Professional Pilots RUmor NEtwork (PPRuNe)

                                                         Ash Clouds Threaten Air Traffic

The major news of today is the disruption of air traffic in Europe.
Like most of you, I wanted to find a site that would keep me informed about the status of the volcanic ash cloud in Europe. I started out at the Google News site and while there was a lot of information about the cloud, it was very general in nature and sometimes conflicting in nature.

After a couple hours of surfing, I ended up on the Professional Pilots Rumor Network (PPRuNE) forum at: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/412103-ash-clouds-threaten-air-traffic.html
It lists the number of currently active users at 2,734.

This was not my first visit but the large number of pilots on this forum make it a great place to find the hottest items.  Here I found more than a than 1,300 posts on the ash cloud with the first post showing a great image of the event taken on April 14 the first day of the eruption.

The Rumor-News forum is just one of more than 50 forums that cover almost every aspect of aviation available on the PPRuNe site.

Impending Loss of WAAS Intelsat Galaxy 15 Satellite

WAAS IntelSat Galaxy 15 Satellite

Orbital Sciences photo 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced on Thursday, April 15, 2010 they have lost control of the Satellite that carries the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) package. It loss will occur some time within the next two weeks to a month. The impact of this loss will be a degradation in the accuracy of the Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) signals in the north western portion of the United States WAAS coverage, especially in Alaska.

The WAAS system normally requires three geostationary satellites to provide coverage throughout Canada, Alaska, USA and Mexico.

The resolution to this situation is a replacement of the satellite will be required. The time frame to make this happen could be as long as 16 months. During the time in which there is just one satellite, GPS users in North America may experience loss of WAAS accuracies for periods of up to five minutes each occurring as many as five times in the year.

No Cost for On Line Access to all 18 ICAO Annexes

I recently required access to the International Civil Aviation Organization's Annexes which contain the rules and procedures that apply to flight in International airspace. My first attempt was to Google my way to the ICAO home page. Here I found a link to the price list for a hard copy of each of the Annexes that varied from a low of $11 to high of $24 each.

Found along with the Annexes were the 15 ICAO Documents including Document 4444 as well as Document 7030, Document 8168 and Document 4132 Manual of Radiotelephony.

Not wanting to pay a total of up to $500 by purchasing them I did another Google search to see if they were available on a web site. After much Googling, I was successful! You can view them and download and print them at no cost other than your paper and ink cartridge costs.

The site is a Danish website at:
http://dcaa.slv.dk:8000/icaodocs/

Please help me pass this source out to the pilot group.
If this information assisted you in any way, please feel free to use the Blog's comment ability to let me know it helped you.
Thanks!
Dick

Welcome to The Iconoclastic Aviators Blog!

Hi!
Welcome to the newest aviation blog on the internet. We have tried to make our posts of interest to pilots of various experience levels. The main purpose of the Blog is to encourage thoughtful pilots an opportunity to express them here. The subjects have been selected to inspire discussions both pro and con.

If you feel the time you spent here is of value to you, please let other pilots know about it. The more participants we have, the better!

I had an initial list of approximately 100 e-mail addresses and have sent an e-mail invitation to each of them. I just sent the last e-mail an hour ago. (Thursday, April 8, 2010)

Here is a list as of today (April 8, 2010) of all 43 posts currently on the Blog.
I would suggest taking a look at this list and choosing which posts you want to view from the Blog Archive just to the left side of this note first.

Welcome to The Iconoclastic Aviators Blog!
Northeast International Operations Seminar
▼ March (7)
"New York Approach, Falcon 900, I am canceling my ...
Displaced Thresholds and Landing - Part II
My opinion about displaced thresholds and landing
Google Analytics is working on the Blog
Installed Google Analytics
Part 6 WGS-84 Versus PE-90.02 update
New Mandatory National Transportation Safety Board...

▼ February (9)
Colgan Air Pilots poorly treated by NTSB summary s...
Part 5 Integrity and Current World GPS status
Part 4 WGS-84 What is it? Current World GPS Stat...
Part 3 WGS-84 What is it? Current world GPS status...
Part 2 WGS-84 What is it? Current world GPS status...
Part 1 WGS-84 What is it? Current world GPS status...
Thoughts On Landing Touchdown Targets and Touchdow...
Unconventional Thoughts on Aircraft Maximum Gross ...
What is the technically correct response to this t...

▼ January (25)
A critical look at use of reduced thrust takeoffs....
Weather deviations while in radar contact with Air...
Automated oceanic position reports via Automatic D...
This post is for you Lou...Use of a satellite tele...
Randomness is good!
Global Positioning System (GPS) Calculated Altitud...
Use your Pilot in Command authority
Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast ground ...
China launches third Beidou GPS navigation Satelli...
European Union announces increase in size of Galil...
Visual Flight Rules operations while in Airspace A...
Air Traffic Control expected climb and descent rat...
The Antonov 225 has a new paint job!
Resolved! Use of flight simulators to maintain in...
Use of desktop simulators to maintain instrument p...
GPS Satellite constellation to be increased from 2...
The best substitute for brains is fuel.
Icing and dangers of attempting to get on top by D...
In the United States, airports have no runways num...
There are more Californians than there are Canadia...
Today in the USA, there are only two basic kinds o...
There is no Airspace A over Hawaii.
The Boeing 787 does not use Pratt & Whitney engine...
The Boeing 787 does not have winglets.
When pilots fly the A-380 into the United States a...

Both Don and I appreciate your suggestions for specific posts. Don't hesitate to let us know.

Northeast International Operations Seminar

Coming to Morristown - Tuesday, April 13, 2010

For those unable to attend the National Business Aviation Association's (NBAA) 37th Annual International Operators Conference, the Westchester Aviation Association (WAA), the Teterboro Users Group (TUG) and the Morristown Aviation Association (MAA) will offer a day-long International Operations Seminar for pilots, scheduler/dispatchers, aircraft technicians and flight attendants.

The event will be held at the Westin Governor Morris Hotel in Morristown, NJ, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and will feature Dr. Mark Rosekind, nominee for the National Transportation Safety Board. RSVP forms are available at local associations and must be returned by March 24 to dprovan@cae.com. For more information, contact NBAA's Dean Saucier at dsaucier@nbaa.org.

The presentations will include flying in Russia and a World Geodetic Standard 1984 (WGS-84) versus Parameters of the Earth (PE-90.02) comparison.

"New York Approach, Falcon 900, I am canceling my IFR flight plan - request traffic advisories."

Is there ever a good reason to cancel your Instrument Fight Rules (IFR) flight plan? Is it possible to operate under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and not compromise the safety of flight? I believe the answer to both questions is yes.

Based upon many discussions with other pilots, I believe most pilots think flying is safer while operating under Instrument Flight Rules.  When I ask them to explain why they think it is safer, the answer most pilots will offer the explanation of having an Air Traffic Controller watching over their flight is the reason.

The fact so many pilots think this may in fact contribute to a less safe situation. Their belief will result in a much less thorough traffic watch as well as a more relaxed overall operation. I have taken the opportunity to cancel my IFR flight plan while flying with a both a co-pilot and a flight engineer.  Their reaction was almost uniform with both of them almost coming to attention and becoming very interested in looking out the windows. You might say the safety of our flight was enhanced by the canceling of the IFR flight plan.

I must add the conditions under which I would cancel the IFR flight plan had been very carefully considered.  First of all, the weather would always include excellent visibility and clearance from clouds.  We had to be in radar contact and receiving traffic advisories from the controller as well.

Now let me ask you this question. Specifically, what service does a pilot receive while under Instrument Flight Rules that he does not receive while under Visual Flight Rules operations?

Answer: The air traffic controller is obligated to assure separation from other "known" IFR traffic. This is his first priority. Traffic advisories are only given to IFR traffic if workload on the part of the controller permits.

This is true also of VFR traffic receiving traffic advisories.  They are only provided on a work load permitting basis on the part of the controller.  Many pilots may be operating on the incorrect belief that flights operating on an IFR flight plan receive priority for traffic advisories over flights operating under VFR.

This may be the primary reason why so many pilots think flying under IFR is safer than flying under VFR.

Another question, does the air traffic controller have an option to refuse your IFR cancellation?  The answer is no.  He neither approves nor disapproves an IFR cancellation.  He only has the option to acknowledge it.  The pilot in command is the sole determiner and is responsible for choosing which set of rules either IFR or VFR he follows for his operation.

Displaced Thresholds and Landing - Part II

JFK Has Five Displaced Thresholds 

What are the reasons a permanent displaced threshold will be established for a specific runway? There are only two reasons.  The first one is if an obstacle penetrates the obstacle clearance plane.  A displaced threshold will be established to assure clearance from the obstacle while making an approach in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). The second reason is for noise abatement. As far as I know, there is no way to tell them apart.    

I made an attempt in 1997 to get the FAA to consider re-locating the five different displaced thresholds in place at JFK in light of the newer, quieter stage II and stage III aircraft using JFK.  The FAA actually did do a study to see what the cost of moving the displaced thresholds would be.  The cost of the computer time to move the thresholds was estimated to be in excess of $100,000.

The reason for the high cost was the need to re-survey the heights and locations of all the man made obstacles that had been built in the obstacle clearance planes for the approaches.  As a result of the high cost of doing this, the displaced thresholds will most likely remain in their current locations. I doubt if we ever see them change.

Once again, I want to re-state the fact there is nothing that prevents you from touching down prior to the displaced threshold.  You will note upon inspection of the actual runway there are many tire marks prior to almost all of the painted threshold markings.

Consider the situation of a requirement for a no flap landing.  Without the use of wing flaps, the approach and touch down speeds are going to be much higher than normal.  Add to the situation a high gross weight condition along with a 9 knot tail wind and the actual touch down speed may exceed 230 knots. I recognize this set of conditions may be highly unlikely but it still remains a possibility.  If you are landing at JFK on runway 31L, I doubt very much if you would choose to land on or beyond the displaced threshold.

If there is an operational need for you to use all the runway, use it!