The FAA's Turn Back To Basics

[djpacro]

The FAA's acting administrator, Michael Huerta, Thursday promoted the agency's pursuit of more regulation regarding how pilots are trained. Huerta spoke at a meeting of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) and his comments follow the July 5 release of the BEA's final report on the crash of Air France Flight 447. Huerta told ALPA members that the forthcoming rules will be designed "to give pilots more training on how to recognize and recover from stalls and aircraft upsets" and to better deal with the complications added when automation fails. The crash of Flight 447 killed 228 people after the pilots stalled their A330 and rode it from 38,000 feet to impact with the Atlantic -- apparently without ever recognizing the stall. That crash took place in June of 2009 and came just months after another widely publicized fatal stall and crash that took place in February.Colgan Air Flight 3407 crashed in February 2009 near Buffalo after its crew reacted incorrectly to stall warnings and spun the aircraft in, killing all 49 aboard, plus one on the ground. In discussing the new regulations, Huerta emphasized the importance of basic training when pilots face a loss of automation. "We can't lose sight of the importance of training on the core aspects of flying," he said, "such as crew management, stall recovery or other events that could occur when there is a change or a loss in automation." The new rules are expected to go through a thorough development process and may arrive next year. The timing may not be soon enough for some safety advocates. In a USA Today article, Scott Maurer, who lost a daughter to the Colgan crash, offered his comments on the implications of the Air France Report. Maurer said it "underscores the dramatic need to better train our pilots to react to emergency situations, and in particular to not be so heavily reliant on the automation in the cockpit."

It was only last week that I mentioned to a CASA safety specialist that the FAA mandates upset recovery training for jet transport pilots., she asked if CASA does too.

Nope, CASA already has in the day VFR syllabus an essential requirement for even student pilots to know completely

 

(a) the symptoms when approaching the stall(b) the characteristics of a stall

and in flight for PPL

 

Stall aircraftStalls aircraft while maintaining balanced flight

Observes IAS and control wheel/stick position at point of departure from intended flight path (stall)

 

Recovers from stall during straight and level, climbing, descending and approach configuration

 

Recovers from stall during a turn

I wonder why the CPL (and also an RAA instructor) I went flying with recently had never stalled an airplane in a turn before?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Maybe because we fly 'aeroplane's'?...

 

 

[djpacro]

The machines that I fly were built in the USA therefore they are airplanes. We could debate who invented flying machines.

 

 

[David Isaac]

You and I have gotta get that young Motz one day Mr DJP ...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

The machines that I fly were built in the USA therefore they are airplanes. We could debate who invented flying machines.

Ahhh, maybe so... But the raa instructor you flew with most probably doesn't fly the Pitts;).

The piper and cessna p charts are called " aeroplane performance charts." ;)

 

The flying machine.. Invented by the aboriginals wasn't it?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

And everybody knows that airplanes stall funny, especially in turns.. AeroPlanes are heaps better.

 

Hehe

 

 

[rgmwa]

The flying machine.. Invented by the aboriginals wasn't it?

No, I think they invented the helicopter.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[motzartmerv]

No the helicopter wasn't invented.. It spontaneously spawned out of the primordial ooze of bad ideas....;)

 

 

[djpacro]

A few things to deal with here:

 

• that RAA instructor - a passing comment - the issue being a CPL holder. Did I mention female too? She can probably fly a biplane better than I.
   
   
  
• now that I mention it - is it biplane or biroplane for you guys who call them aeroplanes?
   
   
  
• the Piper and Cessna "P"charts - the old "P"charts only ever came from CASA's predessor (back in the old Department days as I recall). I have a "P"chart here - neither "airplane" nor "aeroplane" is mentioned.
   
   
  
• David, we'll gang up on motz at one of the get-togethers. “Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill.”
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

No the helicopter wasn't invented.. It spontaneously spawned out of the primordial ooze of bad ideas....;)

A wise old man once told me, "Helicopters do not fly, Son, they flagellate. They are a confidence trick being pulled on gravity. And they're as similar to an airplane as a blow fly is to an eagle."

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Reference from Wikipedia. :

 

The term airplane (equivalent to "aeroplane" in English speaking countries other than the U.S. and Canada) typically refers to any powered fixed-wing aircraft.

 

From the onlinedictionary.com

 

Airplane;

 

n

 

(Engineering / Aeronautics) the US and Canadian name for aeroplane

 

Also, from onlinedictionary.com

 

Airplane;

 

n

 

(Engineering / Aeronautics) the US and Canadian name for aeroplane

 

Apparently, the word 'airplane' is a derivative of the word 'aeroplane' and not vice versa.

 

The yank term is just another example of them not getting with the times.. Lol... Metric system etc..

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

Would it be fair to say, airplane/aeroplane is along the lines of, and about as important as potayto/potarto?

 

Would it also be fair for us to acknowledge that the Wright brothers are accepted as being the first to fly a fixed wing, heavier than air airplane? And does it matter whether the chicken or the egg came first?

 

I must admit, I personally prefer the generic term, aircraft. In which all airmen, as John Magee so eloquently wrote in his poem, "High Flight",....

 

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth...;

 

....

 

And, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod

 

The high untrespassed sanctity of space,

 

Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yea Wayne, of course it doesnt matter.. I was just stirring the old air dogs :).

 

 

[kaz3g]

A few things to deal with here:

• that RAA instructor - a passing comment - the issue being a CPL holder. Did I mention female too? She can probably fly a biplane better than I.
   
   
  
• now that I mention it - is it biplane or biroplane for you guys who call them aeroplanes?
   
   
  
• the Piper and Cessna "P"charts - the old "P"charts only ever came from CASA's predessor (back in the old Department days as I recall). I have a "P"chart here - neither "airplane" nor "aeroplane" is mentioned.
   
   
  
• David, we'll gang up on motz at one of the get-togethers. “Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill.”
   
   
  

Question for the pedantics amongst us (like me)...

 

How many planes does a Pitts have?

 

kaz

 

 

[robinsm]

Nope, the wright bros weren't the first to fly a heavier than air machine, try pearce in Nz and one or 2 other non americans.

 

 

[facthunter]

The Wright aircraft was more sophisticated in it's banking capability. Most designs were stable and only did shallow turns on rudder. When the Wright Bros eventually went to Paris and demonstrated their plane. even the French were in awe at it's manoeuverability. The plane by then had sat without further development and scrutiny, for a few years, so that many were sceptical of whether it was the "real thing" or just a false claim. Patents and legal arguments got into the picture in that period. Wright planes were built under licence in France.. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

I can forgive the people who struggled with English at school, and accidentally get things wrong sometimes but why on earth when you know how to spell and you're aware of the different spelling in different countries would you deliberately abandon Australian English and fly the flag for a foreign country?

 

Is it ego?

 

 

[Kiwi Greg]

"Nope, the wright bros weren't the first to fly a heavier than air machine, try pearce in NZ"

 

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

"Nope, the wright bros weren't the first to fly a heavier than air machine, try pearce in NZ"

And let's not forget the Frenchmen who claim to have been first too... But the fact remains, the Wright brothers are accepted and acknowledged by most as having been the first. It may not be true... But hey, Roger Bannister wasn't the first to run a mile in under four minutes either. I know that because I met this young Zulu who was telling me about his uncle, who had a friend who's brother had an encounter with a hungry lion, and he said.....

 

 

[eightyknots]

"Nope, the wright bros weren't the first to fly a heavier than air machine, try pearce in NZ"

This claim has been debunked (a good US term ) recently by a NZ scholar who did a major study on this issue. One interesting thing about Richard Pearce's flying machine is that it was the first plane in the world with a tricycle undercarriage. The picture below shows a replica Richard Pearce aeroplane: