-
Confessions of a New Corporate Pilot
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
In the Citation III Confessions of a New Corporate Pilot
Life would be sweet, I thought, now that I’d successfully passed my Cessna Citation III (CE-650) type rating check ride (this was a few years back). It meant I’d be flying my first swept-wing jet. Surprisingly, my first day at the new job at Chicago Executive Airport (PWK) would also be the first time I’d been up close to a real Citation III since all the training and even my check ride happened in FlightSafety’s full-motion simulator.
From my research, though, I knew the 650’s cabin was roomy enough for eight, and its rocket-like performance was nothing short of spectacular with a VMO (maximum operating Mach) of Mach 0.85 and 39,000 feet on a standard day. In its day, M.83 was pretty fast. That meant we could make the West Coast out of PWK with four people in the back. I learned quickly, too, that the 650’s awesome performance meant I needed to stay much farther ahead of the airplane than I’d had to in the much slower Citation II (CE-550) I’d been flying in a 12-pilot charter department.
A privately held corporation owned this Citation III and I was the junior of three pilots. The chief pilot, my new boss, brought experience from several other flight departments, while the other pilot, I’ll call him Tom well, I was never really too sure where Tom had come from because the guy kept to himself as much as possible and wasn’t the chatty type. That made three-hour flights long when the entire conversation at FL390 ended with an occasional shrug of the shoulders.
But who cared what one guy acted like, I thought. I was there to learn how to fit into a flight department that needed another pilot on their team. Just like in charter flying, my job was to keep the people in the back happy. I came to know these passengers much better than we ever did in the charter world. These folks sometimes invited the flight crew to their home on Nantucket when we overnighted there.
The Interview
Looking back on this job now though, I guess the 10-minute interview the chief pilot and I engaged in before he offered me the job should have been a tip-off that maybe something was a little odd. But with a four-year-old daughter growing up at home, the chance to dump my charter department pager that always seemed to ring at 2 a.m. beckoned hypnotically.
Cessna Citation CE-650 Corporate line training began right away with me flying in all kinds of weather, where I regularly rotated flying left seat with the chief pilot and Tom. Having flown left seat on the Citation II, I wasn’t brand new to jets, just speedy ones.
After a few months, however, I began to notice a few operational oddities that started making me a little uncomfortable. Some sketchy flight planning and questions I asked were sometimes answered with annoyed expressions. If I appeared not to agree, someone might ask if I’d finished all the Jepp revisions (In those days there were no electronic subscriptions. Updates were handled by hand). I found the best solution for getting along seemed to be to just shut up and fly the airplane. Ignoring those distractions did help me pay closer attention to the little things that made my flying the jet smoother.
Then again … On one flight back from Cincinnati (CVG), I was flying left-seat with the chief pilot in the right. I wanted to add fuel before we left since the Chicago weather was questionable, but the boss overruled me explaining, “We’re fat on fuel.”I didn’t say anything. As we approached PWK, the ATIS reported the weather had worsened, considerably. The Swiss cheese holes began to align when Chicago Approach dumped us early. We ended up burning more fuel than planned. I flew the ILS right down to minimums, but my scan uncomfortably included the fuel gauges every few seconds. After a safe landing, we taxied in with 700 pounds of Jet-A, not much for an airplane that burns 1,800 pounds an hour down low. What if we’d missed at Chicago Executive Airport and needed to run for Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport I wondered? We’d have arrived on fumes. The boss looked at me after we shut down. “Don’t tell me that whole thing bothered you. It all turned out fine, didn’t it?” (more…)
-
Remembering Gordon Baxter: Bax Seat was a Flying Magazine Reader Favorite
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
(Reposted by request)
Each time I stand near my desk, my eyes naturally focus on the framed cover of the August 1983 Flying magazine. Below it is page 100, the “I Learned About Flying from That” (ILAFFT), where my first column appeared. On it, the author of Bax Seat, scrawled in brown ink, “To my friend Rob Mark. His story, my push. Gordon Baxter, August 5, 1983.”
Many months before, Gordon Baxter had given me the Flying editor’s phone number. When I rang with my brief pitch, all I heard was “yes.” I suddenly had an assignment for my first column. That 1983 issue was the first, but not the last, time my name and stories appeared in the aviation industry’s iconic magazine. That same issue also ran a pilot report about the then-new Cessna Citation III, an aircraft I later added to my list of type ratings. Looking back, there were so many aspects of my aviation career that came to life around Bax and that August 1983 issue, not the least of which was that we became friends.
Gordon Baxter, Bax as he preferred folks call him, helped shape my career as an aviation journalist like no one before him and only a few people since. The author of 13 books, Bax’s own magazine writing career at Flying spanned 25 years. His monthly column, Bax Seat, focused on vivid descriptions of his adventures. It was known simply as “Bax Seat.” Did I mention he was also a long-time radio personality in Beaumont, Texas, another interest we shared.
A Bit of Bax’s Background
I first met Bax in the mid-1970s. He brought his show, his act, or whatever the heck he called his evening of storytelling, to the Stick and Rudder Flying Club at Waukegan Airport. I was a tower controller not far away at Palwaukee Airport. Having been an avid Flying reader since high school, I switched shifts with another controller so I wouldn’t miss the event. Bax captured the audience for over an hour with stories from his flying career and his columns that often alternately “em rollin’ in the aisles” with gut-wrenching laughter and an emotional Texas-guy style that also brought tears to many an eye. Another way to think of Bax’s storytelling night was like an evening of improv but all about flying and airplanes.
Born in Port Arthur, Texas, he learned to fly after World War II following his stint as a B-17 turret gunner. Bax was no professional pilot—just a guy with a private certificate, an instrument rating, and eventually his beloved Mooney. On the back cover of one of his books, appropriately titled Bax Seat, Flying’s Stephan Wilkinson said “Bax tries to pass himself off as a pilot, but don’t believe him. He never could fly worth a damn. But Gordon feels airplanes, loves and honors them in ways that the rest of us are ashamed to admit. And he’s certainly one of the few romantics who can express what he feels so perfectly.” I couldn’t have written that myself, but I, too, felt it.
(more…) -
Making the Brazilian ATR-72 Spin
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Note: This story was corrected on August 10th at 10:23 am, thanks to the help of a sharp-eyed reader.
Making an ATR-72 Spin
I wasn’t in Brazil on Friday afternoon, but I saw the post on Twitter or X (or whatever you call it) showing a Brazil ATR-72, Voepass Airlines flight 2283, rotating in a spin as it plunged to the ground near Sao Paulo from its 17,000-foot cruising altitude. All 61 people aboard perished in the ensuing crash and fire. A timeline from FlightRadar 24 indicates that the fall only lasted about a minute, so the aircraft was clearly out of control. Industry research shows Loss of Control in Flight (LOCI) continues to be responsible for more fatalities worldwide than any other kind of aircraft accident.
The big question is why the crew lost control of this airplane. The ADS-B data from FlightRadar 24 does offer a couple of possible clues. The ATR’s speed declined during the descent rather than increased, which means the aircraft’s wing was probably stalled. The ATR’s airfoil had exceeded its critical angle of attack and lacked sufficient lift to remain airborne. Add to this the rotation observed, and the only answer is a spin.
Can a Large Airplane Spin?
The simple answer is yes. If you induce rotation to almost any aircraft while the wing is stalled, it can spin, even an aircraft as large as the ATR-72. By the way, the largest of the ATR models, the 600, weighs nearly 51,000 pounds.
Of course, investigators will ask why the ATR’s wing was stalled. It could have been related to a failed engine or ice on the wings or tailplane. (more…)
-
How the FAA Let Remote Tower Technology Slip Right Through Its Fingers
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
In June 2023, the FAA published a 167-page document outlining the agency’s desire to replace dozens of 40-year-old airport control towers with new environmentally friendly brick-and-mortar structures. These towers are, of course, where hundreds of air traffic controllers ply their trade … ensuring the aircraft within their local airspace are safely separated from each other during landing and takeoff.
The FAA’s report was part of President Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act enacted on November 15, 2021. That bill set aside a whopping $25 billion spread across five years to cover the cost of replacing those aging towers. The agency said it considered a number of alternatives about how to spend that $5 billion each year, rather than on brick and mortar buildings.
One alternative addressed only briefly before rejecting it was a relatively new concept called a Remote Tower, originally created by Saab in Europe in partnership with the Virginia-based VSATSLab Inc. The European technology giant has been successfully running Remote Towers in place of the traditional buildings in Europe for almost 10 years. One of Saab’s more well-known Remote Tower sites is at London City Airport. London also plans to create a virtual backup ATC facility at London Heathrow, the busiest airport in Europe.
A remote tower and its associated technology replace the traditional 60-70 foot glass domed control tower building you might see at your local airport, but it doesn’t eliminate any human air traffic controllers or their roles in keeping aircraft separated.
Max Trescott photo Inside a Remote Tower Operation
In place of a normal control tower building, the airport erects a small steel tower or even an 8-inch diameter pole perhaps 20-40 feet high, similar to a radio or cell phone tower. Dozens of high-definition cameras are attached to the new Remote Tower’s structure, each aimed at an arrival or departure path, as well as various ramps around the airport.
Using HD cameras, controllers can zoom in on any given point within the camera’s range, say an aircraft on final approach. The only way to accomplish that in a control tower today is if the controller picks up a pair of binoculars. The HD cameras also offer infrared capabilities to allow for better-than-human visuals, especially during bad weather or at night.
The next step in constructing a remote tower is locating the control room where the video feeds will terminate. Instead of the round glass room perched atop a standard control tower, imagine a semi-circular room located at ground level. Inside that room, the walls are lined with 14, 55-inch high-definition video screens hung next to each other with the wider portion of the screen running top to bottom.
After connecting the video feeds, the compression technology manages to consolidate 360 degrees of viewing area into a 220-degree spread across the video screens. That creates essentially the same view of the entire airport that a controller would normally see out the windows of the tower cab without the need to move their head more than 220 degrees. Another Remote Tower benefit is that each aircraft within visual range can be tagged with that aircraft’s tail number, just as it might if the controller were looking at a radar screen. (more…)
-
Aeronautical Decision Making: Hurricane Edition
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
It seems a safe assumption that the only people who have not yet seen the spectrum of aviation damage wrought by Hurricane Ian are those have endured its torments and await reconnection to their electrical and data grids. The rest of us have witnessed the destruction at almost every turn thanks to our connections to various news and social media networks.Regardless of how Mother Nature has reconfigured a number of airplanes, the question that arises from each of them is What was aeronautical decision-making process that led them to ride out the storm rather than run to some safe roost beyond Ian’s reach? My motivation here is not criticism but curiosity.
Given an airplane’s aerodynamic proclivities, an unsecured airplane is at risk whenever the ambient windspeed exceeds the airplane’s stalling speed. To a point, effective tiedowns will keep an outdoor airplane in place to a point, but when the breeze is blowing 150 mph or so, Kevlar tiedowns or some secret hurricane knot will not keep Mother Nature from tearing their attachments from the airframe.
Staying put seems more reasonable if the airplane lives in a closed structure that meets Florida’s hurricane building codes. But in a number of images of them, their doors were probably removed by flat plate lift they generated as Ian passed through, suggests that they were not totally safe from injury. Yes, tornadoes caused a lot of the damage, but there is a difference between a standalone Midwestern tornado that is rarely more than a mile wide and scribes a single line across the landscape and the tornadoes spinning out of a 150-mph storm that is a hundred miles or more in diameter.
Certainly, those living in the storm’s path had adequate warning, enough time to make a run for it before the weather became unflyable. Even the local news here in Wisconsin provided enough forecast information that getting out of town was advised and recommended. When NOAA hurricane hunters repositioned Kermit, their WP-3D, from its Lakeland, Florida, homebase to Houston, Texas, that seemed a significant action worth uncounted warning words.For some, procrastination certainly played a part in their aeronautical decision making. Given the number of interviews of people who decided to ride out the storm in their homes, self-delusion seems to be another possible factor because almost all of them said, “We didn’t think it was going to be this bad.” Really? Given all the warnings and forecasts shared by every media meteorologist in the nation? Did they think that Ian was some woke weather-guesser conspiracy?
Logically, the only reason for staying put that seems valid is the airworthiness of the pilot or aircraft. In this situation, other considerations are more important than an airplane. If there are others I am not aware of, please share them in the comments. I’d really like to know because this information goes into the decision-making database I’ll draw from should I face a similar situation. Ultimately, making the correct decision is important because, after we make them, we are fully responsible for their consequences. — Scott Spangler, Editor
-
Callback Challenge: Keeping Your Head in the ADM Game
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
ADM—Aeronautical Decision Making—is a system of thinking that benefits all aspects of life on the ground as well as in the air because it is a reflective way of processing situations composed of often uncertain variables. These situations prepare us to deal with those like them in the future, and these lessons need not be learned firsthand.Callback, the monthly newsletter from NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System, should be required reading by any aviator interested in safety, and the issues I most look forward are headlined “What Would You Have Done?” It presents the salient setup situation reported by pilots flying general aviation, commercial, and business aircraft, and each of them gives the opportunity to decide how you would have addressed them.
After thinking about the action you would have taken, clicking on “The Rest of the Story” you learn how the reporting pilot dealt with it. “Bear in mind that their decisions may not necessarily represent the best course of action, and there may not be a “right” answer,” the newsletter warns, noting that its “intent is to stimulate thought, training, and discussion related to these reported incidents.”
Some of the first-half stories are concise and intriguing, like this one from a Boeing 737-700 pilot, with the cryptic headline of “Communication Once Again,” which said: “[We were] midway down the runway on takeoff. A regional aircraft…stated, “Using the afterburners, huh?” The first thing that popped into my mind was some sort of flaming engine problem, and my ADM mindset says check the engine gauges for a problem, see where we were relative to the V1 decision speed, and consider aborting the takeoff, and do in less time than it took my to type this sentence.
It seems my decision wasn’t far off, given The Rest of the Story: “Since we were empty with no passengers and not much fuel, we were accelerating quickly, and thus, his comment made sense. Upon rotation, the Tower asked the regional aircraft, “What was that you said?” He responded, “Looks like [Company] is using afterburners; a six-foot flame was coming out of the back of the #2 engine.” Upon reaching cleanup altitude, we ran all the appropriate checklists and returned back to ZZZ. The fire trucks were called by ATC, and they performed an inspection upon taxiing clear of the runway. We were cleared to taxi to the gate…. The event was entered in the logbook, and Maintenance, Dispatch, and the Chief Pilots were notified. The regional aircraft could have been more clear in his comments, and we could have aborted the takeoff at low speed.”
But the more important lesson, as a GA pilot who will never fly a real live 737, is to not be cute or humorous when observing a long finger of flame shooting from a civilian airliner not known to be equipped with afterburners. Something along the lines of, “737, your right engine is puking fire,” would have been more attention getting and helpful to the pilot making the takeoff.
The other situations in this month’s ADM challenges are equally interesting, but I won’t spoil the learning experiences for you. Check them out for yourself, and if you haven’t already, subscribe to Callback. It’s free. — Scott Spangler, Editor
-
The Ultimate Airline Mileage Run
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
It’s been slightly more than a year since I’ve flown on an airliner. I certainly didn’t miss airline travel in the middle of the pandemic, but this summer’s cancellation and delay insanity created an avoidance mindset that’s pale by comparison. If my daughter didn’t live 2,000 miles away, I’d still be avoiding the airlines now that they’ve added unreliability to their bag of tricks. But I digress …
Then Brian Coleman and his buddy Micah Engber approached me with this story … one about essentially trying to fly the longest airline trips possible … and on United Airlines (my favorite airline, not) no less. I had to read the story. Brian, it seems, wants to earn United’s Lifetime Premier 1K status. The airline geeks who attempt this sort of whacky flying call this a mileage run. Brian defined a mileage run as, “A trip taken for the sole purpose of earning frequent flyer miles or points to maintain or bump the traveler up to the next status level. The trip can head anywhere in the world. The destination simply doesn’t matter. In a mileage run, only the acquisition of miles for status is important.”
And why would anyone plant their butt in an airline seat for hours on end … for fun? Read on.
Rob
__________________________________________________________________________________________
The Ultimate Mileage Run
My Journey to United Premier 1K Status: Is It Worth Flying More Than 3 Million Miles?
By Brian T. Coleman along with Micah Engber
As of this moment, I’m 211,847 miles short of having flown 3 million miles with United Airlines. Having spent so much time on United aircraft, I asked myself the ultimate question … would I be willing to fly those final miles just to achieve Lifetime Premier 1K status? I of course say yes. But would you be willing to fly 3 million actual butt-in-seat, miles for the same status? Am I the only crazy one here (my friends think I am!)
Brian Coleman awaits his next flight at LAX Premier 1K status translates into lifetime benefits that include pre-boarding, free checked bags, complimentary domestic upgrades, no change fees – ever, 320 Plus Points, and a few other jewels.
To me though, achieving 1K status is about much more than just perks. I believe in the importance of goals and this has been one of mine since I reached the 2 million mile mark. I also believe the additional lifetime benefits over the life of the Platinum status I currently hold are worth the risks and costs.
About the Money
Lifetime 1K status will cost me approximately $20,000 to fly these 300,000 miles. Excluding periodic sales that I will take advantage of, the two most cost-effective routes for me are Los Angeles to Singapore (SIN – approx. 17,740 miles), and Los Angeles to Johannesburg (JNB – approx 20,870 miles). These routes have the lowest cost per mile.
Route Roundtrip Cost Total Miles Cost / Mile LAX — SFO — SIN (thru San Francisco) $800 17,740 4.50 cents per mile LAX — EWR — JNB (thru Newark) $1,200 20,870 5.75 cents per mile Here’s the arithmetic. The average roundtrip flight should yield me 19,305 miles ((20,870 + 17,740) / 2 = 19,305 average miles). That means I must fly 16 roundtrips. If the average roundtrip economy ticket costs $1,000 (($800 + $1200) / 2 = $1,000), I will spend $16,000 on 16 United tickets. I estimated airport parking, hotels, and miscellaneous expenses will add another $4,000, for a total of $20,000 total for the project.
About the Rewards
In my view of the frequent flyer game, the most important benefit of lifetime 1K status is the United Plus Points that can be used for domestic and international upgrades.
United’s Polaris Business Class For example, when I buy International Premium Plus tickets, I can upgrade 10 segments to Polaris Business Class. That works out to five round-trip tickets every year. I can also upgrade eight International Economy segments to Polaris Business Class … for the rest of my life. That’s four round-trip tickets every year.
On average, an International Premium Plus ticket costs about $1,500. An international business class ticket runs more than $3,500, making each upgrade worth at least $2,000. If I fly four round trips a year, that makes these upgrades worth at least $8,000 ($2,000 upgrade value * 4 trips = $8,000 value). Therefore, my payback will be 2.5 years ($20,000 expense / $8,000 value = 2.5 years).
Happily Journaling
Since the benefits are worth the expenses, to me, I also decided to document my adventures and share what I’ve learned by creating a podcast I called, “The Journey Is The Reward.” On this podcast, my friend, occasional contributor, and Airplane Geeks co-host, my Main(e) Man Micah Engber (he lives in Maine BTW), discusses my experiences on these mileage-run flights. We also share aviation industry tips and tricks, explore hotel frequent guest programs, answer questions from listeners, and generally kibitz about travel, aviation, and anything else that comes to mind during the show. It’s great fun. Now I just hope United doesn’t change the program.
I hope you’ll be inspired to think about your frequent flyer status and how you can use it to your advantage like gaining the various elite status levels and the benefits that come with. Follow along on the journey, as Micah and I document the world’s largest “mileage run” at The Journey Is The Reward Podcast.