Going Solo for Currency

N96178 - C172P - 0.9 hours

One of the facts of life when it comes to flying is currency.  Since I've been flying regularly since I had my biennial flight review (BFR), it hasn't been much of an issue.  I haven't been flying much lately in order to save for a trip to Italy in two weeks.  I needed to fly before the trip, though, in order to keep my currency with the flight school.  If I didn't, my currency would've expired in the middle of the trip, requiring me to fly with a flight instructor the next time I went flying, to meet the flight school's requirements.

As I mentioned in my last post, I used this excuse to schedule a short flight out to Winchester (OKV), except this time the wind cooperated.

The preflight was one of the coldest excursions I've been on lately, but it was somewhat negated by new gloves I got for Christmas.  As I got everything set up inside, I tried to set up the ContourROAM on the headband for my head lamp, but the band wasn't strong enough and it got in the way of my headset.  I left it there and got some video from it, but nothing interesting came from it.  I'm thinking of hooking it to my headset somehow for future flights.  A daylight flight wouldn't hurt, either.

The departure was pretty standard, apart from me forgetting to check the carburetor heat initially.  As I cleared the Class B airspace to the west, I noticed my groundspeed was about 80 knots, which was about 30 knots less than my indicated speed, meaning I had a significant headwind.  If the wind is fast enough, you can drop your speed, put the flaps down and fly backwards.  For those of you who can't comprehend that, the plane is still moving forward, but the Cessna 172 can still remain airborne down to about 40 knots.  If the wind is faster than 40 knots opposite the direction you're travelling, you're actually moving backwards over the ground.  Unfortunately the wind wasn't strong enough, so I only got the plane down to about 18 knots across the ground, but it looked like I was sitting still at 5000'.

I ended my experiment when I realized I was at 5000' only 15 miles away from OKV.  Closer in, I lined up with the runway and brought it in.  You can actually see a glow around the approach lights because they're reflecting off of some snow that had melted and frozen earlier in the day.  Later on, as I was in the middle of my flare, I apparently had a subconscious thought to get the nosewheel up, which you can see in the video.  That caused me to float, which I luckily salvaged by adding a little throttle.  I have to say, I'm actually kinda proud that I got the nose up.

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and they went missing.]
After fully stopping - the FAA requires three full stop landings at night, after all - I went around for another landing.  The second landing wasn't nearly as good as the first.  If you watch the video, make sure to have the sound on so that you can hear a sound an airplane shouldn't make.  As I cross the threshold, some wind kicked the plane around a little.  I didn't think much of it after that because it hadn't been gusty, but as I was in my flare and settled on the runway, another gust pushed me to the right some, sideloading the right tire.  It wasn't a pleasant noise.

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and they went missing.]
The flight back home was amazingly quick, mostly due to the wind that was now at my back.  I hooked in from the northwest to land on Runway 35 and call it a night.  This one was much better than the second landing.  I touched down on the aiming points, and vacated at the first available exit.  I'm not sure why I chose to jump off so quickly, but I did.

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and they went missing.]

Luckily the planes on the row behind the spot for N96178 weren't there, so I was able to just pull the plane through.  In the end, the flight was only 0.9 hours, which surprised me.  The Hobbs meter's last hours digits were 64 when I left, and when I landed it was still 64.  I thought the Hobbs didn't even record the hours until I realized that I'd gotten back within an hour, having left at 64.0 and gotten back at 64.9.

So, now I have my my night currency, flight school currency, and sanity back.  We'll see what 2013 brings.

Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 0.0 - 74.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 0.0 - 9.6 (of 40)

The Voices in Your Head

Anyone who knows me knows that flying is my escape.  With rare exception, no matter what's going on in my life, I can jump in a plane and clear my head as soon as the plane's door is closed.  In need of a little escape, and having an excuse of needing to keep up my currency with the flight school and the FAA, I booked a plane for last night.

As I got everything situated, I made sure to charge the cameras so I could try out a new idea I came up with for some of the flight videos.  My intentions were to fly from Leesburg (JYO) to Winchester (OKV), land a couple times, and then head back to JYO.  It's a short flight, but it's all I need.  I have a big trip coming up soon that I've been saving for, so as you may have noticed, I've trimmed a lot from the flight budget to accomplish that.

...and everyone says you can save a ton of money if you quit smoking.

In any case, I was pretty excited even to get a shorter flight in and have my night currency for passenger carriage back.  After parking at the airport and shutting the car down, I could hear the wind howling as I glanced up at the flags in front of the terminal.  I pulled up the latest weather on my phone as I was sitting there.

KJYO 292255Z AUTO 30015G23KT 10SM OVC035 05/01 A2963 RMK AO2

For the non-fliers reading this, the important part in that METAR (Meteorological Terminal Aviation Routine Weather Report) is the 30015G23KT.  That's wind coming from 300 (northwest) at 15 knots, gusting to 23 knots.  Wind like that is strong enough to give you a hard time without the gusts, but it being at a 50 degree angle from the runway's direction makes things even more difficult.  The TAF (Terminal Aerodrome Forecast) said the wind was supposed to die down as the night went on, so I went inside to get everything situated and get a look at the weather station inside that updates more frequently.

The weather station inside showed a similar story, and the wind at OKV was just as bad.  Soon enough, the station showed the wind dying pretty steadily, and when it hit 9 knots I took my stuff and walked outside.  By the time I had gotten out to the plane again, however, the wind wasn't just stronger, it was also more erratic.  I pulled out my phone again to confirm and saw this:

KJYO 292335Z AUTO 32017G25KT 270V330 10SM BKN039 OVC046 05/00 A2966 RMK AO2

Again, for the non-fliers, you know what the 32017G25KT means, but the piece right after it - 270V330 - is saying that the wind is out of anywhere from due west to north-northwest.  It was at that point that I pulled out a sticky note out of my bag and wrote "didn't take the plane up: wind 17G25."  I locked the plane up, stuck the note in the book, dropped the book back in the overnight box, and drove home.

There are a ton of overused sayings in aviation, but a lot of them are overused because we often need to be reminded of them.  As I sat in my car convincing myself I made the right call, one of my least hated overused phrases came to mind: "Every takeoff is optional.  Every landing is mandatory."  I was really sure I could taxi out and take off safely, but a safe landing was questionable.  I was able to put a plane on the ground on a small runway with 12G21 direct crosswind a month ago, but that was in the middle of the day.  As much as I like night flying, landing at night offers its own challenges.

...especially when someone jacks the lights up to their brightest when you're on short final.

Up until this point, my decision to remain on the ground was always a made between me and another person.  Initially, it was a flight instructor and myself.  Since then, it's often been between a friend of mine and myself.  This time, it was all on me.

If you doubt yourself, don't go.  If you're anything like myself, there's a significant amount of pride that's associated with how you fly.  Sitting in the car admitting that the wind was too much of a risk for me to handle did seem like I was admitting I wasn't good enough.  Similar to a memorable quote from Abe Lincoln, I prefer to look at it like this:

Better to remain on the ground and be thought an amateur than to take off and remove all doubt.

Two Sides to Learning

As the holidays draw to a close, I'm sure that there are a good number of potential pilots who will be going up for their first flights in the coming weeks.  I definitely looked forward to the gift certificates my family got for me at my flight school around this time of year.  For those of you who are, or know someone who is about to start taking lessons soon, one of the most important things to do is make sure to get everything out of each lesson.

When you first begin flying, your flight instructor may seem to be at the pinnacle of aviation knowledge, and I'm sure many of them strive to be, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't ask for clarification when you need it.  Part of becoming an instructor is learning the Fundamentals of Instruction (FOI), which is essentially the background theory of learning. One of the points that is made is that many instructors - both in and outside of aviation - stop teaching at the application level.  What that means is that many instructors teach you how to do something, but often neglect the reasons behind the action.  Some instructors are really great at making sure this is all explained, but nobody is perfect.

Having been an instructor of the information technology sort, I can say that sometimes it's simply an issue of forgetting to mention it.  Other times, I got so excited to show someone something, that the details got lost in the process.  Going against that grain, I'll now give you the reason why I'm telling you this: your learning is both the responsibility of the instructor and of yourself.

When I began training, my first flight instructor taught me how to fly power on and power off stalls to the point where I could do them flawlessly.  While it's good that I could fly them flawlessly, it was quite some time before I made the connection that power on stalls were training for recovering from stalls on departure, and that power off stalls were to recognize full stalls and to perfect your landing flare technique.  Had I thought to ask the reasoning behind it all, I would have likely known a lot earlier.

Despite what it may seem, there's often a reason behind all of the maneuvers the FAA asks you to be able to demonstrate on the checkride.  You're flying them in training because they're on the checkride, and they're on the checkride because they show you have control of your aircraft in varying conditions.

Power on, or departure stalls: recognizing control mush and stalls on departure.

Power off stalls: recognizing proper recovery for a fully stalled condition, and perfecting your flare.

S-turns, and turns around a point: properly adjusting for wind over a set ground track (think traffic pattern).
Simulated instrument time: limited training to help you out just in case you end up in clouds.

There are likely several more, but always remember that many of the things you'll be asked to do in training have a reason behind them.  If you don't understand why you're doing something, always ask!  If you're intimidated you ask your instructor, feel free to ask here.  If I don't know it, I'll go find the answer.

Twitter: @TheMintGreenLog
(You can use the box to the right if you're already logged into your account)
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/TheMintGreenLog

Charts: Are They Required?

One of the things that really drives me nuts is misinformation.  I know that in a lot of the cases, some people just don't know any better, and I also fall victim to that from time to time, but people should be more aware of how they can affect others, intellectually.

Before I go any further, I'll ask you the same question I hear all the time:

If you walk out to your aircraft and get ramp checked, can you be faulted for not having charts, or for not having current charts?

Many pilots I know would answer simply "yes," but the answer is a little more complex than that.

The Letter of the Law
For a good number of people, the answer would actually be no.  Surprise!
The only times charts are required are for Part 135 (Commuter/On-Demand), Part 121 (Air Carrier) and Part 91.503 (large/turbojet) flights.  Since many of my friends are flying around in your average light general aviation (GA) aircraft, none of those requirements apply.  Furthermore, there is also no language pertaining to those flights that says your charts must be current.

Beyond that issue, I've also heard people tell others that an iPad application with charts on it doesn't count as a chart.  Even recently, there was a blog post where the author mentioned his designated examiner (DE) friend would discontinue checkrides if someone showed up with an iPad without backup charts.  Now, contrary to the above mention that your everyday Part 91 flight has no chart requirements, checkrides do actually have a chart requirement, inferred by the practical test standards (PTS).  The PTS does not, however, specify the chart medium - printed or otherwise.

I know, a lot of you must be thinking, well you're just implying things, and the FAA would probably still fault you for it, but I'm not.  Here's what the FAA has to say:

What is the FAA policy for carrying current charts?

The term "charts" is not found in the FAA's Part 91 regulations (other than for large and turbine-powered multiengine airplanes in 91.503[a]). The specific FAA regulation, FAR 91.103 "Preflight Actions," states that each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. What is not specifically addressed in the regulation is a requirement for charts. You should always carry a current chart for safety's sake. An expired chart will not show new frequencies or newly constructed obstructions, some of which could be tall enough to be a hazard along your route of flight.

The only FAA/FAR requirements that pertain to charts are:
• Title 14 CFR section 91.503[a] (Large and Turbojet powered aircraft)
• Title 14 CFR section 135.83 (Air Carriers-Little Airplane)
• Title 14 CFR section 121.549 (Air Carrier-Big Airplanes)

The FAA has rendered interpretations that have stated the foregoing. The subject of current charts was thoroughly covered in an article in the FAA's July/August 1997 issue of FAA Aviation News. That article was cleared through the FAA's Chief Counsel's office. In that article the FAA stated the following:
1. "You can carry old charts in your aircraft." "It is not FAA policy to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft."
2. "Not all pilots are required to carry a chart." "91.503..requires the pilot in command of large and multiengine airplanes to have charts." "Other operating sections of the FAR such as Part 121 and Part 135 operations have similar requirements."
3. ..."since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or no chart on board." That's because there is no regulation on the issue.
4. ..."the issue of current chart data bases in handheld GPS receivers is a non-issue because the units are neither approved by the FAA or required for flight, nor do panel-mounted VFR-only GPS receivers have to have a current data base because, like handheld GPS receivers, the pilot is responsible for pilotage under VFR.
5. "If a pilot is involved in an enforcement investigation and there is evidence that the use of an out-of-date chart, no chart, or an out-of-date database contributed to the condition that brought on the enforcement investigation, then that information could be used in any enforcement action that might be taken."

If you, as an FAA Safety Inspector, Designated Pilot Examiner, Flight Instructor, or other aviation professional are telling pilots something other than the foregoing then you are incorrect.

Source

That last sentence is pretty clear.

Note, however, that they do mention that they strongly encourage carrying charts, and that they will throw the book at you if something happens and your out-of-date or lack of charts was a factor (point five, above).

The Letter of Sense

I always hesitate raising this issue because people look at me like I'm trying to encourage recklessness.  My intent isn't to raise the issue to say that you should now go blazing around the skies without charts, hoping that you won't hit a mountain, bust airspace, or manage to get tangled up in some guy wires.  My intent is to raise the issue so that people can exercise a little of their own aeronautical decision making.  I would say that there's a sizable group out there who will still look at me like I'm an idiot, because any intelligent person would always have charts in their plane.  They'd likely say that it doesn't matter who does or doesn't require them to be with you.  I'd agree with them, but only to a certain degree.

My father always taught me his own version of dead right, and I'm reminded of it all the time:
You may be right, but you'd also likely be dead.

As an example, say you're riding on a motorcycle, and you roll up to a light that has just changed green.  Do you check to make sure traffic isn't going to blow through the red light, or do you just look ahead and hope? I'm hoping you'd opt for the former.  In the fight between cars and motorcycles, the car usually wins.  In the later fight between your body and the road, the road almost always wins.  The rule said that person should've stopped, and that you had right of way.  They're in the wrong, but you're now either dead or pretty roughed up.

The rule saying one thing or another doesn't mean your safety is going to be guaranteed.  Regardless of what the regulation says, you need to be in charge of your own safety.  To me, though, it's better that the rule doesn't necessarily specify that charts are required at all times.  I'd argue that knowing this then makes it a conscious choice for you to carry charts from here on out.  With that, you're making a conscious decision to be safe, and those who are consciously involved in a process - in this case, safety - are likely to take it more seriously.

Taking it Further
When coaching people to make improvements in their lives, life coaches often suggest an approach that focuses on adjusting one specific thing at a time.  The analogy given to me by someone teaching me adult learning theory was this:

"If you try to start a fire by moving a magnifying glass around to multiple areas, you will fail, but if you leave it in one spot long enough it will catch fire and spread."

If you're looking to become a safer pilot, concentrate on trying to be safe in one aspect at a time.  The nice thing about the chart issue is that you've likely always been doing it, but you've never done it consciously.  Now that you know it's not a requirement and you don't have to fear being faulted in a ramp check, you have to make the decision for yourself to bring those charts with you.  Your conscious decision to bring those charts is likely one you'll make in the interest of safety.  From there, you'll be amazed at how many other things you might do in order to conduct your flights more safely.

One Last Note: The Electronics Issue
Earlier, I mentioned a DE who would discontinue students if they showed up without backup charts.  I followed that up by saying that the PTS does not specify that the charts must be printed.  The linked post does go further to say that the DE's own backup is another electronic device.  While electronics have gotten a lot more reliable over the years, they still manage to fail at the worst possible times, so backups are still worth having.  The stats on paper charts spontaneously combusting, flying out of the window, or otherwise "failing" on the other hand are very low.

Digging up an old picture from my pilot bag review, you'll note there are still paper charts in there, despite the iPad prominently displayed in front.

Just to cover my own rear, here's a generic disclaimer:
The content provided here is informational only, and is not in any way, shape, or form legal guidance.  If any doubts exist, please contact your local FSDO, the administration, or an aviation lawyer.