How do you pay for flight training

Whether for a career, recreation or both, you need a plan

 

Boeing777For those considering a career as a professional pilot, you’ll be excited to know that Boeing continues to predict strong demand for professional pilots.  Boeing’s highly regarded Pilot and Technician Outlook, updated for 2015, projects that over the next 20 years, the world will require 558,000 new commercial airline pilots.  This forecast represents a 4% increase in pilot demand over its 2014 forecast.  Yes, it’s hard to imagine a more opportune time to embark on an aviation career.

No matter your ultimate aviation goal, whether it recreation, business, career or simply a new adventure, everyone must solo.  The first solo is followed by a variety of certification pathways depending on your ultimate destination.  Each path requires varying levels of investment.

As the adage goes, it takes money to operate an aircraft, and while there are innovative new concepts to help control the rising costs of pilot training (everything from less expensive re-manufactured aircraft to alternative energy sources), we shouldn’t expect dramatic decreases in the costs associated with flying airplanes.  Instead, let’s be realistic about what it’s going to take and make a plan to get there.

Picture1Do your homework.  Research and learn what the real investment will be (in both time and money) to accomplish your pilot training.  The time investment is often overlooked due to the more obvious financial challenges of learning to fly.  But allotting the right amount of time and garnering the support of your personal network of friends, family and other loved ones, will have a profound impact on your monetary investment.

Your continuity of training is of paramount importance in reaching your goals.  At Sporty’s Academy, we recommend at least a two to three day per week commitment to ensure adequate retention and also to allow for proper time in between lessons for preparation.  In short, this is the most efficient utilization of your time and money.

Regarding the dollars and cents, often time perspective pilots mistakenly follow shamefully misleading information regarding costs based on minimum FAA training requirements.  While not impossible, reaching a certification milestone at minimum experience requirements in today’s age of more complicated aircraft with greater capability in more complex airspace, is not likely.  And “minimums” certainly shouldn’t be used for financial planning purposes.

A better method is to base your planning on average training time.  If you’re not able to gather this information from the flight school you are considering, that could be a bad omen.  Also any personal connections you may have with existing pilots who can say with certainty how much time and money it took to accomplish their training would be invaluable.   As a point of reference, averages can range from 50-70 hours for a Private pilot certification.  So let’s discuss steps you can take to get to the low end or below average training time.

LTF_iPadHands-300x300Prepare yourself.  The phrase I like to use with new and perspective flight training customers is to “own your training experience.”   There are numerous resources available to pilots to assist in the training process and lower the time and money to completion.  It’s a matter of understanding what’s available and utilizing the material effectively.  Most impactful will be the use of a complete home-study or distance-learning program as ground school and to complete the FAA written test as well as a flight preparation resource.

While there are differing schools of thought, I support the approach of completing a complete home study course prior to engaging in the in-airplane training phase.  This will not only provide a solid footing and more educated view of the process, but also allow you to complete the FAA written testing component so your 100% attention can be focused on the flight training component.  And I’ve seen this process work well for pilots of all different backgrounds.

Once you’ve completed your home study, the home study doesn’t end.  Consider as a standing homework assignment to always be looking forward in the syllabus and when you come upon a topic to be introduced on the next lesson, attempt to become an expert by referencing your home study course or the various FAA or other online documents related to that topic.  The presence and use of a syllabus (or training course outline) is critical and should not to be compromised.  If you’re unsure of whether you’re following a training outline, of if the instructor or flight school has difficulty in producing its syllabus, this would be yet another red flag.

While referenced above, it’s worth reiterating that maintaining a regular training schedule to ensure effective continuity is imperative to a successful and enjoyable learning experience.  The training industry typically experience high turnover among flight instructors, but a reputable flight school should be able to manage any changes of instructor.  And that is a question you may wish to pose when evaluating training facilities.

Eric-Sean-Airplane1-300x168Paying the bills.  Now that you’ve determined what it will take in terms of time and money, the next step is ensuring the funding is in place to see your training through.  While it’s necessary to have an accurate estimate of what the entire learning experience will cost, keep in mind that it doesn’t need to be paid up front.  Most schools will accept payment as you progress for services rendered.  Be skeptical of any organization requiring fees to be paid ahead of providing the service.

If you don’t have the current means or option to save in order to fund your training out of pocket, consider a financing source.  There could be personal connections through family or friends that would be willing to invest in your success.  There are some flight training institutions that have financing options available directly.  Also consider Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) – the largest pilot association in the world – which also offers financing for flight training through AOPA Finance.

Scholarships are available for pilot training.  If you’re enrolled in a career program through an institution of higher learning, scholarship opportunities are more numerous, but they still exist for everyone.  Once again, I’ll point to AOPA as a potential resource for both a directory of potential scholarship sources and also Future Airline Pilots of American (FAPA) and Women in Aviation International.

A few words of wisdom on scholarship applications:

  • Carefully review scholarship requirements to ensure eligibility before applying
  • Be meticulous in reviewing forms and items that must be submitted with applications and be accurate in your completion
  • Stand out in the crowd – include background, service and experiences that are uniquely you
  • Don’t procrastinate – if required to obtain a letter of reference, start early and don’t expect those who may offer recommendations to be able to deliver a polished letter on a day’s notice
  • Respect the deadlines – deadlines do not mean post marked. Allow enough time for your applications to arrive well ahead of deadlines

flight school1Establish goals and work around obstacles.  A worthy exercise in beginning your journey is take inventory of your goals and priorities.  If you’re like most, you can’t exactly slide pilot training into an already busy schedule so most likely, there will have to be some give and take in life’s commitments.  The inventory will help you identify those activities that can be placed on hold in order to meet your goals.

Establish both short and long-term goals to help maintain your focus.  Your list of goals should be a work in progress.  Make modifications when things progress better than planned and when things don’t go as well as planned.  Everyone will experience a learning plateau. Use task lists, calendars and other support mechanisms to effectively manage your time.  As much as aviation seems like an individualized activity, a network of support can be a major boost.

Austin Crowe - PrivateEnjoy the experience.  Remember, the training experience is only the gateway…a means to the real beginning.  The freedom, adventure and rewards of aviation are just beginning at pilot certification.  For the health of mind and body, take the time to reflect on where you’ve been and where you’re headed.  Coming to the airport should not always be about the next lesson.  Involve yourself in the aviation community and get to know the pilots around you who can also offer support.  After all, the airport is a fun place to be.

The Places Flying Can Take You: Underwater Flying

Piloting a craft that’s part James Bond, part helicopter, and part blimp

When I learned to fly, some 30 years ago now, I imagined that becoming a pilot would broaden my horizons. It would give me the sky, as well as the ability to travel more easily to places few people ever got to see.

I was right, of course. I’ve flown across the country multiple times in my own airplanes. I’ve seen remote glaciers in Alaska, and even landed on one in the French Alps. I’ve explored places in the Australian Outback that even most Australians have never seen. I’ve flown relief supplies in five different countries in Africa. I even got to fly a blimp from Switzerland to the Athens Olympics in 2004, getting a low and slow view of Europe from 500 feet above the landscape. I’ve even seen the curvature of the Earth from 70,000 feet.

A lot of those horizon-broadening experiences came from the fact that after I became a pilot, I went on to become an aviation writer. But although all of those were amazing adventures and experiences, they all took place in the sky. I never dreamed that learning to fly might open up opportunities for me to explore the ocean, as well. But it did.

One autumn morning, almost three years ago, I was scrolling through a long list of emails that had arrived in my inbox, when one caught my eye. “Chance to pilot a submarine?” it asked. Now, any email that starts with “chance to pilot…?” gets my attention. But a submarine? Ok, you got me. How does one fly a submarine?

The email was from a guy named Bruce Jones, an avid pilot and adventurer (he’s currently building an RV-10, in which he and his wife plan to circumnavigate the globe). But, he explained, his day job was as CEO of a company that builds personal submarines. He said that piloting a sub was very much like piloting an airplane. And seeing as I’d flown a wide variety of atmospheric aircraft, he thought I might enjoy the experience of flying something under sea level, instead of above it.

Triton 3300 submarine

After thinking about it, I realized he might have a point. After all, as any fluid dynamics engineer will tell you, the air we fly through is actually a fluid. “Oceans of air” is not just a poetic way of describing the sky. It’s also a factual description. So maybe piloting a submarine could have some similarities to flying a plane.

In all honesty, I can’t imagine any pilot turning an offer like that one down, unless they have a deep-seated terror of the ocean. But it took a while for this one to actually pan out. A couple of months ago, however, I finally found myself in a small tender, just off of Nassau, in the Bahamas, on my way out to a 280-foot-long “shadow” boat, which is the yachting industry’s name for the utilitarian, floating hangars that accompany super-yachts and carry all the toys.

The submarine I was going to pilot was a Triton 3300/3 – so named because it can descend 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) underwater, and carries three people. Triton builds a number of different models, from one-to-three person, and capable of diving from 1,000 to 5,000 meters. The company is also currently developing a sub for a customer that will be able to dive the full depth of the ocean, or 36,000 feet.

My image of a submarine, formed by seeing Navy subs and a lot of Hollywood movies, was of a cigar-shaped, windowless torpedo with one or more propellers at the back. The Triton subs could not be further from that image.

Triton sub launching

Almost all of the Triton subs are acrylic spheres, surrounded by a fiberglass support structure that gives the impression of a very high tech, solid, and brightly colored pool chair. The acrylic sphere nestles gently in between the arms, supported by a back deck connecting it all together (and housing the vehicle’s batteries and support equipment). Entry to the sub is through a hatch at the top of the acrylic bubble, which on the Triton 3300/3 has an inside compartment about 80 inches in diameter.

I asked Bruce about the wisdom of using acrylic as a structural material in a deep-diving submarine. After all, one of the biggest concerns with diving is the immense pressure water exerts on a vessel or person as you go deeper. At sea level, the pressure exerted on a body (human or mechanical) is about 14 psi. At 1,000 meters, the pressure jumps to 16,000 psi. But apparently acrylic has come a long way since the 1970s, and acrylic actually gets stronger under pressure, down to a depth of about 5,500 feet. So although the acrylic that forms the Triton’s spheres is only 6.5” thick, it’s strong enough that the compartment itself doesn’t need to be pressurized. The air inside stays at sea level pressure for the entire dive.

Another advantage of acrylic, as I would discover, is that it has the same refractive index as water… which basically means that underwater, the acrylic material becomes invisible to the human eye. So “flying” a Triton sub feels almost surreal. Okay, it does feel surreal, on numerous levels. But the biggest piece is that, because of the refractive properties of the acrylic, it appears as if you’re immersed directly in the ocean, except you’re sitting in a comfortable chair, in t-shirt and shorts, with music being piped in to the passenger compartment, and a bottle of water (or whatever) at your fingertips.

Welcome to the fantastical world of James Bond, made real.

Lane Wallace on Triton sumbarine

Of course, unlike aircraft, which can taxi from their hangar to the runway and then take off under their own power, a submarine cannot just roll itself off the side of a ship into the ocean. And they’re heavy, because they have to be at least as heavy as the water they displace. The Triton 3,300/3 weighs in at 17,600 pounds. So except in the case of very high-end super yachts, which have “drive in” underwater garages, the subs have to be lifted off the deck and placed on the surface of the water by a crane. Once it’s in the water, the passengers can be taken out to the sub in a dinghy.

Having said that, a brief squall was passing through just as we started the launch process for my dive, and getting off a big ship into a dinghy bobbing up and down on waves, and climbing aboard a rocking and rolling submarine in the rain is a bit sporting. “Graceful” is not a word I’d use to describe my maneuvering. The good news is, all that rough noise and tumble goes blissfully away as soon as you submerge. It’s actually the opposite of flying, in that sense. It’s bumpy until you take off. Then it all smooths out.

My PIC for the dive was Patrick Lahey, an experienced dive pilot and the president of Triton Submarines. We climbed down into our leather seats (the Tritons are built for comfort) and prepared to submerge. Patrick warned me that most people are so disoriented by the apparent disappearance of the acrylic when the vehicle first submerges that they fall forward. I could well believe it. Visual cues, even if they’re illusions, can be strong triggers. Especially because even the small platform under your feet in the Triton is clear acrylic, so the bottom literally falls out from under you when you dive.

Triton going under water

As promised, the change from the surface to the underwater world was dramatic. I consciously sat back in my seat, but it still felt surreal. I had the sensation of being immersed in a 360-degree, surround-sound IMAX movie, looking at fish swimming right by me, with nothing in between us, despite the fact that I was perfectly dry.

The Triton subs get their buoyancy from air tanks in the catamaran booms. To descend, you release the air from those storage areas. To ascend again, you pump in air from a pressurized air tank below the back deck. A separate oxygen tank pipes breathing air into the passenger compartment, and CO2 scrubbers process and recycle the “dirty air” that is expelled.

Control of the sub is provided by four ducted-fan electric motors. There are two motors on the back of the sub, for forward and back motion, and two angled on the sides of the back deck which can be used for up, down, and banking movement, as well as “translational” sideways movement. Trim is provided by the sub’s batteries, which are located beneath each side boom and can be electronically moved forward or aft as necessary to change the sub’s pitch by up to 7.5 degrees up or down.

View from inside submarine

All of these systems, the overall design, and each production model, are certified against established safety standards. There is no federal agency, but certification is provided by the American Bureau of Shipping, a not-for-profit organization founded in 1862 to improve maritime standards and safety. Triton reports that ABS-certified subs have not had a fatality or serious injury in the past 20 years. This is all reassuring to me as we descend to depths that would crush a human body if the vessel were to rupture.

The big selling point of these vehicles is the view, however, and as we descend, the sunlight from the surface fades. Fortunately, the Triton is equipped with six 7000-degree Kelvin exterior LED lights, which mimic sunlight and bring out the natural colors of things even 2,500 feet below sea level, where rare corals and sponges and creatures like goblin sharks and giant squids abide.

Gadget-happy customers can also order exterior manipulator arms refined enough to pick up toothpicks, robotic vehicles that can scoot out and explore places too small for the sub while streaming back video, or even a radar-guided spear gun. The sub is also equipped with “plug and play” Ethernet capability, which opens up all kinds of custom options. And although GPS doesn’t work underwater, Triton has designed a virtual GPS navigation system for the sub. It uses a mother ship-based transceiver to track the sub’s location relative to the ship, integrates that with the ship’s GPS signals, and sends the resulting navigational information via an underwater radio telephone system to a display in the sub.

Despite the fact that I’d never been in a submarine before, Bruce was right. I felt right at home in the Triton cockpit. Part of it might be the similarity of the acrylic bubble to helicopters I’ve flown. But I suspect it’s also because because these subs were designed by a pilot. Control of the sub is executed through a three-axis joystick with a thumb wheel on the top of it. And almost all of the instrumentation and data a pilot needs is presented on a single multifunction display that looks as if it would be very much at home in an airplane.

Instruments in Triton submarine

Front and center in the panel’s six round-dial instruments is an artificial horizon, with a heading indicator below it. Flanking that are an altimeter (for distance to the bottom) as well a depth gauge (for distance to the surface). There’s even a vertical speed readout. Bruce told me they designed the sub to be intuitive and easy to operate, and I’d say they succeeded––at least in terms of instrumentation and displays.

Ah, but is piloting this vehicle anything like flying an aircraft? Oddly enough, I’d have to say it is. Not an airplane, mind you. But if you took the sensitivity and maneuverability of a helicopter and mixed it with the languid speed, lagging control time, vectoring fan engines, buoyancy and variable ballast concerns of a blimp… you’d have the flying qualities of a Triton submarine.

Like a helicopter, the Triton is really easy to over-control. It’s also a little disconcerting that pushing the stick forward doesn’t make the nose go down, it just makes the sub go forward (or backward, if you pull back). To turn left or right, you twist the stick. If you pull it one way or the other, the nose stays put, but the sub scoots sideways like a crab. (What they call “translational” movement). Vertical movement is controlled by the thumbwheel on the joystick. But you can maneuver the Triton on a dime. We sidled right up to the side of a shipwreck, and cruised up and down along its length, just a few yards away.

Depth perception, I should note, appeared to be a little wacky in the sub, perhaps because of the curved surface between you and everything outside. But objects look closer than they really are. The shark I would have sworn was a midget swimming five feet away turned out to be a normal sized shark swimming 30 yards away. And I would have sworn that we were six inches from the shipwreck, not 10 or 20 yards. But I suppose you get used to that.

Control stick in submarine

That high degree of maneuverability and sensitivity might be helicopter-like. But piloting the Triton also involves not only the ballast and buoyancy issues, but also the slow, floating movement of a blimp. There’s no jarring movement or noise, like there would be in a helicopter. And there’s a bit of a lag between control inputs and vehicle responses, so that takes some getting used to, as well. It’s a very peaceful experience, when all is said and done. You just have to think ahead, and be gentle in your inputs.

As for speed, the Triton only goes about three knots underwater. But as Patrick said, “Speed is the enemy of observation.” And it’s what you can observe, in this underwater bubble, that makes it so utterly remarkable.

“We know more about the far side of the moon than we do about the deep ocean, below where scuba divers can go,” Bruce told me. That means piloting a Triton sub offers the chance for a rare kind of exploring, in a world where there are few unexplored places left. We only went to 600 feet below sea level, because a storm was coming in and we had to get back. But even at that depth, Patrick pointed out, we might very well be the very first humans to see what we were seeing.

“There are close to 100,000 seamounts [underwater mountains] in the oceans, and only about 1% of them have been explored,” he continued. “But if I dove [in a Triton sub] on one every day for the rest of my life, on every dive I’d probably find a new species.”

This remarkable viewing and piloting experience comes at a price, of course. A new Triton 3300/3 sells for about $3.5 million. But then again, that’s less than a new Pilatus PC-12. And even a Pilatus doesn’t take you––at least not intentionally––where no human has gone before.

In aviation terms, expanding your altitude envelope by a mere 600 feet doesn’t generally amount to much. But if that 600 feet is below sea level, it makes a very big difference, indeed.

Lane Wallace is an internationally known columnist, author, and speaker. She’s been an editor and columnist for Flying magazine, a columnist for Sport Aviation, and a correspondent for The Atlantic. In addition, she’s written two books on adventure and its life lessons, including Unforgettable: My 10 Best Flights, which is available through Sporty’s Pilot Shop. You can read more of her adventure stories and writing through her website (www.lanewallace.com), or at her blog: www.nomapnoguidenolimits.com.

fueling 172

Top off the airplane fuel tanks? Maybe…

Fueling C172When I turned 16 and first learned to drive a car, I was taught to always be aware of the fuel status. When it was time to go to the gas station and refuel, there was never any thought though about how much gas to put in – insert the nozzle, set the hold function on the lever, and wait for the auto-shutoff to kick in when the tank was full. Why would I consider anything other than a full tank?

The same held true in my experiences in recreational boating. After heading back to the marina to refuel, I left with nothing short of a full tank. I used the same logic as when fueling my car – I could run the engine a longer time with less visits to the gas station. There was nothing else to consider.

When I learned to fly an airplane though I quickly learned that I needed to throw that logic out the window. Airplanes are more sensitive to weight and loading, and more often than not can’t be operated with the tanks full of fuel on every flight. Every airplane has a limiting maximum takeoff weight specified by the manufacturer, and you’re legally obligated to follow it (common sense should tell you it’s a good idea too).  Flying over a manufacturer’s maximum weight leads to degraded performance in flight, and that’s assuming you’re able to get the aircraft safely off the ground in the first place.

Payload in training aircraft varies a good deal between different models. A Cessna 172R Skyhawk, for example, can carry around 450 lbs of passengers and bags with a full load of 53 gallons in the tanks, yielding nearly 5 hours of flying time. That’s pretty generous, considering it would be a challenge for a pilot, training gear and flight instructor to exceed this limit (that might help explain why the Skyhawk is one of the most popular training aircraft ever built). What if you want to take more gear, or another passenger on the flight though? The simple answer is to depart with less than full tanks. If you need to take along an extra 120 pounds, have the tanks filled up to only 30 gallons — this still provides over 2 ½ hours of flying time with reserves.

Fueling jetAs you move up to larger aircraft, you’ll find the same principles apply. While you might think that a high-performance jet can carry a full passenger load and still fly with full fuel, that’s not always the case. In fact many jets filled to the brim with jet fuel can only carry 2 pilot crewmembers and maybe a passenger or two before reaching the weight limit. Even if there isn’t a full passenger or cargo load, it’s still not efficient for larger transport aircraft to carry more fuel than needed for each flight segment. The extra weight decreases performance and will increase the amount of fuel needed to complete flight. One exception here is when there is a considerable fuel price difference between the airports of intended use.

Take fuel planning seriously throughout your flight training. Even if you’re flying a C172 loaded full with 5 hours of fuel for every lesson, pay attention to how you manage the fuel. Lean properly on the ground and in the air according to the guidance in the POH, and mentally note the fuel burned for each flight during shutdown. That way when it’s time to maximize the performance of the airplane for longer trips or taking additional passengers, you’ll be very knowledgeable about the expected fuel burn, and can confidently plan to arrive with your required fuel minimums. You’ll also have the right mindset for flying other aircraft that don’t offer the luxury of providing a large payload with the tanks topped off.

A straight-in approach is safer than a standard pattern

straight inOn a recent morning while hangar flying with some colleagues, we were engaged in a heated debate on pattern entries and what is considered appropriate. Most pilots are taught pattern entries during their training and a 45 degree entry to the upwind or downwind leg seemed to be the most commonly taught. If consulting the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), you’ll note only one recommendation for pattern entry, that being in level flight, abeam the midpoint of the runway, at pattern altitude. But is this safer than shooting a straight in approach?

As background, Sporty’s is based at an active general aviation airport just east of Cincinnati, Ohio and is home to nearly 150 small aircraft including a busy flight school. As such, it’s not uncommon for as many as three aircraft to be mixing it up in the pattern with two more awaiting a window of opportunity to depart. But we also have moments of blissful isolation when it feels as if you have the entire airport environment to yourself.

patternWhile some remain staunch supporters of patterns and appropriate entries no matter the circumstances, I make a case for straight in approaches for landings in certain situations. Before you revoke my license and feed me to the tigers, hear me out. In aviation, there is no shortage of risk management debates. Flying is an inherently risky business. Accepting and managing these risks is a big part of what we do when we take to the air.

We are more likely to encounter other traffic around the airport environment as opposed to enroute cross-country flying at 7,500 feet. While some say that this is the reason we must fly a full pattern at non-towered fields so to give us the best opportunity for predictability and to see and avoid other traffic, I propose an alternate solution.

Flying a 45-degree entry to upwind followed by a complete circuit around the pattern will take approximately 4-6 minutes at most small airports.  Given that the airport environment has the most traffic congestion, should we not try to minimize this exposure by minimizing our time in this environment? A straight in approach reduces your exposure to well under a minute.

pattern diagramObviously, there are other factors that come in to play. There isn’t a one size fits all solution. If there are four airplanes already in the traffic pattern and two waiting to take off, a straight in pattern might make you the least popular pilot around the coffee pot in the lobby of the FBO; however, in situations when there are no aircraft in the pattern, none waiting to take off, and you are already flying from an area where a straight in approach would be the most efficient method of entry, why not take the most efficient route to landing?

Doing so will free up the airspace for others coming in to land and also results in less low-level maneuvering. Add in an active traffic avoidance system along with announced intentions/position reports on CTAF, and we might find that the straight in approach is a safer solution. I would emphasize that making a straight in approach takes experience and practice as you certainly won’t have the same visual cues and checkpoints as you would flying a standard pattern. Keep your options open and discuss various circumstances with your instructor. You may be glad you did.

Visibility: more than meets the eye

Visibility, unlike so many other weather terms in aviation, seems so simple. It’s a measure of how far you can see, right? What nuances can there possibly be?

Turns out, a lot.

Hazy day 182Visibility may be the single most important weather metric for VFR pilots, and it’s right up there for IFR pilots too. While weather conditions are usually reported in terms of ceiling and visibility, it’s the latter that usually matters more. An 8000 ft. overcast may sound like good VFR, but if it’s 3 miles underneath that cloud deck, things will look very murky. I’ll take good visibility over high ceilings every time.

That’s especially true if it’s raining. Rain can have a dramatic effect on visibility, and if it’s showery (with bands of rain moving through the area) the visibility could swing from good VFR to low IFR within the span of a few minutes. So don’t stop at the visibility number when reading a METAR – make sure you consider any precipitation too. As a rough guide, you can almost cut the observed visibility in half if it’s raining.

But visibility is affected by more than just the wet stuff – haze is actually the VFR pilot’s worst enemy. The John F. Kennedy, Jr. crash in 1999 is a classic example. While weather conditions were legal VFR, hazy conditions made the horizon nearly impossible to see (the open water environment made this even worse). The VFR-only pilot lost control over the ocean and crashed. Legal to fly? Absolutely. Safe? Probably not. At least not for this pilot in this airplane.

I thought of this accident on a recent flight from Chicago to Cincinnati, when I was reminded just how disorienting it can be to fly in thick haze. On this day, the combination of hot summer haze and smoke from some large Canadian wildfires had brought visibility down to about 4 miles (see photo at right). The whole world took on a fuzzy, gray appearance, and I was glad to have an instrument rating.

As we flew on at 9000 ft., we were comforted by the fact that we could still see the ground. How bad can it be, right?

182 looking down in haze

But this was a trap. After all, at 9,000 ft., seeing the ground doesn’t mean much: visibility could be as low as 2 miles. Looking out the front windshield, which is what really matters, visibility was effectively zero. In fact, we nearly stumbled into a cloud because we couldn’t see it. Not to mention the traffic issue: while we saw multiple traffic targets on our G1000 screen, we never saw one with our eyes.

The lesson is clear: what you see is what you get. No matter what the METAR says, if you’re uncomfortable with the situation, it’s time to file IFR (if you’re instrument rated) or land (if not).

Visibility sensorAnother trap, although less dangerous, is the catch-all report of “visibility 10 miles.” Most airport weather sensors only go to 10 miles, so even on days when visibility is 35 miles you’ll hear 10 on the AWOS or ATIS. This can cause your brain to subconsciously calibrate a report of “10 miles” with nearly unlimited visibility. But the first day you fly when the visibility really is 10 miles, you’re likely to be surprised. It’s not unsafe, but it’s a little unsettling. 

A good way to counteract this is to always have the big picture in mind. Is there a big high pressure system that’s packing the haze in or has a strong cold front come through recently to clear out the atmosphere? Both situations could result in a report of “10 miles,” but the view out the front window will be different. Go beyond the METAR for the true story.

A final consideration is the sensor on the airport that determines visibility. These work well most of the time, but they are subject to errors. Even when they’re not, they can only report conditions at a single point on the airport. That’s helpful, but what really counts is what you see as the pilot on short final. Don’t become a slave to the electronic eye.

Even the FAA trusts pilots more than electronics: instrument pilots must have the “required flight visibility” in order to complete an approach. Note that the term is flight visibility, as observed from the cockpit, not what the airport weather station senses. That is recognition that, once again, “what you see is what you get.”

Self Weather Briefings

Given the recent change in technology, more weather information is available at pilots’ fingertips than ever before.  With this improvement, pilots can turn to many different sources for weather information, instead of just Flight Service or DUATS.  Pilots grab this information and form their own “self-briefings” as opposed to the formal briefings offered by Flight Service; and while these self briefings are often faster and more convenient than their traditional counterparts, they can open pilots to omitting key sources of weather information and provide incomplete briefings.  Here are some tips to keep your self-briefings complete and effective.

In order to understand what the weather is doing on a local level, you must first understand what the weather is doing on a national and regional level. These large scale weather maps will begin to set the canvas for your weather picture for the day and your upcoming flight.  While most pilots are not forecasters, we can still use these tools to explain the source of many weather phenomena and help fill in gaps left from smaller, local forecasts.

Many of the common used forecasts and observations, like TAFs and METARs, leave a lot of area unforecast.  TAFs only forecast an area of 5-10nm around the airport, and METARs are just an observation at the airport itself; not the surrounding area.  These are just some of the limitations that any one weather product has and in order to overcome these shortcomings, you need to create a mosaic of different weather products with overlapping areas and purposes to get a complete picture.

The first few items to review in your briefing should be national observation charts, like the Surface Analysis chart and the Airmet/Sigmet map for the country.    hpc_sfc_analysisThese give you a high level overview of weather systems and hazardous areas for aircraft.  All other forecasts and observations can be put in reference to these backdrops.

With the large scale focus still in mind, you will then want to switch to forecasts over large areas.  Prognostic charts offer the best long range planning, but are still useful in the 0-12 hr range.  Depending on which products you have available and which service you are using, the next charts would likely be Convective Forecasts (CCFP, Convective Outlook), Icing Forecasts (CIP/FIP, Freezing level forecast), and Turbulence (GTG if applicable).  These are more detailed geographically than their Airmet/Sigmet counterparts, and provide more detailed information with respect to intensity, altitudes affected, and timeframe.

Winds Aloft forecasts come as both a graphical and textual format, but their graphical forms are convenient for altitude selections and temperature considerations, especially in the winter time while avoiding icing conditions.  Also, many flight planning tools will also display similar altitudes and its winds/ETE to allow for easier fuel/time decisions.

Several new graphical prediction products are available to indicate widespread areas of cloud ceilings, and visibilities, which are easier to interpret than the former weather depiction charts and offer analysis as well as forecast time periods.  Following those charts up with the textual Area Forecast products will answer any remaining questions about widespread clouds, winds and weather.

End your forecast review with TAF or MOS products from your departure to your destination and the course in between, allowing for viewing off-route as needed to fill in the gaps in forecast areas.  These are the most detailed of the forecast products and give an hour-by-hour cloud, wind, visibility and precipitation forecast that are useful in determining your go/no-go decision.  Although these may be the easiest to read, do not rely solely on this product.  Incorporate all of the forecast products into making the best informed decision possible.

IMG_6632As we have worked from larger areas to smaller areas and the distant future to near future, we now need to analyze current conditions.  Start with Satellite and Radar imagery to give you the biggest overview as you work smaller.  Each of these products offer a different insight and will be needed when we reference back to their forecast conditions.  PIREPS are also a large scale area product and offer the only direct weather observation by other pilots.  Keep in mind what type of aircraft gave the report and how that difference in aircraft can affect your experience in the same weather phenomena.

201508142030_metarsNCVAfcat_LWS End your review with the current conditions at your departure and destination using METARs or other graphical charts of current conditions, like the weather depiction chart or the newer CVA charts.  Remember to compare the current information back with its forecast information to determine if conditions are changing faster or slower than originally expected, or if the forecast has gone in a different direction.  This little comparison is often ahead of TAF or Area Forecast updates and can help prevent getting you into a sticky situation.

NOTAMs and TFRs are not weather products, but should always be incorporated into a complete weather briefing.  The information gained is not only a legal requirement, but can prevent embarrassing situations like getting to the airport only to find out that the runway has been closed for repairs.

Keep your self-briefings organized and thorough, and you’ll stay ahead of the weather.