Flying in the Snow

N9559V - C172R - 2.0 hours

After my trip to Italy, I had to jump right back onto another plane to head to San Antonio (SAT) for work, which meant I spent quite a lot of time in aircraft this month.  As I was sitting on the connecting flight through Atlanta (ATL) to Dulles (IAD), I ran the mental math and it came out to be about 25 hours in the back of commercial aircraft.  Of course, even though I spent all that time in aircraft, I couldn't log any of it.  After landing at IAD, I decided that I'd take a plane out before the month's end so that I could at least log a couple hours.

After blowing up Facebook asking people if they'd like to join on a trip to Charlottesville (CHO), Phil and I worked out a plan for what we'd like to do.  As with all plans down to CHO, we would fly down, grab some food from Timberwood, and fly back.  Since Phil's brother was down near CHO, we also diverted course slightly to fly over where he would be.

When we got up to the airport, there was a sign up on the desk saying "NO STUDENT SOLO," which I asked about, because the weather seemed to be mostly okay, despite a lower scattered layer of clouds than what the METARs and TAF indicated.  Apparently the conditions on the other side of the Blue Ridge mountains (towards Winchester - OKV) were marginal at best, which is where the practice area is.  I was warned to be careful about low clouds, and to keep it legal.  For those who aren't quite clear on why it would be illegal, the reason I've been doing all of this flying is to get my instrument rating, which, in simple terms, allows me to fly in clouds and poor weather.  It's a separate rating because it is more difficult to control an aircraft and navigate by looking solely at gauges and dials in the aircraft, and not out the window.  Until you have that rating, you have to keep away from clouds.

After another quick check of the weather both online and outside, Phil and I set off to take up a plane in the fleet that I had not yet flown.  Oddly enough, the last time I flew, I walked by it noting that fact and thought to myself "maybe next time."  Phil checked the fuel while I gave the aircraft its shakedown, and then after tossing way too many electronics into the aircraft, we set off towards CHO.

As soon as I could, I threw the blinders on after departure so that we could both start logging time.  Phil kept us clear of the clouds, while I brought us out towards Upperville (2VG2), and then slightly west of the normal course to overfly Wolftown, VA.  We had to descend a couple times to avoid the clouds, but they lifted as we flew south.  After practicing a couple turns around a point, which turned out to be the wrong point (house), we almost gave up to land at CHO when Phil got a text message with his brother's location in a field.  After turning around, we spotted them standing next to their truck and took a couple laps around them before heading back towards the airport.  On the way, tower assigned Runway 3, and then switched it to Runway 21 because the wind shifted.  The change in runway ended up saving us some time with a straight in landing.

The video picks up after passing Piney Mountain.  The banter in the background is both Phil and me negotiating my target on the runway, which ended up being the old numbers and the new thousand foot markers.  After that, you can hear me groan a bit as I realized I missed it, Phil asking if I'm going to get the nose up for once, and then me groaning a second time about letting the plane float.  The landing was pretty smooth, but in an effort to jump off at the first taxiway I pressed a little too hard on the right brake, causing it to skid.  You can hear me jokingly denying it and then reading back the taxi instructions before the clip ends.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
We passed a Gulfstream on the way in, and for the first time in the entirety of parking at Landmark, nobody came out to park me.  I, of course, took it as an opportunity to park wherever I wanted, and did just that.  The rampies were actually busy towing another plane, but one stopped by to check on us and see if we needed fuel before returning to marshal another plane out.  It was only after walking inside that we found that the crew car had just been taken by the pilots of the aforementioned Gulfstream.  I gave Keya a hard time about letting someone take my car, but her retort was something to the effect of "well I had no idea what to do with it since you haven't been around in so long."  Valid point.  It wasn't a huge deal in the end as she just dropped us off with their van.

Brief pause for Clint Eastwood burger consumption.

Getting ready to head back, I paid for the fuel, and then Keya asked me a ton of questions about the Superbowl in order to get some idea of how to fill her pool sheet out.  Phil and I walked back outside to set up all of the electronics again, started up and set off towards JYO.  Since I've started a tradition of my own signature departure from CHO, here's the video of it.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
After turning on course, I threw the hood back on to log more time, which amounted to 0.9 hours of hood time for the day.  Just 0.5 hours left before I could finish the rest of the instrument requirement in a simulator if I really wanted to, but where's the fun in that?

Getting closer to JYO, and after switching controllers, our radar service was terminated because the radar up at IAD wasn't picking us up in all of the snow.  For a second, we came back up, but then dropped off again, so I told the controller we'd cancel the radar services and just utilize the normal JYO Maneuvering Area procedures.  It added a couple minutes to the flight, but it also kept us from giving the controller a headache.  The clouds dropped back down again, along with the visibility because of the snow falling.  Similar to the rain video I got a while back, the snow looks like you're hitting light speed as it flies by.  It was somewhat unnerving to hear Potomac working an IFR flight on the ILS Runway 17 approach to JYO as we continued in visually, but we sequenced ourselves properly over the frequency, landing in between that IFR Cirrus, and another VFR Bonanza behind us.

Right before I shut down, I snagged the AWOS weather report for insurance in case anyone questioned how visual the weather really was:
KJYO 262115Z AUTO 32005KT 5SM -SN BKN038 OVC044 00/M02 A3026 RMK AO2

I wouldn't recommend buzzing around an area you don't know very well in conditions like that, but if you know the area well and have good tools for situational awareness, you can remain reasonably safe even in degraded conditions.  I'll put it this way: I'll take those conditions in the day over clear and moonless with a low altitude at night.

Another awesome flight for the books.

Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 2.0 - 76.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 0.9 - 10.5 (of 40)

Short Runway - Strong Crosswind

N172DR - C172R - 1.8 hours

Phil and I have had plans to go flying for a while now.  Originally, it was a flight back in May, but that got cancelled so I flew out west on my own.  I'm pretty sure there were a few plans in between, but more recently we were thinking of helping a friend get home to Upstate New York.  Those plans also got cancelled as well, so like the flight back in May, we thought we'd head up to State College, PA.  Yesterday, we decided that flight would be a little longer than we would've liked, so we cancelled those plans as well and opted for a challenge instead.

To be honest, that last paragraph reminds me a little of this:



Back in February of 2010, I went for a flight out of Harford County Airport (0W3), right after one of the Snowpocalypse storms.  If the 2000' x 40' runway wasn't enough of a challenge, some of the snow plowed off of the runway was piled at the ends.  It wouldn't be enough to force pilots to hit a 2000' x 40' target, though.  Why not add in a 24' telephone line 500' from the runway, and some giant trees just beyond that?  This is also not mentioning that I hadn't flown since August of 2008 prior to that.  Despite it being a challenge, I really enjoyed it.  I think that was the reason I enjoyed it, actually.  It's a challenge.

We started the day early in weather that could only be described as "severe clear."  Clear weather, however, makes no mention of temperature or wind.  While it wasn't too incredibly cold, it was cold enough to put frost on the wings.  The wind only added to the chill at a steady 6 knots.  Phil preflighted the plane while I de-iced the wings of our plane, and several other aircraft on the way to put the de-ice bottle back inside.  Back outside, I got the interior all set up with Phil.  In the last flight narrative, I made fun of myself for the amount of technology I bring with me, but we essentially doubled it this time.  Phil had his GoPro, iPad, Dual XGPS150, and the audio setup.  I had my Contour, iPad, Garmin GLO, and audio setup as well.  Why not?

After starting and heading down to the end of Runway 35, I called Potomac to get my SFRA flight plan activated.  Apparently they didn't get it, though, so instead of bothering with Flight Service, Phil and I gave up the plan of a shortcut through the SFRA and just departed north, up and around it.  On climb out, my iPad was not agreeing with the Garmin GLO for whatever reason.  Phil ended up getting it sorted through cycling the power on both.  Once that was all sorted, I threw the blinders on so that we could both log time (and I could continue to chip away at the 40 hour instrument time requirement).

Because we didn't get an SFRA clearance, we flew a route that would hug the outside: DINUW LINSE TAFFI 0W3.  In order to log another approach, I flew the RNAV (GPS)-B off of TAFFI.

One of the issues with flying GPS approaches is that you never know whether or not the GPS database in the aircraft is up to date when it comes to renting from flight schools.  It all depends on the school, really, but the one I rent from tends to be pretty good about keeping the aircraft up to date.  The ever-so-trusty N172DR has a KLN-89B, and looking at the unit, it seems pretty simplistic.  If you're a flyer of an aircraft with a simpler-looking GPS, don't discount it too much as a lot of them have some pretty neat features buried in them.  Unfortunately, most of the CFIs don't know a lot of the features and normally only show you how to use the Direct-To feature.  That's nothing against them, really, as some fleets have different equipment in just about every plane, but it's tough to utilize the tools in front of you if you've never been shown how.  If you're not going to be shown the neat features, you might as well go learn them on your own.  The KLN-89B actually has a free simulator that's out there on the internet.  Unfortunately, I can't find a link from the manufacturer, but I did find a link through Software Informer.  If you fly with a different unit, there's probably a free simulator out there somewhere as well.  To be honest, the only reason I knew the KLN-89B had a moving map and an approach database was through the simulator in the link.

So, all that to say I was able to load the GPS approach after TAFFI through a little homework.  Since the GPS was only going to give me lateral navigation, I flew the approach with step downs.  Looking at the track in CloudAhoy, I didn't do too poorly.  At the far left, you can see a very subtle bend in the track, which is my turn over TAFFI.  After that, the more obvious turn in the middle is SNAZI, where you can see I turned a little more than necessary, and had to adjust closer to the field in order to land on Runway 10.  I'll review CloudAhoy in another post, but check out the screen capture in Debrief Mode.

When I began the approach, I checked BWI's ATIS as noted on the approach plate, as there's no weather station on the field.  It noted the wind was 040 at 9, meaning a nice crosswind for the approach, but nothing too unmanageable.  After the little sidestep at the end of the approach, I brought the plane in for what I thought would be a nice showing of my landing skills.  Unfortunately, the weather had other plans.  The 9 knot wind wasn't so much of a 9 knot wind as much as it was a gusty 9 knot wind.  It wasn't until I landed and checked the weather that I found out how gusty exactly.

In any case, here's the video of me fighting the crosswind down to the runway.  Closer in, you can hear Phil say "nosewheel," anticipating me hitting nose first as I bring it in typically flat.  I think I managed to hit the mains first, but wound up airborne again.  I couldn't get it to settle and the end was coming up quickly, so I went around.  Note the telephone line and giant trees at the end that I mentioned earlier, too.

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and all was lost.]
After going around, I wrapped the pattern back around to try the approach to Runway 28.  In the video, you can see that the wind sock shows the wind somewhat favored Runway 10, but the last time I flew here I used Runway 28, so I figured I'd try that.

The second approach wasn't any better than the first, so I went around.  The third attempt, however, was good enough to set down.  I won't say it looked pretty because it really didn't, but I at least made it down to the ground, despite a gust picking the right wing up slightly, causing me to drag the right wheel while trying to brake.  Thankfully, I had Phil to dump the lift by raising the flaps when I called it.

The video picks up on final, and you can definitely see how close you come to the trees and the telephone lines this time around.  Contour changed the style of the videos as well.  I'm not so much of a fan of the new overlay, but it is what it is.  Just make sure not to pay attention to the speed display.  It's not very accurate, which you can see as it still displays 70 mph when I'm pulling off the runway.

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and all was lost.]
As I exit, you can barely hear me coordinating with the aircraft holding short of the runway, who I later joked with about the luxuries of longer runways.  Because I don't have any specific audio editing software, or audio hosting for that matter, I made it into a short YouTube clip:

After that departure, we headed back to JYO and I put the hood back on.  Closer to Frederick (FDK), I remembered that they now have a tower and that I would need to avoid their airspace, or call them up.  I opted for the former by climbing above it.  The controller seemed to have his hands full with a couple pilots still adjusting to the relatively new tower, and I didn't feel like adding to his workload.  After turning south, I handed the controls over to Phil so he could get in a landing.  Compared to my landings, his was nice and smooth.


Here's the evidence:

[Video was here until Contour closed down for a bit, and all was lost.]

After I got home and checked the weather, it turns out that BWI's weather information updated right after I flew the approach.  This report matches more of what I felt:

KBWI 171454Z 04012G21KT 10SM CLR 08/M03 A3059 RMK AO2 SLP359 T00831028 51019

For the non-pilots among us, this is saying that the weather at BWI (KBWI) today, at 1454 UTC (171454Z), had wind from the northeast at 12 knots gusting to 21 knots (04012G21).  The rest is sky conditions, temperature and pressure.

Definitely an airport I would return to - wind or not. I loved the challenge.


Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 1.8 - 74.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 1.3 - 9.6 (of 40)

Garmin GLO vs. Dual XGPS150

If any of you reading this took a look at my review of the iPad, ForeFlight and the Garmin GLO, you'll remember I briefly mentioned the Dual XGPS150, but I didn't go into much detail.  Reviews are all well and good, but they get better if you have something to compare different products.  Luckily, my friend Phil has the Dual XGPS150 and let me borrow it for one of those little comparative reviews.

Before I jump into the actual review, I want to point out what I checked on each of them:

Ease of use (power on/power off, really - there's not much else to them), ease of Bluetooth connectivity, time to connect via Bluetooth, time to acquire satellites for position, time to acquire satellites for altitude, and general user interaction.  As far as acquiring goes, I used hot boots, meaning I let each one boot up fully and acquire, shut them off and booted again within a minute.  I've also thrown in some manufacturer statistics like battery life (sorry, I'm not sitting there with a stopwatch to time that for you), and size.

The Dual XGPS150

Not much needs to be said for the XGPS150.  Even if you've casually glanced at the product on Amazon, or anything of that sort, you'll see the raving reviews.  It's really simple, compact, and easy to use.  Out of the box, you get the unit, a non-slip pad, a strap (for wearing, or securing more permanently in a car/aircraft), a USB charging cable, and an adapter to charge it in a car or properly equipped aircraft, all for $99.99 (as of writing).

The small size - a 2.25" square - makes it easy to store without taking up too much space, and it has a weighted feel to it that just feels sturdy.  The red circle in the middle is a large button to turn it on, with the pressure point being slightly below center.  Said button takes a firm prodding with your thumb to turn it on, but if it's being stored in a pilot bag, or similar, you don't want the button to be too easy to press.  Pressing and holding once again will turn it off.  On the side of it, you'll find a door that hides the USB charging port and a button that switches the data format from Apple to everything else.

Holding down the button for a few seconds will bring it to life with all of the lights confirming you have, in fact, brought it out of its slumber.  At that point, the appropriately blue Bluetooth light begins flashing to let you know that it's in discoverable mode, while the green GPS light flashes until it picks up the required amount of satellites.  Going into your iPad's Bluetooth panel, you'll find XGPS150-[serial number].  Click to connect.  Begin using it.

If you're interested, you can also download an app from the app store that allows you to see what's going on behind the scenes with the device.  I'd explain further, but pictures are better:

The Garmin GLO for Aviation

Somewhat later to the game is the Garmin GLO.  Reviews are just about as good for the GLO as the Dual on Amazon, and I'd expect similar from other stores.  It's equally simple, easy to use, and just about the same size.  Out of the box, you get the unit, a non-slip pad, a USB charging cable, and an adapter to charge it in a car or properly equipped aircraft, for $129.99 (as of writing).  The regular Garmin GLO comes with the unit and the USB cable only, for $99.99.

Though it's a slightly different shape and appears larger, it's 0.0465 square inches smaller, based on the manufacturers' measurements.  The size difference being negligible, it's just as portable and doesn't take much room in any bag you'd carry it in.  The only button is clearly visible and functions as the power button.  One press turns it on, and a press and hold will turn it off.  The USB port is on the side of the unit by the power switch, in the open.  Additionally, there are no special switches to switch between devices.

A press of the power button will bring it to life, and just like the XGPS150, the blue Bluetooth light will flash until it's connected to another device, and the green GPS light will flash until it has acquired enough satellites for an accurate position.  In the iPad settings panel, you'll find Garmin GLO #[serial number].  Click to connect.  Enjoy.

No apps for the GLO, unfortunately.

Side by Side

Looking at the above summaries, they seem like they're just about the same, and they really are.  Even through my simple testing, they came up about the same by the numbers.

Here are the side by side manufacturer specs:

	Garmin GLO	Dual XGPS150
Weight	2.12 oz	1.8 oz
Size (L/W/H)	3.04/1.65/0.70"	2.25/2.25/0.75"
Battery Life	12 Hrs	8.5 Hrs
GPS	GPS/GLONASS	GPS
WAAS	Yes	Yes
Refresh	10 Hz	>1 Hz

Just in case you forgot your old physics knowledge, 1 Hz is once per second. In the case of refresh rates, more Hz is better. Dual's website only says "at least once per second," so I just indicated that as greater than 1 Hz, or >1 Hz.

Before I provide the data from my tests, I want to be very honest in that these tests were done literally in my back yard and not in some field.  Both devices proved very capable of picking up signals both outside and even inside.  In any case, both devices were tested in the same spot, so despite not being in the middle of an open field, the same disadvantages were present for both devices.  Additionally, when testing the vertical accuracy, I gave it a +/- 10 foot buffer and stopped the clock when it reached that.  I included the first altitude indication time as well.

Here are the test specs:

	Garmin GLO	Dual XGPS150
Bluetooth Connection Time	14 sec	5 sec
Position (2D) Time	22 sec	18 sec
Position (3D) Time	30 sec	30 sec
Accurate (3D) Time	49 sec	100 sec

Conclusions and Other Notes
The Dual had a clear advantage in its Bluetooth time, while the Garmin seemed to fully latch on to the satellites slightly faster.  The Dual satellite times may be slightly longer as my iPad seemed to be arguing with it at first.  This was shown in the fact that I had to close ForeFlight and reopen it before I could see a position the first few attempts.  I believe I got it sorted out for some more accurate times, but I want to put that out there.  The fact that they both provided vertical data at about the same time leads me to give the Dual the benefit of the doubt on the accurate 3D time.

To be honest, you're not going to go wrong with either device.  They're just about even all around, both in performance and ease of use.  The Dual does have an app for the iPad so that you can check up on the device.  At the very least, it's nice to know what the battery life is looking like, which is possible in the app.  The lack of an app for the Garmin doesn't set it back too far, but there's some mystery in how much battery life is left if you haven't just charged it.  This is also somewhat offset by the fact that the Garmin's non-slip pad has a cutout where the charger can fit, which allows you to plug it in while using it in its non-slip pad.  The Dual's pad hides the charge port entirely, and even then it's hidden behind a door.  You could easily remedy that issue with scissors by cutting the pad where you'd like to have access for the charger.

Both devices will have issues with heated windscreens, but most have reported good results after moving the device into the cabin.  The range of Bluetooth being about 30 feet allows you to move it just about anywhere in any aircraft where you'd want an external GPS.

There really isn't a clear winner, and as a result, I'm not going to say you should go get one or the other.  In the end, it'll probably come down to a price issue.  In order to get the same features (minus the strap) for the Garmin, you have to spend an extra $30, so despite all else being just about equal, there's that.  Hopefully I've provided enough information for you to make a more informed decision.

If you'd like to see anything else reviewed here, let me know on the Facebook page, or @TheLifeOfAPilot on Twitter.

Good luck in your decision making.

Dual XGPS150 - Garmin GLO for Aviation