Hello everyone.
It's a great day in America, isn't it? Sorry, just channeling my inner Craig Ferguson.
Here at the PlaneBusiness Worldwide Headquarters it's been a bit of a challenging 24 hours. We experienced a loss of connectivity late yesterday as a rather nasty line of thunderboomers erupted almost directly over our heads. I lost all email for a bit, and we lost our FIOS (our internet connectivity) after one particularly nasty lightning surge.
Things are now back working as they should, but it caused our editing process to slow to a crawl last night. No, let me rephrase that. It came to a screeching halt.
I finally gave up and we all started up again this morning at about 6 a.m.
And so here we are. Yes, it's a great day in America.
After I get done here I get to go to the vet's office and find out how difficult it is going to be to transition my cat to a new form of insulin. Why do I have to do this? Because the FDA has halted the sale of the type of insulin she was on.
I'm so looking forward to this. I know she is too.
I know that PlaneBusiness Banter subscribers are looking forward to this week's issue -- so here it is. Finally!
This week in PlaneBusiness Banter I talk about the change in command at the Allied Pilots Association. The APA is the pilot union at American Airlines, and well, let's just say the APA and I go back a long time.
Captain David Bates was just elected as the organization's new leader and while this is a most welcome event (anything would be an improvement over the previous "leadership" and yes, I use that term loosely) as I write this week this is a two way street. Management at the airline has to tune up its game plan as well if anything constructive is going to happen as a result of this change in union leadership. More on all this in this week's issue.
On the passenger rights front, Kate Hanni and her followers received a nice bone to chew on last week when we once again had one of those nasty "stranded on the tarmac" incidents. This time the aircraft belonged to Virgin Atlantic, the ordeal sounded awful, but that still doesn't mean that the airline was totally at fault. As usual, there was enough blame to go around. Airport, airline, customs officials, you name it.
A fact that should negate any move to extend the "three-hour rule" to international flights.
Of course this didn't stop the DOT Secretary from using the incident as another excuse to pander to the masses.
We talk a bit this week about the latest Boeing 787 delay information, and we also talk about the American Airlines - FAA discovery of unexpected "cracks" that were found in some Boeing 767 engine pylons. Could newly installed winglets be creating the problem?
Meanwhile, airline stocks had a dismal week. Shares of Hawaiian Airlines took the brunt of the sector decline -- fallout from an Avondale Partners downgrade and price target reduction was to blame.
Oil prices were back on the move again as well last week, as oil traders came down with a case of hurricane angst on Friday.
Finally in this week's email bag, we hear from our subscribers on a range of issues. We have a corporate travel manager lamenting the changes at Continental, someone who agrees with us that the industry is already too regulated, not regulated enough, and someone who asks: if all the airline analysts are so bullish, isn't that a perfect time to sell my stock? Answer? Could very well be. I am a big fan of contrarian thinking. Especially after reading my daily economic news feeds.
As usual, we talk about all this -- and more -- in this week's issue. Subscribers can access this week's issue here.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
PlaneBusiness Banter Now Posted!
The USA No Longer Holding Short of Canada
The USA No Longer Holding Short of Canada
A few readers have written to alert me to a change in FAA regulations effective June 30th. The new rule requires controllers to issue, and pilots to receive, explicit clearances to cross any runway, including an inactive or closed one. Controllers are no longer allowed to simply say "taxi to" the active runway and must give a routing and explicit instructions to cross or hold short of each runway encountered en route. They can still assign an airplane to follow another, instead of giving explicit routing, but must issue crossing and/or hold short instructions to the following aircraft if the route crosses any runways. The "follow the 737" type of instruction is very useful for pilots who are unfamiliar with an airport that has confusing taxiway instructions. The controller can just have us follow someone that they know knows the way, such as a scheduled airline flight.
This rule change makes me happy, because the rule has existed in Canada since before I learned to fly, and was deeply ingrained in my psyche before my first solo. Every time an American controller blithely says to me, "Taxi to runway seven," I frown and consult my runway diagram, thinking "how does she want me to get there?" I choose a route using the taxiway diagram, but my instinct is still to stop at all hold short lines. To tell the truth, even when I am in the States and know that the rule allows me to proceed across the double lines ahead of me, most of the time I still call ground and "confirm cleared across two seven?" The ground controller might sound irritated, but not as irritated as she would sound if I committed a runway incursion.
I believe some US airports have had this in place as a house rule or a local regulation for some time, because I have had explicit US runway crossing clearances in the past. In fact on June 20th I landed at a US airport and my taxi clearance to parking included an explicit runway crossing. The next day when I was taxiing out it didn't, so I confirmed and then followed up with "I guess you guys don't need to issue that clearance until next week, eh?" The previous day's controller was possibly practicing for the change.
What safety procedures already present in the US should Canada adopt? Off the top of my head, I'd like to suggest that Nav Canada print airport identifiers on WACs and VNCs (charts).
Labels: air law, ATC, FAA, safety, taxiing, US-Canada differences
posted by Aviatrix at 00:00
Friday, June 18, 2010
North of Lake Superior
North of Lake Superior
I wrote this blog entry in detail and then attempted to publish it on a day that Blogger had some major problem, and the text was eaten, so this is the reconstructed version.
Before we left Gore Bay, we double checked our next fuel stop. It would have to be Wawa, as the wind was too strong to make Marathon, and there isn't anywhere else a wheel plane can stop for fuel along the north shore of Lake Superior. There were no fuel NOTAMs for Wawa, but a careful reading of the CFS entry reveals that winter hours are still in effect, and the fuel service is scheduled to be closed by the time we arrive. The PIC makes a quick call to verify that fuel will be available for us tonight, and then we start up and taxi back to the runway.
The four cylinders of the little engine directly drive the propeller and with full throttle the pistons are pounding up and down at almost 2700 rpm. We're rolling down the runway and soon airborne again. We cut northeast across the water and level out on a direct track above the wilderness towards Wawa.
My role here is mainly as companion, safety pilot and whip cracker. I'm the one who says, "You fill the tanks and I'll update the weather and file the flight plan," or "Just pee and refill your water bottle: we'll eat in the plane." She is doing the flying. We should be able to get three or four legs a day, assuming we aren't NOTAMed out of our own airport. The weather is good and turbulence is light, but it occurs to me that while I'm used to flying out the last minute of my duty day, she more normally flies for an hour or two and goes home. Plus we're literally flying cross-country and it's likely more stressful for her than me. I want to have two competent pilots in this cockpit six hours from now, so I suggest I fly this leg and she kick back and take it as easy as she can, to conserve her energy for later in the day. I know she's more of a night owl than I am, so I want to use her strengths. She agrees and I take control.
Here I could insert three paragraphs about rocks and trees and lakes, but this is Northern Ontario. You've been here, if not in person, then with me. We can't see the big lake yet from this vantage point, but there are rocks and trees and lakes. Mostly it's trees, mostly some sort of pine, and we pass them at a groundspeed of 70 knots or so.
After a lot of this we approach Wawa. We have the latest winds and altimeter setting, from an autostation or perhaps from a flight service specialist, I don't remember which, and we've tuned the aerodrome frequency. There's someone in the circuit, landing on 03. This is unexpected, because the surface winds are strongly favouring 21. That's consistent with us struggling along trying to maintain seventy knots westward over the terrain. I listen again--we have lots of time before we get there--and the aircraft in the circuit reports touching down on the threshold of 03. I call them on frequency and ask if the winds are not favouring 21. They laugh and explain that they're a helicopter. The winds are definitely favouring 21. They are doing hover practice over the runway and landing westbound on the threshhold of 03. Ohhh, that makes sense. They promise to stay out of our way and I join the circuit. The trees are quite high and 21 has a displaced threshold because you can't make a normal approach over the trees to the actual end of the runway. You almost can in this plane, with 40 degrees of flaps and that headwind. I descend towards the runway and flare slightly high. I realize it, and fix the landing with power; there's lots of room to play around and get a nice soft straight touchdown.
"Whee! You let me land!" I say, "How'd you know I wouldn't pooch it?"
"You never said 'you have control'!"
"You never took control. It's your plane!"
This sounds like a CRM disaster movie, but of course if I had any doubt I could safely land it, I would have given her control, and if she had any doubts she would have taken it. I probably have more time flying Cessna 150s than she has total time, but mine isn't recent time and I've watched a lot of pilots more experienced than me embarrass themselves in small airplanes that they used to know how to fly. We both laugh and taxi in. One of us parks in front of the fuel pumps. I think it was her, because I remember pointing them out. Pumps inside a locked cabinet are easily identifiable to me, but it was the first time she had seen them and didn't instantly recognize that shape as meaning fuel, or the red stripe as being the one that says 100LL as opposed to the black one for Jet-A. We shut down and go inside to find out who has stayed late to provide us with fuel. No one has, but there's a local there from another business who calls the appropriate person and says they'll be right here.
He is, and he fuels us quickly, but the $75 callout fee is more than the fuel bill. There was no avoiding it, as we had to get fuel here, and its not less trouble for someone to come out for a little plane than a big one, it's just more painful when it's a higher proportion of the fuel bill. I pay callout fees a lot at work, fuelling on weekends and early morning or late at night, but the callout fee is typically less than 5% of the fuel cost, so it never feels like an issue. She pays for her fuel and we start up and taxi back to the runway.
We're still not going to fly direct to Thunder Bay, because this is a big lake. If we cut straight across it we would be out of sight of land, and we'd still only be in the northwestern corner of the lake. We'll remain within gliding distance of the shore, or at least the shore of islands, following a big offshore arc. For the first part we're over land still because although Wawa is close to shore, it's at the eastern end of a big cape that juts out southward into the lake. It would be longer here to go over the water than to cut across the cape. Insert another forty-five minutes of trees.
Finally the expanse of Lake Superior comes into view. This is a huge, huge lake. We can see the shore beside us to the north, but we can't see the western shore and the whole south east to south west is just water. There must be people in the world who cannot conceive of this much water. I'm not sure I can. We pass offshore of Marathon, and of a floatplane base. I imagine some pilot inattentive pilot planning to fuel there and then discovering too late that there is no runway. It's close enough to Marathon they could probably make that and not have to ditch, though.
There are big islands and peninsulas down the west side of the lake, so we're flying over them as Thunder Bay comes close enough to tune the ATIS. We call the tower and follow their instructions for a downwind to the long runway. The sky is just beginning to pinken as we touch down. She follows the taxi instructions and chooses the Maintair Shell as our parking spot. We need fuel and oil. The FBO agrees to sell us both, but then are surprised to discover they are out of our grade of oil. We try the other FBO, but they don't have it either. That's unexpected. The CFS lists our grade of oil available at Kenora and Fort Francis, but it's too late in the day to call and confirm that. We'll call in the morning, and call this a day.
We leave the airplane fuelled, chocked, locked and tented and take the FBO recommendation for a hotel. It's much better than the last hotel I stayed in in YQT. This one has polite service, clean rooms, and a pool with a giant waterslide. Damn me and my superlight packing. Let this be a lesson: there is always room in your flight bag for a Speedo.
Labels: airplanes, flight plans, flying, private flying
posted by Aviatrix at 21:30
Would you want to become a pilot for a living now?
Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Scott Spangler has written an interesting post on JetWhine where he noted a recent NPR story about the dwindling number of student pilots in the USA. Apparently, it is being reported that the FAA’s estimate for this year’s number of student pilot certificates will total less than 60,000 – an all time low. For some perspective: Student certificates peaked at 209,406 in 1968 (around the height of the Vietnam War) and then reached an all-time high of 210,180 in 1979. Since then though, they have been in decline and fell into the five figures in 1994.
Scott noted that he often receives plenty of questions and genuine interest about becoming a pilot from youngsters but their interests is mostly fueled by having played video games and from seeing Red Bull Air Racing. However, the NPR story also profiled a CFI and aspiring professional pilot who is the perfect example of why pilot numbers are in decline:
His loans total nearly $100,000, and to build the experience that will qualify him for a $20,000-a-year right seat in a regional airliner, he’s forced to “flight instruct, tow banners, and haul skydivers.” Think about the attitude bred by this decades-old system and the declining student and pilot population should surprise no one.
In other words, why would anyone want to become a professional pilot under those conditions? However, Scott noted that the US aviation industry only makes changes when it is forced to but then he suggested that:
A good solution might be the military model, where candidates vie for a coveted seat, knowing they will receive top-notch proficiency-based training designed for the mission they will soon fulfill. Anyone can apply, but only the best will be chosen for the education program that fills a guaranteed professional pilot slot. Because the airlines would have more invested in their pilots, perhaps they wouldn’t treat them like Doritos: Hard financial times? Furlough them! There will always be new suckers who still believe in the happy airline pilot dream.
Hence, we want to know what our readers think – especially any USA based pilots who fly for a living. Would you choose to become a pilot again or choose a different line of work? What do you should be done to reverse the decline in pilot numbers?
Share and enjoy:
Related posts:
- How do I renew an old and expired pilot’s license?
- Buyer’s market for recreational flyers
- Mid-air collisions and the reverie of flight
- Will piloted aircraft soon be a thing of the past?
- More Northwest pilot humour….
Tagged as: Training
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Press Release - Statement from the FAA in Response to the Associated Press Story about Temporary Flight Restrictions over the Gulf of Mexico
Statement from the FAA in Response to the Associated Press Story about Temporary Flight Restrictions over the Gulf of Mexico
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today’s story by the Associated Press contains a number of inaccuracies with regard to the government’s oversight of flyovers in and around the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Since May 28th, the FAA has approved every request to fly over the area–more than 176 requests. While the temporary flight restriction requires pilots to stay above 3,000 feet, the FAA is working with news organizations and granting exceptions so that pilots can fly at lower altitudes throughout the day.
The reason for these requirements is safety, pure and simple. So far, there have been a number of reported near misses over the Gulf due to heavy traffic and pilots flying above the oil spill to give their passengers a closer look.
On Sunday, a helicopter carrying a member of the Associated Press violated the temporary flight restriction around the oil clean-up efforts in the Gulf of Mexico. The helicopter operator was not authorized to fly into the restricted area and was flying at various altitudes well below 3,000 feet. For over 30 minutes, the pilot was not in communication with the Border Patrol aircraft that is providing traffic advisories for all participating aircraft. Border Patrol was forced to divert other traffic in the area, creating a dangerous situation for everyone involved. When the pilot was finally reached he was told to leave the area.
A pilot deviation (an action that results in the violation of a Federal Aviation Regulation) is being filed against the helicopter pilot.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
A First Time for Everything
A First Time for Everything
Next morning the weather looks passable on my iPod Touch, but there is such a paucity of reporting stations, or civilization of any description, around the north shore of Lake Superior that we can't be certain. And I know the GFA is based on the same kind of interpolation I have to do. I know what the weather was like half an hour ago at three five mile circles scattered around the north of the lake, so from that I try to interpolate the suitability for flight between them. While the PIC is in the shower, I pick up the phone and call an expert for a briefing. He starts describing the moisture content, stability and direction of travel of air masses, then interrupts himself. "Did you say Brampton?"
"Yes. I'm in Brampton now; it's clear skies."
"Someone just yelled a NOTAM for Brampton across the room, 'All runways closed."
He isn't able to elucidate the reason for a sudden airport closure, or suggest when they may reopen. In my experience, airports have closed for resurfacing, drag racing, severe weather, special security events, or major accidents. I'm guessing the last, and we decide to drive out to the airport anyway, hoping that everyone is okay and the wreckage is cleared before we want to depart.
As we pull into the parking lot we can see police cars and police officers on the airfield. This is weird, but hey, they are allowed to be there, and the NOTAM says the runways are closed, not the apron. My new guess is that there is some kind of drug bust going on. I live in a country where one is not obliged to cower in terror at the mere presence of law enforcement officials, so while the other pilot makes a few last minute decisions about what to take and what to lock in the trunk, I walk through the unlocked front gate from the car parking lot and into the aircraft parking area.
I'm immediately approached by a young man in a reflective vest. "Where are you going?" he asks.
"Thunder Bay," I reply.
I love to watch the moment of adjustment a person goes through when you give a valid answer to a question, but it is not the same order of magnitude as they were expecting. He asks if I am renting a flying school plane and I tell him, no, a private aircraft, and give the call sign.
Then it's his turn to watch someone react to the unexpected, "Make sure you do a very thorough preflight." He doesn't know if our little one-fifty was one of the victims, but there was extensive vandalism on the field last night, and a number of aircraft were damaged. As I walk further I can see a flying school light twin with all the windows bashed in and a fire extinguisher lying beside it on the apron. Detritus such as engine plugs, aircraft covers and seat cushions are strewn on the grass. A Katana has been pushed up against a hangar. There are footprints on the horizontal stabilizer of an older Skyhawk. The perpetrators have also left broken beer bottles and what looks like a corsage. Evidence suggests that some high school students have chosen to celebrate their putative entry into adulthood by getting drunk and committing a federal crime against thousands of dollars worth of other people's property.
The airplane tied tail-to-tail with ours has been hit, but ours looks good. It's tied down, the doors are still locked, and the only exterior damage is what looks like a long-ago mend to a rear window, probably broken by an unsecured object in turbulence. Not the first one I've seen like that. There are tiedown rings inside and I secure all our cargo as I calculated it should go, with the light objects like our jackets and the engine cover at the back and the snacks and water on top right behind the seats.
I've never seen this kind of vandalism at an airfield before. I call back flight services to update them on the situation. The briefer says he's never seen it before either. I ask if they have an UNTIL time on that NOTAM. It's midnight zulu, which is eight pm here, but "midnight zulu" is a default kind of time, not something with a real reason behind it. The weather forecast suggests we can get at least to Thunder Bay today, so only this NOTAM is stopping us. After a bit of waiting around I decide I don't like this NOTAM.
A police officer in blue latex gloves is dusting the rear window of the airplane behind us for fingerprints. I ask whether it is the police or airport management who has imposed or has power to change the NOTAM. Reflective-vest guy is there, and says that it's his responsibility, and that he will change it right now. He picks up his phone and does so. In the time it takes me to call Flight Services to file our flight plan, they have received and propagated the cancelling NOTAM. Excellent. This, right here, is an example of why pilots are so infuriated by incompetent security. Aviation has a lot of rules, a lot of procedures, a lot of things forbidden from time to time. But they are for a reason and in the vast majority of cases when you have a reason that is more reasonable than their reason, you find the right person, you explain your reason, and you go do what you have to do. You may have to prove it is safe, and it may cost money, but it's easier than getting thirty millilitres of shampoo through security in a 110 mL bottle.
We fuel, taxi out and she starts the take-off roll. My flight instructor instinct kicks in and I advise, "Rotate normally and wait. The airplane will take off slowly." I know she's been bombing around solo in this airplane, but we're now close to max weight, and it's worth being tagged as a back seat driver not to be in the plane during a departure stall. She follows my advice, and the airplane rolls along the runway on its rear wheels for a bit before it lifts off and slowly climbs. If a pilot isn't used to this behaviour in a loaded airplane, she may pull back harder on the control column, trying to get it to fly. It may become airborne in ground effect and then stall, crashing back down on the runway.
I have the local airspace on the VTA and displayed on a handheld GPS receiver so I navigate while she flies. We call Toronto Terminal for flight following and they laugh right on the radio as they radar identify us "grounding fifty knots." A voice in the background of the transmission says "... only has four hours of fuel." I have a picture of a crowd of people gathered around a radar scope laughing at our slow-moving blip. Freaking headwinds.
We gain a little speed as we level out at 4500' so we're mostly keeping ahead of traffic on the highway. Mostly. Metropolitan Toronto thins out behind us and Wiarton, where Canada's most famous groundhog lives, slowly comes up ahead. We pass it and continue up the peninsula and then across the water to Manitoulin Island. It's a short over-water stretch, but the briefer said that many pilots choose to go the long way around to avoid it. We're not even out of gliding distance of land, and the beach that we would end up on in the case of engine failure looks more hospitable to me than something we might find between North Bay and Sudbury. But everyone has different risk tolerances.
Manitoulin Island is pretty, with lots of little inlets. I wonder if someday there will be a bridge, making this shortcut available to car drivers, too. Our first stop will be Gore Bay. It's easy to find, and we land and taxi in, parking next to the fuel pumps. There is a white building on uphill next to the apron and I walk up there in search of a phone and washroom. They have both, and sell us the fuel we need.
I'm writing this blog entry tired, and while that's not dangerous like flying tired, it's in danger of being boring, so I'll leave off here and continue the story after we depart, with full tanks and empty bladders.
Labels: aerodynamics, ATC, crime, NOTAM, places, private flying, security, wind
posted by Aviatrix at 00:00
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Specialized Scholarships for Aviation Maintenance | The Delta Online
Aviation maintenance is a highly specialized field of work and requires a high degree of understanding, skills, and professionalism. In the last few years, the aviation industry has witnessed a decline in the number of people venturing into the field of aviation maintenance. Apart from this, the high levels of security risk in the aviation industry, especially after the events of September 11, 2001, have boosted concerns regarding the maintenance and day-to-day wear and tear of airplanes.
In order to boost this dwindling profession, the Professional Aviation Maintenance Association (PAMA) has launched a campaign to promote a higher degree of professionalism among aviation maintenance personnel. The association is aiming to develop and improve skills, methods, learning, and achievements in the aviation maintenance industry. PAMA has been conducting meeting and seminars at both the national and state levels, and striving to recognize achievements in this field. However, most importantly the association has been collaborating with other organizations in the aviation industry and has been actively addressing the queries of governmental agencies pertaining to maintenance rules and guidelines.
In the recent years, PAMA has also established a Student Scholarship Program that recognizes and rewards qualified airframe, power plant, and avionics students who have selected aviation maintenance as a career. The awards that the association provides, may be used for tuition, fees, supplies, or books, which are related to their program
The association also supports another scholarship program – known as the Foundation Scholarship Program. Created to recognize and reward qualified students who have selected aviation maintenance as a career, the PAMA Foundation (PAMF) Scholarship Program awards $1,000 to the recipients. The association awards these scholarships regardless of the color, race, religion, and the national origin of the applicants.
PAMA’s programs operate based on donations received and from the funds raised at PAMA’s Annual Chili Cook-Off. Though the scholarships are not renewable, students have the option of reapplying for the scholarship every year.
Apart from PAMA, the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) also provides scholarships for qualified students wishing to study further in the field of aviation maintenance. The UAA’s Era Aviation, Inc. Scholarship offers two scholarships, each of $2,500. The aid is to help students who are admitted to an aviation maintenance technology program at the university with the cost of tuition, fees, and tools. While one scholarship is awarded to a helicopter maintenance student, the other is awarded to a general aviation maintenance student. Additionally, preference is given to candidates who are intending to follow a career in Alaska itself.
While these two are the more prominent of the scholarships in this field, there are others as well, such as the Helicopter Association International’s (HAI) Aviation Maintenance Technician Scholarship Award Program. This program aims at promoting the choice of helicopter maintenance as a career, and the scholarship is given to five recipients. Apart from this, the first place winner also receives about $1,500 from HAI to assist with the associated expenses.
Overall, the field of aviation maintenance should pick up as such kind of scholarships add to the value of the field, and attract more students to enter the industry. While helping students along financially, these aviation maintenance scholarships are also giving rise to specific skill-based talent in the country.
Click Here To Discover more about aviation scholarships
Read Also
Aviation Abbreviations « Aviation
Aviation Abbreviations
I try to make each blog entry understandable in itself, even to people who
aren’t familiar with aviation abbreviations, but some unexplained jargon creeps
in. Sometimes I think that I’ve explained something recently enough, or I’m in
a hurry, or I forget altogether that something is an abbreviation. These things become words unto themselves after a while.Some of the expanded abbreviations don’t match the letters in the abbreviation. That’s just the way life is. If I haven’t expanded a particular abbreviation in the list below then either it doesn’t stand for anything worth expanding, or I forget what it stands for. Definitions given are not official, complete or completely accurate, just enough to allow you to understand them in context. Some of the terms only apply in Canada and/or may mean different things in other countries.
See (or add to) the comments for variation in usage or pronunciation and pedantic expansions on the definitions.
A&P – American equivalent of AME
ADF (eh-dee-eff) – Automatic Direction Finder – cockpit navigation instrument that uses ground-based radio beacons. It can also be used to listen to AM radio.
AME (eh-em-ee) – person certified to supervise and sign for repairs and modifications done to aircraft
AMO (eh-em-oh) – licenced airplane repair shop
ATIS (eh-tiss) – a recorded message broadcast at some airports describing the weather conditions and the runway in use
CAME – Civil Aviation Medical Examiner – a doctor who is licenced to certify pilots fit or unfit for duty
CFS (see-eff-ess) – book listing facilities (runway, frequencies, services)
information for Canadian aerodromes
ETA (ee-tee-eh) – Estimated Time of Arrival – when I think I will get there
ETE (ee-tee-ee) – Estimated Time Enroute – how much longer I think it will take to get
there
FA (eff-eh) – Flight Attendant – a person other than a pilot who is responsible for passenger safety during a flight
FAF (faff) – Final Approach Fix – a point lined up with the runway a few
miles back
FBO (eff-bee-oh) – Fixed Base Operator – an airplane service station at an airport
FO (eff-oh) – First Officer – a pilot who is second-in-command of an aircraft
FSS (eff-ess-ess) – 1. Flight Service Station 2. Flight Service Specialist – Source of
aviation information such as weather
GFA (gee-eff-eh) – Graphical Area Forecast- A regional forecast in the form of a weather map
GPS (gee-pee-ess) – Global Positioning System – Usually refers to the GPS receiver, an instrument that provides navigation
information
GPU (gee-pee-you) – Ground Power Unit – A cart with its own power that can be connected to
an airplane on the ground to provide power to electrical systems or an extra
boost for starting engines
IFR (eye-eff-are) – Instrument Flight Rules – 1. flying with reference to
instruments alone, 2. IMC 3. capable (pilot, aircraft, etc) of #1IMC (eye-em-see) – Instrument Meteorological Conditions – weather that requires IFR #1
LNAV (el-nav) – Lateral Navigation – A type of GPS approach
MDA (em-dee-eh) – Minimum Descent Altitude – Lowest altitude a pilot may legally descend to before seeing the runway
METAR (may-tar or meh-tar) – an hourly report on weather at an aerodrome
NDB (en-dee-bee) – Non-Directional Beacon – ground-based navigational beacon. Occasionally misused to mean ADF
NOTAM (no-tam or no-t’m) – an advisory of a change in procedure or a non-weather hazard to aviation
PIC (pee-eye-see) – Pilot in Command – 1. the crewmember on an airplane who has ultimate responsibility for the flight, regardless of who is actually manipulating the controls 2. time logged by a pilot while acting in that capacity
PRM (pee-are-em) – Person Responsible for Maintenance – the company official who
is legally liable if the aircraft is not properly maintained
RNAV (are-nav) – navigation not dependent on ground facilities, nowadays usually GPS
TAC (tack) – Terminal Aerodrome Chart – a 1:25,000 chart for VFR navigation in the United States
near a major aerodrome
TAF (taff) – a forecast for weather in the immediate area of an aerodrome over the next 12 to 36 hours
TC – Transport Canada – the regulatory authority that governs aviation in Canada
TSB – Transportation Safety Bureau – the Canadian body that investigates aviation accidents and makes safety recommendations
UTC (you-tee-see) – Coordinated Universal Time – a time that is the same all over the world,
regardless of time zone or Daylight Savings status
VFR (vee-eff-are) – Visual Flight Rules – 1. flying by looking out the window, 2.
weather that allows #1, 3. only capable (pilot, aircraft, airport, etc.) of
#1 (as opposed to IFR)VMC (vee-em-see) – Visual Meteorological Conditions – Weather that allows VFR #1
VNC (vee-en-see) – 1:50,000 scale VFR Canadian aviation navigation chart
VOR (vee-oh-are) – 1. a type of navigational beacon 2. aircraft navigational
instrument that receives its information from 1VTA (vee-tee-eh) – 1:25,000 scale VFR navigation chart for Canada
YQT (why-queue-tee) – if it’s three letters and starts with Y or Z it’s probably a Canadian airport identifier. It doesn’t stand for anything, just represents that airport, which usually I will have already named before using this form. YQT is Thunder Bay. These aren’t usually spoken in conversation unless the name of the airport is longer or harder to pronounce than the identifier.
Z or Zulu (pronounced “zoo-loo” in either form) – UTC
I’ll update this as I use more abbreviations. If any explanations are missing,
wrong or unclear, please leave a comment on this blog entry, and I’ll add, fix
or explain it. Unless you’re just being pedantic, in which case I’ll leave your comment for people who like that sort of thing.
If the jargon you don’t understand isn’t an abbreviation, try this Aviation Dictionary website.
This entry was posted on June 14, 2010, 4:26 pm and is filed under aviation. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Your VOR receiver does not care for your heading…
By Vincent on Jun 15, 2010Your VOR receiver does not care for your heading…
ADF receivers are easy to understand. They measure the direction from where the signal from the station is coming. Then, if you turn right, the needle’s head will go left, and if you turn left, the needle goes right. Easy. But with a VOR receiver, even if you fly a 360, the needle won’t move. Not at all. Even the TO / FROM flag will not see any change.
Back basics: how VOR works?
Many pilots struggle with that and I think this is because the name TO / FROM flag is misleading. Going back to the basics is the best way to understand how VOR works and why they don’t care about the aircraft’s heading. The VOR ground station transmits two signals which can be compared to waves:
- The reference signal is the same in all directions
- The variable signal is different in different direction
North of the station, the reference and variable signals are synchronized. The top of both waves reach the receiver at the same time. East of the station, the top of the variable signal’s wave is delayed and reach the receiver a quarter of the cycle’s period later. By measuring the time difference between the reception time of both waves’s tops, the receiver can know it’s east of the station. South of the stations, the variable signaled is delayed by half a cycle, and so on.
Because the VOR receiver measures this difference in time – or, for engineers, in phase – they are completely independent from the aircraft’s heading. Whatever the heading flown, the received time difference is the same. What the CDI needle and the TO / FROM flag indicate are not direct reading from the receiver, but the difference between an arbitrary radial selected by the pilot and the measured one. Yes, this is the radial selected by turning the OBS knob.
What’s really driving the VOR TO / FROM indicator
Once the selected radial is defined, the VOR receiver splits the airspace in two sectors along a line going through the station, perpendicularly to the selected radial. The part that contains the selected radial is the FROM sector, the other half being the TO sector. Nothing to do with the aircraft’s heading, only its position relatively to the station and the selected radial.
Need an example? Let’s make it easy. The selected radial is 360, the line starting from the station and extending towards North. The perpendicular line is the one going from East to West. So the two sectors are North and South of the VOR. The one containing the selected radial is the one North of the VOR. This is the FROM sector. The part south of the VOR is the TO sector. Whatever aircraft heading, if it is located north of the VOR, the display will show a FROM flag. If the aircraft is in the FROM sector and flies a 360 degrees turn, it remains in the FROM sector. No flag change.
This sounds complicated? May be even scary? Does it remembers you of overheard stories of VOR being sometimes misleading? Yes, VOR can mislead you and a needle to the left can mean you have to turn to the right… but only if you don’t use it the correct way.
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Have a look at my homebase for a good overview. Thanks for visiting!
Great post on how to use the VOR, but more interesting were the range radio navigation facilities I learned on!
