TFRs for Fires - more to think about then just the TFR

In the summer time, it is not uncommon to see TFR’s for “Hazard” due to fires. The actual TFR is often times the least of the issues since:


1. they are often small, e.g. a radius of 10 miles of less,
2. they are plotted via various apps/systems such as ForeFlight, G1000, as well as the sectional view on www.faa.gov.
3. and you can create a plan to avoid them.

The greater hazard is the smoke and haze generated from these fires. The smoke and associated haze reduce flight visibility and in some cases dramatically so. In addition, the haze can cause strain on your eyes because all you see is a wall of white. Probably the biggest challenge is that it is hard to know where the smoke will be both from a geographical area as well as how high the smoke goes. Smoke may not easily show on a satellite image if it is below a cirrus cloud layer. Area forecasts often only provide broad indications of where smoke (FU) might be found and then only if the visibility is less than 5 SM. So if the visibility is 6 or 7 SM, which is still pretty poor, the area forecast won’t report the smoke like the examples below.

OR CASCDS WWD
SWRN INTR...BKN CI. OCNL VIS 3-5SM FU. FU TOP 120. 21Z SCT CI OCNL VIS 3-5SM FU. OTLK...VFR FU.

NRN CA...STS-SAC-TVL LN NWD
SHASTA-SISKIYOUS...BKN CI. OCNL VIS 3-5SM FU. FU TOP 120. 21Z SCT160. ISOL -TSRA. CB TOP FL400. OTLK...VFR TIL 02Z TSRA.

CNTRL CA
SAN JOAQUIN VLY...SKC. TIL 20Z OCNL VIS 3-5SM HZ/FU. FU TOP 055 OTLK...VFR.

Sometime the best sources of information are pilot reports. But often times, they are not very many pilot reports to be helpful. But when they do exists, like the ones below, they can be valuable information if they happen to be near your intended route of flight.

LMT UA /OV 2S2 /TM 2010 /FL109 /TP C185 /SK TOP105 /WX HZ FU
MFR UA /OV FJS-OED180020/TM 2234/FL100/TP C310/WX FV01SM HZ/RM IMC

Lastly, sometimes an AIRMET may help identify an area that is obscured by smoke but AIRMETs technically have a threshold that the weather phenomenon has to be impacting an area of at least 3,000 square miles. In the cases below, they do help pinpoint area where visibility will be poor.

WAUS46 KKCI 311445
SFOS WA 311445
AIRMET SIERRA UPDT 3 FOR IFR AND MTN OBSCN VALID UNTIL 312100
AIRMET MTN OBSCN...OR CA
FROM 60SE EUG TO 50ESE OED TO 70SW OED TO 50S EUG TO 60SE EUG
MTNS OBSC BY FU/HZ. CONDS CONTG BYD 21Z THRU 03Z.

WAUS46 KKCI 311445
SFOS WA 311445
AIRMET SIERRA UPDT 3 FOR IFR AND MTN OBSCN VALID UNTIL 312100
AIRMET IFR...OR CA
FROM 40NNW OED TO 20NW LKV TO 80SSW LKV TO 50E FOT TO 40NNW OED
VIS BLW 3SM HZ/FU. CONDS ENDG 18-21Z.

Lycoming engine information

Most of my flying is with Cessna planes and Lycoming engines. Often times I have question or am curious about things that are not fully explained in the POH. I ran across this document from Lycoming that seems to be a collection of articles that may have been published by them over the years. It seems like an interesting gem of a document because it is not too technical and it covers common topics like engine break-ins and leaning.

Lycoming Reprints

http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2001/01/flying-versus-driving/

Oxygen cylinder expiration dates - yes there is a regulation for that too!

Recently I spent some time looking into oxygen usage for general aviation. I was looking into the various portable oxygen systems and their details. Several clubs let members check out portable oxygen tanks including San Carlos Flight Center and West Valley Flying Club. When I looked at the WVFC oxygen tank I was told that the next time it needed to be refilled it had to be certified. Huh? Certified? What’s up with that? This got my searching. What I found were the regulations governing recertification of the cylinders that are used for the oxygen tanks. All the cylinders I have seen are aluminum and are of type 3AL. The regulation is in 49 CFR 180.209. It states that the cylinders need to be hydrostatically tested every five (5) years. There is actually a stamp that is imprinted on the cylinder when it is manufactured and also stamped when it is tested. In the picture you can see this cylinder has a "06 * 99" stamp indicating it was originally tested in June of 1999. It has another stamp of "05 * 07" when it was recertified in May of 2007. It turns out that it is not legal to refill a tank that is not current like the one pictured. So it is a good idea to know when a tank needs to be recertified. There are a couple of places that can perform the required test and stamp the cylinder. Near SQL, Alliance Gas Products will do it but it does take them a couple of weeks.

Oakland Center

Earlier this week I got a chance to tour the facility that handles the ZOA airspace, which we all know as "Oakland Center". The Oakland Center tour is not as educational as the NorCal tour so if you have a choice between the two I found NorCal to be much more interesting.

One of the unique things you see at Oakland Center are the controllers that work the Pacific Ocean sector for flights headed to Hawaii and beyond. This sector has NO radar so position reporting by planes is the standard way to track planes and ensure separation. A small number of planes have ADS-C, yes that is right -C. These planes can transmit their position as well as the controllers can query the planes status. The other interesting thing is that the controller NEVER talks to the planes. He either sends a text like message for clearance such as climbs/descents or the planes talk to a radio facility in Livermore and the Livemore "ARINC" phones the Oakland Center controller to relay the message.

Oakland Center also has traditional controllers that handle the airspace outside of the NorCal area, e.g. Paso Robles. The airspace is divided up into sectors and split between high and low altitudes. The other interesting thing is there is often two controllers in a sector. One controller works the radar terminal and communicates with the pilot while the other controller works what they call the "D" side. The "D" side is where data is entered about each flight. It is quite interesting to see the controllers seamlessly working together.

A question was asked about flight following. Sometimes when you request flight following a controller will give you a squawk code and then later ask for details on your request while other times a controller will ask for your destination and then give you a squawk code. The controller said that this is all a personal choice by individual controllers and is not based on any policy or level of work.

What my instructor never taught me and why that might be a good thing

The Aviation Safety Reporting System, ASRS, is a repository of voluntary, confidential reports of various types of potential safety issues. It contains a lot of interesting reports that are fascinating reading. The one below is from a flight that occurred last year at SQL. Reading it makes you wonder what was this pilot thinking??? In particular, this pilot used a special VFR clearance to depart SQL when the airport was below VFR minimums. My CFI never taught me about SVFR and perhaps that is something that should never be taught to a private pilot.

Here is the narrative has reported by the pilot.

I arrived at the airport from San Francisco and although there was a cloud deck at approximately 600 FT I had noted a number of holes, which I had deemed sufficient to fly through and get on top for VFR conditions. In checking the conditions for the route the conditions were showing overcast at 600 FT with 8 miles of visibility in the bay area and clear to the south and east with 12,000 few in the central valley. I had made the trip the day before under the same conditions with no issue. As I was looking to plan my route, I saw that there was a hole with clear sunlight over Coyote Hills, which meant asking for a special VFR clearance with a cement plant departure and climbing on top as soon as I reached the hole. This was exactly what I had done the day before. In the worst case I had 8 miles of visibility so even with the low ceiling I could always make a u-turn and come back to the airport if there was a problem. I performed the normal preflight and asked for my clearance from the Tower. Once I received this I taxied to the run up area and when I was ready I asked for a clearance.

Just as I was taxiing onto the runway I was stopped by a large goose standing right on the 12 numbers which initiated a dialog with the Tower. Eventually the goose left the runway and I taxied onto the runway for a cement plant take off. In the time I was in the run up and paying attention to the goose I had not noticed that the conditions were changing rapidly and that the fog was moving very swiftly. Once I took off and made a 20-degree turn off the end of the runway, as is the normal procedure and then proceeded to turn towards the cement plant. At this point I was at approximately 400 FT and noticed there were a number of clouds below 600 FT that I needed to avoid. I began to weave around the clouds when the Tower called and inquired about my strange flight and if all was ok. I indicated that I was avoiding clouds and all was fine. At this time the Tower called to hand me NCT Approach. At about the same time I lost sight of the cement plant and the hole I was flying towards. The situation was rapidly getting worse. At that time I decided to turn back to San Carlos and radioed my intentions to the Tower.

I told the Tower that I was turning back due to the clouds and proceeded to turn into a cloud. What I had not realized was the 8 miles of visibility had closed to 0 behind me within a matter of minutes. I was in a cloud with no visibility in any direction. I told the Tower of my situation and tried to descend and see if I could get below the clouds. I was at 300 FT and could not see the water below me and remembered the power lines so I began a steep climb. I then tried turning left and right to see if I could find any visual reference. At this point being a VFR pilot in a cloud with complete white out conditions and no clue which way to go I began to panic. I tried to fly the plane and when I looked at the instruments I was descending at a rapid rate completely uncoordinated and given my height above the water did not have much time before I would crash. I stopped the descent at about 200 FT and remembered my flight instructor telling me to stare at the instruments, as you will have no idea what you are doing otherwise. I can honestly say that until I stared at the gauges I did not realize I was turning at a 45-degree bank while slipping. I immediately began to stabilize the plane and was reporting to the Tower my altitude to make sure there was no traffic that would be a factor.

Once the plane was stable I began to fly coordinated with the instruments and realized that I had no clue of where I was and certainly could not find the airport. I decided to try and get the GPS set so I could use the moving map however after 5 tries it would not accept my input of direct to San Carlos this may have been due to my hitting the wrong buttons in my state or a problem with the GPS. I was lost over the bay in the clouds with traffic and obstacles all around. The Tower was talking to me almost constantly and asking if I could see anything I reported that I was in total white out conditions. He asked if I was IFR certified and I reported I was not. He reported I was just about over Coyote Hills and that I should fly a westerly heading. I began to turn however I was still lost. I flew the heading and he told me there was an instructor in the Tower to help. He had me verify my altimeter with his and the heading I was flying at that point he directed me to fly a heading and report when I can see anything. I flew that heading for what seemed an eternity however could not have been more than a couple of minutes. Eventually the ground below came into sight. I reported seeing the power lines and was able to make sure I was above them however I still could not see the airport. I kept flying and then the 101 highway appeared almost instantly. I reported the highway in sight and then the airport. At that point there was a large hole above the airport and there was very good visibility and not a problem to land.

I made my go no go decision without paying attention to how fast the conditions were changing. As my Hobbs meter indicted .6 from the time I started the conditions went from 600 with 8 miles visibility to complete white out within minutes. The visual reference points all disappeared including the ones behind me that would get me back to the airport in case I could not go forward. From a risk management standpoint the margin for error with a 600-foot ceiling was too narrow. In looking back the questions I should have asked myself were

1.  What is the margin for error in this situation?

2.       What are the consequences of failure if I am wrong? Given the answer to 1 is 600 FT with power lines below and clouds all around the answer is very little. The answer to 2 is I will end up in a cloud and likely to crash into the Bay. An easy answer in hindsight I should have stayed on the ground.

G1000 Data Logging

Michael Vowles has been experimenting with the ability of the G1000 to log data on flights. He recently got this to work in a 172/G1000. The process was to place an SD card in the bottom slot of the MFD. That was it. After the flight, there was a CSV file on the SD card with an entry approximately every second. It records lat/lon, altitude, OAT, IAS, TAS, GS, Vertical speed, fuel, fuel flow, RPM, wind speed and direction, engine, and a number of other parameters. There is a web site that can take this information and put it into a useful format. Below is a report from a recent flight. Interesting data....