This opens a page that asks for the user’s name and email address. After filling out the form, click “submit” and a temporary password will be sent to your email address.

The email from the FAA contains a link back to the site. Click the link and you will be prompted to select a new password. Once the new password is set, you will be taken to the home screen.

From the menu on the left side of the home screen, select “Form 8500-8” to access the medical application. The application screen asks for the same information that was required on the paper form. Note that the list of medical history questions covers your whole life, asking “have you ever had” any of the following conditions.

Any yes answers require an explanation. To provide an explanation, click the “add comment” button. This opens fields for each of the required explanations. If the condition has been reported on an older medical application and there has been no change, you can click the “PRNC” button at the right to indicate “previously reported, no change.”

As on the paper application, you must list any medications and doctor visits. It would be helpful to gather your medicines and doctor’s addresses when you fill out the application. The form requests dosages and the frequency of medicines. For doctor visits, the name, date and address of the visit are required as well as the reason. To add medicines and doctors, simply fill out the appropriate blanks and then click the “add” button.

When the application is completed, click the button at the bottom to validate it. The application will be checked for errors and unanswered questions. If any problems are found, the user will be directed to correct them.

A “save” button is also found at the bottom of the page. I recommend that you save the application frequently. When I completed my application, I was disconnected several times and had to start the application from scratch.

As you navigate through the application, there are question mark icons that are supposed to open help screens for different fields. In practice, when I clicked the help icons, they took me to the login screen. More helpful was the Med Express Users Guide, which contains step by step instructions for registering with Med Express and completing the application. A link to the user guide is on the home page.

When the application is complete and validated, enter your password at the bottom to submit the application to the FAA. No changes can be made to the application after you submit it until you are with your doctor. When an application is saved, the FAA will store it for 30 days. After the application is submitted to the FAA, you have 60 days to visit an Aviation Medical Examiner for your physical exam.

After the application is submitted, you will receive a confirmation number. Write this number down and take it with you when you go for your physical. The AME will use this number to access your medical application. An email will be sent to you with the confirmation number as well. If you lose the number, you can find it again by logging into Med Express and viewing your application. The confirmation number is at the top.

The FAA suggests that you print out the application and take it with you to your physical. Some doctors only want the confirmation number, so check with yours to find out what they want you to do.

If you have problems with website or the application, the FAA provides support via telephone and email. The telephone number, 1-877-AVS-NSD1 (1-877-287-6731), is monitored continuously. The email address for support, 9-NATL-AVS-IT-ServiceDesk@faa.gov, is only monitored from Monday through Friday during business hours.

Originally published at Examiner.com

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/med-express-now-required-for-pilot-medical-certificates?cid=db_articles