AircraftOwner Online

The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) may be changing the face of aviation technology, but the human body’s reaction to the ever-present, accelerative force of gravity is a constant. Described in units of “G,” this force causes a constant acceleration of 32 feet-per-second squared. A pilot in a steep turn may experience forces of acceleration equivalent to many times the force of gravity. This is especially true in military fighter jets and high-performance aerobatic aircraft where the acceleration forces may be as high as nine Gs. Air race pilots in a tight pylon turn also experience high G-forces, but the important thing to remember is that any aircraft operated in a maximum-performance profile will subject the pilot to acceleration that is greater than the one G acceleration encountered on the ground. Pilots need to understand this to successfully master flying.

 

Types of Acceleration

There are three types of acceleration:

 

Linear Acceleration involves a change of speed in a straight line. This type occurs during takeoff, landing, or in level flight when a throttle setting is changed.

 

Radial Acceleration involves a change in direction, such as a sharp turn.

 

Angular Acceleration involves a simultaneous change in both speed and direction, such as in spins and climbing turns.

 

A pilot may experience a combination of these accelerations, categorized as Gx, Gy, and Gz.

 

Gx acts from chest to back. Positive Gx pushes the pilot back as the aircraft accelerates during the takeoff roll. Negative Gx can occur during landing and pushes the pilot forward into the shoulder strap.

 

Gy acts from shoulder to shoulder. It is encountered during aileron rolls. Aerobatic pilots routinely encounter Gy.

 

Gz acts on the body’s vertical axis. If experienced from head to foot, as in pulling out of a dive, it is positive Gz. Negative Gz travels from foot to head, as when a pilot pushes over into a dive.

 

Respecting G-Force

Aviators need to understand and respect G-force, because any flight maneuver has the potential to expose the body to more than one positive Gz. When the pilot experiences positive Gz, the cardiovascular system must respond to keep blood flowing to the brain. One of the first indications of trouble may be a progressive loss of vision, because the eyes are extremely sensitive to low blood flow. If the rapid onset of G-force continues and the cardiovascular system does not keep pace, the result may be G-induced loss of consciousness (GLOC). NOTE: In some acrobatic airplanes it may be possible to experience GLOC without experiencing any early visual symptoms.

 

G tolerance is degraded by alcohol, fatigue, and dehydration. Lack of physical conditioning, a sedentary lifestyle, and smoking can also reduce G tolerance. A well-rested, well-hydrated, and fit aviator will be able to withstand higher G-forces. A regular conditioning program with a mix of aerobic exercise and resistance weight training will increase resistance to the effects of Gs. Regardless, a smart aviator will always include consideration of G-forces when it comes to flight planning.

 

Dr. Tilton received both an M.S. and a M.D. degree from the University of New Mexico and an M.P.H. from the University of Texas. During a 26-year career with the U.S. Air Force, Dr. Tilton logged more than 4,000 hours as a command pilot and senior flight surgeon flying a variety of aircraft. He currently flies the Cessna Citation 560 XL.

SWAT Dogs and Tawny Port

 

By Judith R. Lear

 

As a flight school owner and aircraft broker I am frequently required to travel for business.  The purpose of these trips may vary; for instance, my partner and I may be hired to ferry aircraft back into our area or to handle a closing on an aircraft much like a real estate broker would close a property or to inspect an aircraft and/or all of the three.  For the most part these trips are not only enjoyable but educational.  And then there are those that make you question the very core of this country’s fiber and the essence of its heart and soul. 

 

One spring two years ago I found myself on such a trip.  We had been hired by a business man named Hans, who was quite fed up with airline travel and decided to buy a twin engine, private airplane.  By his calculations the time and money he would save on his trips -- including the salary of the pilot -- was more beneficial to him than the current option of flying the airline. 

 

We had just returned from St. Louis on another closing when the agent of a twin engine aircraft located in CA called to counter a bid I had submitted for Hans.  After haggling with the seller’s broker, a final offer was agreed upon and the next step was put into play; confirm a clear title, inspect the plane and the aircraft logs and fly it home to Virginia.

 

Over the years my partner Tom and I have made many aviation related friends along the way.  One of them was Rick, who had recently moved to Las Vegas.  We decided the first stop would be Vegas to visit Rick. 

 

As a veteran pilot instructor of 33 years, my partner was definitely the one who wore the pants in the flying arena and I trusted his judgment unquestionably.  One of his stead fast, no exception rules when ferrying a plane was day flying with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) only.  So it would be with this flight, also. 

 

After spending three days in Chico CA inspecting the plane and preparing the closing documents we were ready for our voyage home.  After reviewing the course I was surprised that Tom had charted us straight across the Sierra Nevada’s; albeit, at their lowest elevation!  Hmm, may I retract that statement about trusting Tom unquestionably?

 

Since the buyer’s pilot, Anthony, was with us to pick up the plane I would ride back seat instead of my usual right seat co-pilot.  Along the way Tom would instruct Anthony and at the end of the trip sign off on his multi engine endorsement.  That is if Anthony could keep Tom awake long enough to do so!   Did I mention that this was also part of the responsibility of the right seat?  As a helicopter instructor and fixed wing pilot Anthony proved himself a worthy student.  He not only handled the aircraft proficiently but by remained relaxed as Tom occasionally nodded off. 

 

Then it happened!   The plane began to climb uncontrollably.  Maintaining an altitude even remotely relevant to 14,000 feet became impossible.  We were “wind surfing.”  As a preliminary precaution we had all been sucking O2 since we exceeded 10,000 feet so there was no risk of hypoxia; however, Anthony, a flat-lander was alarmed.  I heard him exclaim nervously over the intercom, “I can’t control the altitude!”  Now fully alert Tom instantly calmed the young pilot.  “Just go with it, don’t fight it.  The plane will level out.

 

Needless to say from the back seat I had my eyes glued to the instruments, particularly the altimeter.  I watched as the needle uncontrollably rotated clockwise: 15,000, 15, 500 …16,000 and so on until we had reached 17,500 feet very near the aircraft’s ceiling!  Tom, ever cool, assured Anthony that we would level out and I’ll be damned if we didn’t! 

 

Anthony clearly relieved resumed his “role” as pilot in command, while I ceased my incessant wriggling in the back seat.  Tom went back to sleep.  The plane gracefully gained and lost altitude over the mountains wind surfing until we had cleared the ridge and began preparations to land.  We had been on Flight Following with the tower since leaving Chico so we called ahead and announced our intent.  The landing was perfect and Anthony required no intervention from Tom.  We were in Vegas!  Party time!

 

In my experience dealing with pilots, I’ve found there to be two types: the fly hard and fast, all business behind the yoke but party just as hearty type A and the studious, clean cut t-totaler’s type B like the image the commercial airlines portray.  The line seems equally drawn right down the middle.  Did I mention we were the former?

 

Prepared to experience the sites and landmarks of Las Vegas we met Rick at the private airport.  We weren’t disappointed with Rick’s hospitality but knowing what lay ahead – or so we thought -- we called it a short night.  Once back to the hotel we charted the course for the next day; right over the Grand Canyon.

 

Now if you think our flight was unnerving the day before … well … just let me say I had no clue what we were in for in the latter part of this flight -- thermals!   However, for now we effortlessly soared to10,000 feet cruise altitude and I settled into the back seat with book in hand.

 

Kaboom!  I was lifted -- I swear -- a foot off my seat!  Instinctively I looked out the port hole to see if the wings were still attached.  They were, but I feared they would soon depart the aircraft if we hit turbulence like that again!  The flight was so rough I could barely appreciate the scenic view beneath me.  I recalled water skiing as a teenager and the best way to describe the airplane’s attitude was skiing over rough seas at high tide!

 

Once again the Anthony-Tom team landed us safely on the ground.  This time the port of call was San Antonio, TX.  I jumped out of the plane obviously shaken, never so eager to disembark a vessel in my life.  Nearly running now, I stayed far enough ahead of the two pilots that they could barely lip read my demand.  “I need a drink!”  Tom and Anthony trailed behind me laughing and I suspect the joke was on me!  Of course, why that might be I haven’t a clue!

 

Ready to accommodate my demand -- a rare occasion in itself -- we chose a hotel near the airport that also had a bar.  It never ceases to amaze me how truly unique and different our country can be travelling from one area to the next.  And by air, the differences are even more dramatic.  Less than 5 hours before we had left the bright lights of the Las Vegas Strip and were now seated in a restaurant, complete with waiters dressed as cowboys and severed bull heads hanging off the walls! 

 

We all ordered steak cooked to perfection and a stiff Scotch and water for me; surprised?  Again, not knowing what lie ahead on our next leg, we left the restaurant and had a nightcap at the hotel bar.  We all retired early that evening electing to chart the next day’s course in the morning.

 

It was a beautiful, clear VFR day along our charted course and the temperatures were expected to remain warm along the southern route.  Determined not to chance another turbulent flight cold sober, I insisted we stop at the liquor store on the way to the airport, where I picked up a bottle of port.  I would put myself in the class of a moderate to light drinker especially in relation to my pilot team but today I would make the exception.  Once again, I took my leave to the back of the plane, only this time I was going to enjoy it regardless of the conditions!

 

The liquid did its job.  I was comfortable and relaxed and not at all concerned that the weather had turned sour somewhere along the route.  I did notice the commotion up front, while Tom and Anthony dodged the dark full clouds rapidly forming around us.  Due to inclement weather the decision to land was made and we found ourselves in a small southern Georgia town.  The sights and sounds of this laid back town could have been taken straight out of a scene from The Dukes of Hazard!  It was only mid afternoon when we landed and reasonably sure this would be our last stop before arriving Virginia; we elected to clean the plane.  Due to my fairly tipsy condition, I didn’t mind at all that I completed most of the work and luckily the pending rain held until we had finished.

 

We gathered the luggage -- and the empty port bottle -- and strolled across the ramp into the small terminal where we discarded the evidence.  We ordered fuel, called the hotel shuttle and waited in front of the terminal until the van arrived.  No sooner had I placed my hand on the door of the vehicle than we were swarmed by law enforcement officers!  The local sheriff was there, along with the FAA, the DEA and their dogs and the local police!  It was a movie scene straight out of a sting operation that left us dazed and confused.  Of course, my first thought was, “How did they know I was drinking on the plane?”  But as quickly as the thought occurred, it vanished with the realization that I had done nothing illegal.

 

The officers quickly and assertively disbanded our team and separated us for questioning.  As we were led away from each other our eyes were full of question and not in the least, fear.  As a group we were totally dumb founded and had no idea why we were being stopped.  I watched Tom as the DEA and FAA led him back to the ramp where the plane was tied down.  It was only later that I learned that they had ordered him to nearly disassemble the aircraft right on the ramp!  One by one, he removed the seats and the carpet as the sniffing German Shepherds performed their duties.

 

Since Anthony was not Pilot in Command and I was merely a passenger, we were held where we were stopped being drilled about our “intentions.”  I couldn’t hear Anthony’s questioning, but I clearly recall my own.  “Where are you coming from?  What business do you have with this plane?  Who owns it, and where is it headed?”  On and on the questions were fired at us and I could tell by Anthony’s body language, he was nearing his tolerance limit.  I wondered how long it would be before this young former marine would have had enough.  Meanwhile, I responded to the barrage of questions as quickly as I could, all the while praying silently that the officers would not smell the wine on my breath.

 

With the officers in tow ever cool Tom led his entourage leisurely past us laughing at something he had murmured to one of them.  As unexpectedly as we had been apprehended we were released with orders not to leave the area until we were notified that the investigation had been concluded.  As quickly as they stormed the airport environment the officers were gone, leaving us wondering, “What the hell just happened?”

 

Forced into sober reality, my thoughts rushed forward to what in the blue blazes I was going to tell the new owner!  The scene played out in my head.  “Ah, sorry Hans but we’ve been detained in cow-dunk GA with your half million dollar airplane.  Why, you ask?  I haven’t a clue.  When will we return?  Beats me -- we haven’t been told, yet.”

 

Oh, my … not good, not good at all!  What on earth were we going to do?  I didn’t know about Tom and Anthony but I felt like I was playing out a Laurel and Hardy skit complete with the phrase, “Well, Ollie, it’s a fine mess you’ve gotten us into, now!” 

 

Finally at the hotel we agreed to plot our next course of action -- which was -- call a lawyer!  And as the group’s mouthpiece, I was elected to call the new owner.  As luck would have it, I fretted over nothing.  Hans laughed hysterically as I hemmed and hawed through the sequence of events.  Did this sharp business man recognize something about our flight crew that I had not?  Could that be why he thought our excursion was so funny?

 

The guys claimed neither of them slept well the night before and I know I didn’t.  Breakfast in the hotel restaurant was quiet with the exception of charting the course home.  That is, if and when we were ever released to leave!  We never knew beyond our own speculation why we were stopped and detained that early spring day.  Only that we were, and more importantly that they could.  Fortunately, the plane was clean and even with all the checks and balances in play, you can never be completely sure of what you may be in for when you transport an unknown aircraft.  Sometime that morning our background checks all cleared and we were released to go. 

 

Solemnly, we departed the field clawing our way once again through the GA clouds, this time determined to make it home.  Thankfully the final leg was uneventful and for the first time during the trip we were escorted by a turbulence free, tail wind for most of the flight home.  At last from three miles out PVG was in view.  I couldn’t recall ever being as happy to view the cross wind runway at our home base. 

 

  We were greeted by an excited and satisfied customer while taxiing up to the ramp of the sales office.  Tom offered to take the new owner up but Hans generously declined, instead opting to take over my seat in the rear.  Anthony proudly showed him all the bells and whistles with which his new plane was equipped.  Waving off Hans’s invitation for a celebratory dinner, Tom and I left knowing that even with the unexpected detours we had done our jobs successfully.

 

Now as I write this, nearly two years have passed and we have continued to relocate aircraft each with its own distinct story.  I am happy to note here that none, however, can top our unexpected layover in Georgia.

 

 

Editor’s Note:

 

Rick Carmichael has now joined the Lear Stevens Aviation Services, Inc. team! 

 

 

 

     

  

 

 

 

 

Is My Fuel Certified?

FAA does not certify aviation fuel, but the agency has a role: FAA certifies use of the fuel in engines and aircraft. Specifically, FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service administers safety regulations for type certification of engines and aircraft. As part of the type certification, standard specifications control the fuel(s) used to show compliance to the regulations. For certificated engines and aircraft, FAA considers the fuel specification an operational limitation. Steve Thompson’s Airworthiness 101 article in the May/June issue of the FAA Aviation News explained the type certification process and described the type certificate data sheet (TCDS). The TCDS, engine installation manual, aircraft flight manual, and aircraft placards all list approved fuels. It is the responsibility of aircraft operators to use only those fuels.

 

Like many other countries, the United States uses ASTM International (www.astm.org) specifications for aviation fuel. ASTM International is a consensus standards organization comprised of producers, users, and general interest groups that develop, issue, and maintain these fuel specifications and test methods.

 

Why Are Aviation Fuels Different?

The first aircraft used spark ignition piston engines burning the automotive gasoline that was available at

the time. Over the years, as aircraft engine designs evolved to produce more power with less weight, fuels evolved with them. Operational and research experience in the early part of the 20th century identified fuel parameters that affect engine and aircraft performance, such as density, energy content, vapor pressure, and knock performance. The first fuel specifications captured this experience and ensured more consistent performance. The industry developed the octane scale that indicates how resistant the fuel is to premature detonation, or knock, in the engine. Octane is the factor most associated with engine power and it became the fuel grade.

 

What Drives Availability of Fuels?

Demand. In the 1930s and 1940s, the military was a primary user of aviation gasoline. The large radial engines used in military aircraft at the time drove the introduction of fuel grades with higher octane. With the introduction of turbine engines in the 1950s, the military and commercial airline focus shifted to jet fuel. Consequently, the need for many of the grades of aviation gasoline decreased. Today, there are only four grades (80, 91, 100LL, and 100) listed in ASTM International Standard Specification D910. Market forces determine the grades produced. The predominant U.S. commercial aviation fuel for reciprocating engines is 100LL avgas.

 

Cost. Aviation fuel use and production is a fraction of the use and production of diesel, home heating, and automotive fuels, which affects the availability and cost of aviation fuels. For example, 100LL avgas represents fewer than 0.5 percent of the total gasoline produced in the United States and, because of its lead content, 100LL is produced, delivered, and stored separately from its unleaded automotive gasoline counterpart. This contributes to the higher cost of avgas compared with automotive gasoline.

 

Environmental Concerns. The primary environmental concern for avgas is lead emissions. Though tetraethyl lead (TEL) has not been in automotive gasoline since the late 1970s, it remains an additive in aviation gasoline to boost octane for safety reasons. Introducing grade 100LL did reduce the added TEL amount, but FAA and industry have searched for an unleaded replacement for many years. So far, no one has found a “drop-in replacement fuel” that will cover all applications in the existing fleet. For example, though ethanol has been proposed, it is not a “drop-in.” Among other issues, engine and aircraft performance tests have shown significantly reduced aircraft range that may not be acceptable for all operations.

 

Introducing New Fuels

In the United States, the path to introducing a new fuel goes through ASTM International, the engine and aircraft type design holders, and FAA. Introducing a new fuel requires testing of fuel properties, components, engines, and aircraft and a thorough technical and safety review of any issues.

Approaches to introduce new fuels include:

 

- Existing standard specification. An example of this approach is adding different grades of avgas to ASTM International Standard Specification D910. The grades in D910 differ only in the tetraethyl lead quantity added to produce the needed octane and the dye used to differentiate among the grades. Historically, higher octane grades allowed for higher-power engines. Once fuels are included in the specification, those seeking design approval for engines and aircraft can use those fuels to show compliance with certification regulations.

 

- New fuel specification to replace an existing fuel. This approach introduced Grade 82UL aviation gasoline. The 82UL standard specification provides an aviation quality gasoline using available gasoline stocks that can be used in engines and aircraft with an autogas Supplemental Type Certificate (STC). FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) CE-00-19 (http://rgl.faa.gov/) to communicate approval of 82UL as an alternative fuel for certain automotive gasoline STCs.

 

- New fuel specification for a new fuel. In the early 20th century, this approach produced the first specifications for aviation gasoline and then later for jet fuel. Currently, ASTM is working to introduce new unleaded avgas specifications keeping D910 as the leaded avgas specification. Once the new specification is approved and released, those seeking design approval for engines and aircraft can use fuel that meets this specification to show compliance with certification regulations.

 

- Hybrid approach. This approach is currently the path used for alternate jet fuels, allowing the introduction of new synthetic turbine fuels. A new specification will list the performance properties of new fuels as blended with Jet A/A-1 and allow designation of the blend as a D1655 fuel. Each new fuel would be a blend component with detailed requirements listed in individual annexes to the main specification. This approach will allow control of parameters unique to the new fuel and separate from Jet A/A-1.

 

What’s the Future for Aviation Fuels?

While we cannot predict the future for aviation fuels, FAA is an active participant with the industry as this future unfolds. Here’s how.

 

Research. The Aviation Fuel and Engine Test Facility (AFETF) at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey, has conducted research on aviation gasoline for many years. The Center has performed full-scale engine testing and laboratory analyses to evaluate:

 

- The interaction of advanced fuel chemical components and additives with existing fuels and with each other

 

- The performance and properties of alternative and experimental fuels, such as ethanol and biofuels

 

- The octane performance of unleaded avgas

 

Standard Specifications. As the primary aviation fuel standards organization in the U.S., ASTM International has been active in the aviation fuel arena. Currently, task forces are working on:

- Developing new standard specifications for unleaded avgas

- Introducing 87 and 91 grades into the 82UL standard specification (D6227)

- Developing an aviation grade ethanol standard specification

- Introducing synthetic turbine fuels into D1655

- Preparing for the future introduction of bio-derived jet fuels

 

Avgas Lead Emissions. FAA’s Office of Environment and Energy is working closely with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate the impact of lead emissions from aircraft engines on the environment. EPA recently issued a new standard for lead emissions in the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This new standard will require a coordinated response from the aviation industry. FAA is already working with groups, such as the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), the Coordinating Research Council (CRC), and ASTM International to address future fuels for the reciprocating engine fleet.

While we cannot predict the future for aviation fuels, we can be certain that market forces, environmental concerns, and availability issues will drive changes. We can also be certain that FAA will be an active participant in meeting the challenges ahead.

 

Mark S. Orr is an aviation safety engineer in the FAA Small Airplane Directorate’s Programs and Procedures Branch. Dave Atwood from the Aviation Fuel and Engine Test Facility (AFETF) at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and Mark Rumizen from the FAA Engine and Propeller Directorate contributed to this article.

    How many experienced pilots say “I’m sorry, can you repeat that—I don’t hear very well?” Then they get the sophomoric response from the young pilots “Say what?”

    Hearing loss in pilots is almost universal and especially in pilots who learned to fly without headsets.

    When I first started instruction, the instructor had to shout over the engine noise and I still blame all my current bad habits on those miscommunications!

    Hearing loss, in the far majority of people, is due primarily to exposure to loud noise and to some extent, heredity. Loud concerts, noise from drilling, hammering, riveting, wind noises, engine noises, and supersonic prop tips all contribute to hearing loss.

    What is important for everyone to understand is that noise exposure is cumulative. So even when someone already has hearing loss, they need to be aggressive about protecting what they have left because they will continue to lose more hearing with additional exposure.

    Sound intensity is measured in decibels and the scale is logarithmic so a deference of 3 dB is approximately twice the level of sound. In additions, there is “frequency weighting” because some frequencies, particular the 2,000 to 6,000 Hertz range, cause more hearing loss than other frequencies. (For you audio techies out there, I know this is not as simple as this explanation states but this is not a treatise on sound measurements.) General conversation occurs between 500-3000 Hertz.

    To understand the decibel ratings (know as dB level), OHSA (Occupation Health & Safety Administration) standards state the 85 dB over eight hours is safe but only two hours at 91 dB. However, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has identified the level of 70 dB for 24 hour exposure to protect the public from hearing loss which is significantly lower than OHSA.

    Putting this in perspective, a jet taking off has a 180 dB rating. Riveting creates a 120 db level while a car horn at about 20 feet is a 100db. Pain usually begins at about 125 dB but hearing loss can occur with as little as one minute exposure to 100 dB which is about the sound level of a cement mixer.

    It really is impossible to give a dB level of noise in an aircraft unless measured (a reasonable portable dB meter is available from Radio Shack). Piston aircraft create noise from the engine through the exhaust and vibration, propeller blades beating the air, and airflow around the fuselage. Each aircraft has so many variables with these factors that no average level really is valid but the FAA states the range is between 70 and 90 dB. (Obviously, the FAA has never measured a Stearman!) What is valid is that all most all aircraft in the piston fleet will cause hearing loss over time.

    There are no regulatory criteria for aircraft occupants in general aviation which is good by keeping government out of our lives. Unfortunately, the other side of that coin is there are neither standards nor testing for ear protection in aircraft so buyers beware.

    Everyone should wear hearing protection and the type breaks down into passive and active protection. Passive ear protection includes the classic foam plugs and standard but relatively inexpensive headsets. The foam or wax plugs work very well but must be placed in the ear properly. For the foam plugs, this means that the plug must be rolled small enough to fit into the ear so that it completely seals the canal when it expands. The molded wax or custom plastic plugs work very well and are easier to place properly albeit more expensive.

    Passive headsets do not require any fitting and my recommendation is to buy the highest dB reduction set available. It is important to buy a reputable brand since there are no government standards or testing required when bought in the civilian world.

    Active noise reduction headsets (ANR) are more problematic. Most of the audible noise in an aircraft is lower frequency which is handled very well by the electronic portion of the ANR headset. However, higher frequency, less audible noise, which causes hearing damage, is generally not reduced very well by the ANR headset’s passive attenuation. This leads to a false sense of security with ANR headsets.

    My recommendation is to use foam/wax/molded ear plugs under ANR headsets in the aircraft. This will give you the best of both worlds. When working in the hangar, use the highest passive attenuation passive ear muffs available. I recommend ear muffs in the hangar because they are easy to put on and take off which increases use even for short exposures.

            The most important point is the use of some type of ear protection anytime there is exposure to loud noise. It will help avoid those dumb jokes in the future.  < B.B.

 The Washington DC Court of Appeals recently gave  a little relief to hundreds of pilots who have been  accused by the FAA of “intentional” falsification of federal records and whose certificates had been revoked on an emergency basis. Essentially, the FAA took the position, and the NTSB had been upholding it, that the FAA did not have to prove that the airman intended to falsify the entry. The FAA felt that the mere fact that an important entry was incorrect would automatically “prove” that the airman intended to deceive the FAA.

    Most commonly, this issue came up in regard to the airman’s answers to Question 18v on the Application to Renew Medical Certificate. The FAA basically felt that it was totally incredible to believe that someone who had been stopped by the police for a supposed alcohol-related charge, and who answered “no” to the question, didn’t intend to deceive the FAA. In the collective mind of the FAA, pilots should know that they need to err on the side of full disclosure of all alcohol-related stops.

    Question 18w also came in for review. The question asks about convictions for crimes other than non-alcohol-related traffic crimes. One pilot, who had a criminal conviction for forgery, testified that he had discussed this question with his AME. Both he and his AME told the Administrative Law Judge that the AME had advised the pilot that the only thing the FAA was interested in on this form was a conviction for alcohol or drug-related matters. The NTSB felt that this information was irrelevant because the pilot also testified that he now understands that this information was incorrect and that he should have answered the question “yes”. The DC Circuit Court ruled that the NTSB had to consider the pilot’s arguments and testimony, and could not simply ignore it.

    As many of you are aware, the FAA has been using its “emergency” powers more and more recently lately. In fact, as of last year, fully 46% of all of the appeals heard by the NTSB from decisions made by Administrative Law Judges were from emergency appeals. This means that more than half of all FAA enforcement actions are now classified as “emergency” actions, forcing the airman to send back his or her certificates, stop flying immediately, hire counsel and prepare to go to trial within 30 days. To make matters worse, the FAA had convinced the NTSB that it did not have to prove “intent” to falsify an entry when trying to prove that an airman was guilty of the offense of “intentional falsification”, resulting in the airman being deprive of a hearing if the FAA could simply prove that the information on the forms submitted by the airman was false. This combination of having to defend under the expedited procedures of the emergency determination by the Administrator, and not even being able to show any circumstances under which an improper or incorrect statement might not have been intended by the airman to deceive the FAA, has resulted in a huge number of airmen losing their flying privileges for things that, in years gone by, would never have resulted in such a severe penalty.

    While these two new cases are important, they still give a lot of latitude to the NTSB and the Administrative Law Judges to rehear the cases involved and still to make rulings in favor of the FAA and against the airman. The primary benefit of these cases, however, is that this is one more reminder, from a very high judicial authority, that the FAA really has an obligation to prove that the airman did something wrong and that the appropriate punishment for what the airman did wrong is revocation of the airman’s certificates.

    We can only hope that, at some time in the near future, both the Courts and the Congress will take a look at the way in which the FAA has used its determination that an “emergency” exists. Only the most radical of pilots or lawyers would argue that the FAA should not have the power to enact regulations and to make sure that airmen follow those regulations. In most cases, however, where the FAA believes that a violation exists, I think most informed people would agree that the airman is entitled to an opportunity to present his or her side of the story, and to have his or her arguments listened to by a neutral party. Sane people would also not differ on the fact that the government needs to have the power to stop an activity that imminently threatens the lives of the traveling public, or of people on the ground, without having to wade through a whole bunch of red tape to stop the dangerous activity.

    But many of us in the field have noticed that many, if not most, of the actions the FAA is bringing under its emergency power do not appear to have any imminent threat to the safety of flight. They are, for want of a better adjective, “garden variety” technical regulatory paperwork violations. In some cases, the FAA has researched and investigated the operations for years, and there have been no accidents, or even history of safety violations, when the FAA suddenly files an Emergency Order of Revocation, essentially grounding the operator immediately. In the cases of small operators, this immediate cessation of business usually spells the end of the business in its entirety. The operator simply lacks the cash reserves to keep paying rent, salaries, and other expenses for several months, while at the same time hemorrhaging cash to pay for attorneys and expert witnesses. In effect, even if the operator or the airman prevails in the end, the business has been ruined.

            There is an urgent need to scale back the types of actions for which the FAA can bring an emergency revocation to limit the cases in which they use this drastic power to situations where air safety is truly at issue. These DC Court of Appeals cases, merely hint at a part of the solution. Much more action is needed to solve the underlying problem.

It’s not only major companies like Air Canada and Air France (who both reported losses last quarter), that are suffering, pretty much every company in the aviation industry is feeling the pinch. Airlines are having to up the costs of many amenities like: checked bags, in-flight drinks and blankets to try and make up for the lack of people taking to the air.

Smaller operations are also experiencing difficulties because of a lack of funding for the necessary personnel to perform the jobs that are crucial to flight preparation. Without the proper equipment to align the planes on the runway for take off or to store planes in the hanger upon arrival, the job becomes both exceedingly difficult and quite a bit more expensive to perform.

Outdated machines are cumbersome much more difficult to operate and use up gallon after gallon of costly fuel during operation. Running aircraft tugs that aren’t easy to operate or economical has a very large effect on a company’s budget and can quickly turn a profitable part of your business into a financial liability.

Aircraft tugs from Lindbergh are energy efficient, easy to use and run quietly enough for the operator to remain mindful of his or her surroundings while using them. Lindbergh tugs are also ergonomically correct, making them some of the safest tugs for your employees to use.

One of the best ways to bring down costs in the aviation industry is to useequipment that is efficient, reliable and safe for anyone on your staff to use. You’ll know longer waste man hours by having several members of your staff occupied by the work that could be handled by one with the proper tool for the job. Lindbergh tugs can handle aircraft up to 35,000 lbs quickly and easily at a cost of much less to operate than older gas powered tugs.

There are plenty of issues we face everyday in the airline industry, this weekend gave of a perfect example of constraints put on our jobs that are completely out of our control. The East Coast (particularly the Mid-Atlantic region) was pounded with an outrageous storm that dropped anywhere from six up to more than twenty four inches of snow in certain locations. Areas around Washington DC, Philadelphia and the entire State of Delaware where punished particularly hard, making conditions completely impossible to fly in – thousands and thousands of flights in the Mid-Atlantic region were cancelled, leaving travelers stranded and unable to get to their intended destinations.

Mother Nature is responsible for many of the things that make this line of work particularly difficult; snow, rain, ice and clouds can make both the actual flying and all of the prep work to get the planes up into the air dangerous or impossible tasks. This is, unfortunately something that is out of our control, but it doesn’t mean that every facet of our jobs has to be difficult.

Using the proper equipment to get your planes in position on the runway or properly placed in tight hangers once the flight is done makes that part of the job much easier. Using ergonomically correct and reliable airplane tugs reduces both the stress on the body and the mind and makes your crew much happier and more efficient. Once runways have been cleaned and the skies have been cleared for flight you want to ensure that the rest of the process, that part that you and your crew control goes as smoothly and easily as possible and the best possible way to do so is to use the best equipment for the job. We at Lindbergh offer the most versatile, reliable and easy to use equipment for moving aircraft of up to 35,000 lbs. You may not be able to control Mother Nature, but if you’ve got a tug from Lindbergh you’ll have no trouble controlling your plane when it’s time to fly.

Television reality shows have chronicled the lives of 20-somethings trying to carve a dream out of the big city. They’ve provided a window into the daily, if sometimes bizare lives of everyone from mega-stars like Ozzy Osbourne to star wanna-bes like Kim Kardashian. Reality shows have made stars of tough bounty hunters, custom bike builders, people with scads of kids, bachelors looking for love and Atlanta housewives. Particularly when the series revolves around people who do a unique job like Ice Road  Truckers or Ax Men, the shows can be as informative as they are entertaining. But let’s face it; we really watch to see these folks implode under the spotlight of created fame. It’s one of life’s guilty pleasures.

Well, buckle up! It’s finally our turn.  The aviation industry is about to get its own “tell all” reality show. Fly Girls is scheduled to debut soon on CW. The reality series will follow the lives of five flight attendants working for Virgin America airlines. Virgin exec Richard Branson may even cadge a recurring guest star role.

Expect considerable melodrama as the Fly Girls — naturally, all young, beautiful 20-year-olds full of hopes and ambitions — hop in and out of their Los Angeles “crash pad” in between flights. The network promises plenty of jet-set dating and partying to keep viewers tuned in. Expect the usual gossip, infighting and cattiness that seem to be a reality show staple. Let’s hope there’s also at least a nod to the realities of life in the aviation industry.

Might be fun to create a scenario where the gals get a taste of the other arms of the industry: reservations, baggage handling and maintenance. With our Lindy motorized aircraft tugs, the Fly Girls could still wear their heels while maneuvering planes!

The future is now and you can see it in Lindy’s aircraft tugs. To remain competitive going into the future, experts predict that the aviation industry and its attendant ground support operations will have to work harder, smarter and leaner. Marketed for FBO, corporate or individual ground operations, Lindy’s versatile aircraft tugs and tow tractors are designed to be the only aircraft tug you’ll ever need.

The ergonomic design of Lindy’s powered aircraft tugs allows a single operator to easily and safely maneuver airplanes up to 4K, 15K, even 35K. Ergonomics is the science of engineering equipment to fit the physical attributes and abilities of the worker. Ergonomics reduces worker discomfort and fatigue and prevents repetitive strain injuries that can lead to long-term disability. Lindy’s ergonomically-designed, battery-operated aircraft tugs allow workers of any size, age or sex to easily maneuver aircraft in and out of crowded hangers and around service areas. Because Lindy’s versatile aircraft tugs are safe and easy enough to be operated by any worker, FBO and ground service/support managers can exercise maximum flexibility in assigning staff. More effective staff utilization helps managers cut costs.

Lindy’s aircraft tugs feature an easy-on cradle that accommodates both tricycle drive and tail dragger aircraft with ease. A lever handle and cable system designed into our airport tows locks and releases the easy-on cradle for safe loading and unloading of the aircraft. When loaded, the cradle functions as a 5th wheel, allowing tugs to pivot a full 180 degrees underneath the wheel of the aircraft without engaging the plane’s wheel or steering mechanism. All of Lindy’s aircraft tow tractors are capable of handling airplanes with and without wheel pants. Versatile design makes Lindy’s aircraft tugs the only tug you’ll need to handle any airplane in your fleet.

For more information about Lindy’s aircraft tugs, visit our website.

Not long ago the future of FBOs was looking pretty rosy. Business travel was booming worldwide and aviation industry gurus predicted a robust future for FBO operations. Then the U.S. economy tanked sending  global markets sprawling. Financial woes pulled the plug first on personal airline travel, then on business travel. Airlines were an early casualty of the recession, pulling down FBOs and other support services with them.

For FBOs the recession has caused a host of headaches with decreased airplane volume being just the tip of the iceberg. The financial problems of their customers mean FBOs must cope with an increasing number of slow pays and other financial risks that affect their own cash flow. To protect their financial future, FBOs are being forced to run leaner and meaner than ever before.

For many FBOs that means a decrease in staff size and more efficient utilization of service staff. Versatile Lindy aircraft tugs can be used to easily and quickly maneuver aircraft — both with or without pants — in and out of hangers and around FBO maintenance and service facilities. The ergonomic design of Lindy aircraft tractors allows any worker, regardless of physical strength, to easily maneuver aircraft, allowing FBO operators to make maximum use of personnel. Use of electric powered Lindy aircraft tow products can also decrease FBO fuel costs.

As the nation moves slowly out of recession, airline industry experts say savvy FBO operators should prepare to compete in a more competitive business environment. Customers are expected to do more comparison pricing and even consider cheaper, less regulated  foreign FBOs for major maintenance service. In order to better manage costs and remain financially competitive, U.S. FBOs will have to offer a broader range of services, including more in-house maintenance. Using Lindy aircraft tugs can help FBOs decrease operational costs and remain competitive.