Aircraft Maintenace is Important

Direct link to May 24th post on Facebook by Coulson Aviation

Maintenance of aircraft -- firefighting aircraft, commercial aircraft and general aviation aircraft -- is very important to be sure that aircraft are safe to fly. Operators of aircraft including Coulson follow a maintenance schedule for their aircraft, some maintenance is more routine and other maintenance involves inspecting the whole aircraft. Aircraft parts may be replaced as needed in order to keep the aircraft safe to fly. I applaud the Aviation Maintenance Technicians who maintain aircraft for Coulson and other aircraft operators.

Drone incursion in Newark-Liberty Airspace

I have nothing against drones, I really don't. Drones are being used for a lot of good: storm surveys by the National Weather Service, agricultural aviation, scientific research and recreational uses such as photography outside of restricted airspace. Having said that, this is not the place to go if you want to learn about such uses. My concern here is and always be the safety of aviation operations both over wildfires and in and around our airports. I implore all who are use drones, aka unmanned aircraft systems that as applicable you register your drones with the FAA, stay out of airspace in and around airports, obey any applicable TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) and to the point of my blog, stay away from wildfires and structure fires.

Flight operations at Newark-Liberty International Airport were halted for a couple of hours on Tuesday, January 22nd when one or two drones were reported by the pilots of two planes near Teterboro Airport at 3,500 feet. Teterboro Airport is located under Newark's airspace about 20 miles north of the Newark-Liberty International Airport. See this report from CBS2 in New York (with video) and this NJ.com article.

A mid-air collision between a drone and an aircraft has the potential for fatal consequences. So far we have been lucky, but I fear the time will come when I drone will bring down an aircraft causing injuries or death to the occupants. In 2017 a drone collided with an Army Black Hawk Helicopter over Staten Island that later landed safely in New Jersey, see this article from NJ.com for more information. See the video report in this Business Insider report about what a drone collision with an aircraft wing could do.

January 26, 2019: I have read some reports on the internet speculating that the the alleged drone sightings by pilots on January 22nd may not have been drones. I posted a follow-up on January 28th, saying that the FAA has so far been unable to verify that a drone was sighted on January 22nd.

UAS (drone) danger near airports as well as wildfires (and more)

Embed code to video referenced below is no longer available, updated on August 1, 2018. Here is the  direct link to a good video on CBSNews (August 2, Face the Nation) on the dangers of drones

I have written a few times recently about the danger the danger caused by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) or drone incursions over wildfires, see for example my article of July 20th

I don’t know about your area, but I know that airline crews have reported seeing UAS on approach to Newark-Liberty International Airport (NJ), and crews have spotted UAS near JFK airport (Queens). I was inspired to write this article because of what I thought is a great editorial ("Crackdowns needed on drones airports - editorial") written by the Star Ledger Editorial board On August 10, 2015. I saw the editorial in the August 10th edition of The Star Ledger that arrives in my driveway each morning. I'd like to thank them for making me aware of the CBS News interview with Captain Sullenburger that I embedded above.

I hope that you take a few moments to read this editorial. While the editorial board was speaking about UAS (drone) incursions at NY-NJ airports, I think that they are speaking to drone incursions at other airports, including perhaps yours. The Star Ledger Editorial Board urge that lawmakers and the FAA take action:

We're not sure anyone's listening, but the reckless behavior of a few drone operators should have made lawmakers and the FAA shake a leg by now.

The Star Ledger Editorial Board end their editorial by saying that

But until the guys with their tech toys are brought under control, we can expect more close calls and near misses. Until Washington acts, the technology is outpacing the rules that should govern its use.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, Craig Whitlock of the Washington Post wrote an article on the August 10th Washington Post called Rogue drones a browning nuisance across the U.S. He reports on problems caused by several rogue drone (UAS) operators, including but not limited to drone (UAS) incursions over wildfires in California and drones flying “dangerously close to airports.” This article is worth reading, it isn’t long and includes a short video on rogue drone (UAS) operations. Whitlock provides a little background on the lack of UAS (drone) regulations for recreational users:

In general, drone misadventures are happening in a regulatory vacuum. The FAA has banned most commercial drone flights until it can finalize new safety rules — a step that will take at least another year.

But people who fly drones for fun aren’t regulated. Under a law passed in 2012 that was designed in part to protect model-airplane enthusiasts, the FAA cannot impose new restrictions on recreational drone owners. As a result, they are not required to obtain licenses, register their aircraft or undergo training. . . . 

To protect regular air traffic, the FAA has issued guidelines requiring that consumer drones stay at least five miles away from airports and below an altitude of 400 feet. 

Those standards are widely flouted, however; in the past month alone, airline pilots have reported close calls with drones near airports in New York, Charlotte, Minneapolis and Phoenix.

Please, if you have a hobby UAS (drone), stay away from wildfires, stay away from airports, and fly under 400 ft AGL. Fly your UAS safely, you may read more the FAA standards for unmanned aircraft systems here.

Control Tower at Ramona on FAA list of ATC Towers to be closed

I posted a short article on  March 16 about the then possible closure of the Air Traffic Control Tower at Ramona Air Attack Base linking to a letter that Walt Darran of the Associated Aerial Firefighters wrote to the FAA urging them to keep the Tower at Ramona open for the safety of aerial firefighters and other aviation interests. Well, as I am sure that some of you already know by now, the FAA released a list of 149 Contract ATC Towers to be closed this past Friday.

The tower at Ramona is on the list of towers to be closed, according to a March 21st article from the Ramona Sentinel, the FAA will begin to close these towers starting April 7 over a four week period. The Ramona Sentinel article has a nice quote from San Diego County Supervisor Dianne Jacob giving voice to local concerns about the closure:

This is so critical. We will continue to make the FAA aware it is a wrong-headed decision. …. We want to prevent another mid-air collision, another disaster. Lives are at stake. (Supervisor Jacob, Ramona Sentinal, March 21, 2013).

Added on October 12, 2015. The March 21, 2013 article from the Ramona Sentinal is no longer available on line, I have removed direct links.

I don't know how many towers at Air Attack/Tanker Bases are on the FAA list of closures. I do know that Fox Field (CA) is on the closure list, as is Klamath Falls (OR) are on the list, and I am pretty certain that both are tanker bases. Bill Gabbert of Fire Aviation posted the list of California towers that are on the closure list, in an article he posted on March 22. One of his commenters remarked that both Ramona and Fox Field are Tanker Bases. NBC San Diego reported on the closure of the tower at Ramona and a tower at Brown Field in San Diego (not a tanker base) in a March 22 report.

Mike Archer of Fire Bombers Publications provided a link to a March 24 article from KPIC on the five ATC Towers in OR due to close, including the tower at Klamath Falls. 

I am not exactly in a position to state with any certainty whether or not other ATC towers at other air attack/tanker bases in the U.S. are on the FAA list of 149 Contract ATC Towers to be closed. If I should become aware of additional ATC towers at air attack/tank bases that are due to close, I'll report back here.

Update on March 26, 2013: Just today I revisited a March 22 article from the AOPA regarding the 149 Towers that the FAA is planning to close starting on April 7. In the course of reading the article from the AOPA I came across a link to an FAA list of 24 FAA Contract Towers that will remain open; it seems that the tower at Klamath Falls OR is included on this list of towers that will remain open. 

Control Tower at Ramona Air Attack Base due to close

Ramona Air Attack Base

I have been been aware that many air traffic control towers (ATC) at smaller airports in the U.S. are due to close because of the sequester. For example, at least two towers in northern New Jersey are due to close, see this article on NJ dot com. I was distressed when I read an article on Michael Archer's Firebombers Publications Blog this past Wednesday (March 13) from News 7 in San Diego that the air traffic control tower at CAL Fire's Ramona Air Attack Base. Another article on the pending closure of the Ramona ATC tower may be found here.

I have included a couple of photos that I took at Ramona Air Attack Base when I visited Ramona Air Attack Base early in the Summer of 2012 Unfortunately, I did not get a picture of the affected air traffic control tower.

I want all pilots, including pilots flying aerial wildland firefighting aircraft, to be safe. I was very interested to read that Walt Darran, chairman of the Safety Committee and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Associated Aerial Firefighters has submitted a comment to the FAA urging the FAA to take the ATC at Ramona off their closure list and to keep the ATC operational. Walt writes of two mid-air collisions at Ramona, one as recently as 1995. Both mid-airs happened before the ATC was open. Walt says in part:

Maintaining an operational FAA control tower at Ramona is essential not only for the safety of pilots and aircraft, but also to maintain an orderly and efficient flow of aerial firefighting aircraft to protect lives and property subject to wildfires in the surrounding area.

I hope you take a few moments to read Walt's comment to the FAA that may be found here.

CFIT: VFR pilot into instrument conditions

Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) "accounts for 17 percent of all general aviation fatalities ... ." (FAA Advisory Circular 61-134, p.1). One type of CFIT accident involves visual flight rules (VFR) only pilots, i.e pilots without an instrument flight rules (IFR) rating, flying in marginal visibility or in instrument conditions.

The practice of attempting to maintain visual flight in marginal visibility or in instrument conditions is referred to as scud running. "CFIT occurs when an airworthy aircraft is flown, under the control of a qualified pilot, into terrain (water or obstacles) with inadequate awareness on the part of the pilot of the impending collision" (FAA Advisory Circular 61-134, p.3).

Many pilots scud run, some live. Some don't.

It is Sunday afternoon, time to go home after a pleasant weekend away visiting friends not far from the mountains. You are worried about the weather, there has been talk of a rain storm coming from the west. You have to fly west to go home, perhaps a 175 nautical mile (NM) flight. You might be able to make it in under 1.5 hours in your Cessna Cutlass.

You get a weather briefing, the bottom of the cloud deck is currently at 3,000 ft  above ground level (AGL), but conditions are forecast to get worse with lower ceilings at about 1,200 feet expected at your home airport in about 1.5 to 2 hours. The mountains between you and home climb anywhere from 2 to 4,000 feet above the elevation of the airport where you landed on Friday,.  But you have flown this route before and know where there is a highway that travels at a lower elevation through the mountains.

You and your son get your things together and drive to the nearby airport. You fueled the plane after landing Friday morning. You are set to go. You take off heading west and level off at 2,500 ft AGL. You find the highway west after a few minutes of flying. Some of the taller mountain tops are shrouded in clouds.  You had a GPS installed in the Cutlass recently. There are still a few features that you need to figure out.

You fly along at 2,500 ft AGL for about 20 minutes, glancing down to check your GPS every so often. You continue to follow the highway.

But then things start to get worse.

Ceilings are lower than forecast, so as the bottom of the cloud deck gets lower, you fly lower and descend to 2000 ft. AGL. As you fly along, the cloud deck continues to get lower and you fly lower and lower until you are just under 1,000 ft AGL flying perhaps a couple hundred feet under the clouds. Several minutes pass and it starts to rain, you aren't worried about the rain because your outside air temperature gauge says that the temps are about 45 degrees F. You are now at about 600 ft above the highway and your eyes are glued outside the cockpit looking ahead at the road below. You are OK because you know where the highway is. On a couple of occasions you have followed the highway west flying VFR, and have also driven west along the same road.

You are losing sight of the highway. Where is it? You fly lower. Oh, is that it down there? You don't know. You keep flying. You don't see that the Terrain Avoidance Warning System (TAWS) in the GPS is flashing, first yellow and then red. When you see the mountain it is too late. You pull back on the yoke and take your son's hand. Too late!

__________________________

The above scenario is fictional. There are many real fatal accidents in the NTSB database where the pilot attempts to maintain visual flight in instrument conditions resulting in a controlled flight into terrain. I've read some of them.

The AOPA Air Safety Institute's video, 178 Seconds to Live depicts a similar scenario to the fictional scenario that I have described above. There is no GPS, but you will get an idea of what you might see from the cockpit when a VFR only pilot ends up in instrument conditions. I was not able to get the embed code to work, but you should be able to watch the video from the link I provided. Added on December 18, 2014, I have updated the link to the 178 Seconds to Live video from the AOPA Air Safety Institute. A heads up that I was unable to get the video to play in my Firefox browser but it worked in Safari and Chrome. For those you who are interested in seeing the video (I recommend it), there is a similar video that I found from the Civial Aviation Safety Authority in Australia (go here) on YouTube.

I'd like to thank the staff of the Air Safety Institute who assisted me as I was researching this article. I'd also like to thank my pilot friends and my friends at my home airport.