FAASTeam and SAFE - Weather

358 views

Published on

FAASTeam and SAFE - Weather

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
358
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 2011/10/01-005 (E) PP The focus of this forum is weather. The purpose is not to teach weather to the attendees. The purpose is to meet, discuss, exchange ideas on how to teach weather, and listen to what pilot examiners are looking for when they test weather tasks. There is not time or patience enough in this forum to cover all the charts or to go into depth on any one topic. Try to get the attendees talking and interacting. The presenter ’s part of the forum is to stimulate the interaction.
  • Presenter should emphasize that the objective is to openly discuss ways instructors and examiners, in their respective roles, can help improve the general aviation safety record as it relates to weather. The following slides will prompt discussions on the most common weather issues.
  • Presenter should emphasize the objective is to openly discuss ways instructors and examiners, in their respective roles, can help improve the general aviation safety record as it relates to weather. The following slides will prompt discussions on the most common weather issues.
  • Presenter will refer to the handout on the PTS excerpts. The discussion for slides 3-4-5 should revolve around how to provide effective instruction and testing for real-world flying based on these standards. DO YOU TEACH: how to find the weather data you need for a flight. Knowing where to find the information and knowing that the weather is going to change on you is a very important piece of the puzzle. DO YOU TEACH THE TOOLS TO USE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE FORECAST MIGHT NOT BE HOLDING TRUE? WHAT ARE SOME OF THESE TOOLS? DO YOU TEACH: Once it changes, where are you going? Do you have an exit plan before you go inadvertent IFR? Is it north? Or south?...have a plan
  • This will be open discussion to get ideas on how these tasks from the PTS can be used to help pilots make safe weather-related decisions.   To get the discussion going, ask: “If a student pilot can look at these maps and reports and identify high pressure, low pressure, cold fronts, and warm fronts, and translate an Area Forecast (show next slide), is that good enough for real-world flying? What else do you want this student to know?” DO YOU TEACH/TEST FOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH FRONTS/PRESSURE/TROUGHS?   Instructors and examiners might point out that they want pilots to go beyond just rote learning or memorization and exhibit the ability to apply their knowledge to realistic and perhaps unfamiliar situations.
  • This will be open discussion to get ideas on how these tasks from the PTS can be used to help pilots make safe weather-related decisions.   To get the discussion going, ask: “If a student pilot can look at these maps and reports and identify high pressure, low pressure, cold fronts, and warm fronts, and translate an Area Forecast, is that good enough for real-world flying? What else do you want this student to know?”   Instructors and examiners might point out that they want pilots to go beyond just rote learning or memorization and exhibit the ability to apply their knowledge to realistic and perhaps unfamiliar situations.
  • The Instrument Airplane PTS contains this Judgment Assessment Matrix as Appendix 3. have attendees refer to their handout. How are examiners testing using this? How are instructors preparing students using this?
  • The Instrument Airplane PTS contains this Judgment Assessment Matrix as Appendix 3. Have attendees look at handout.
  • Refer to the FAA Safety Briefing issue that includes an article on VFR into IMC. The fatality rate is computed by dividing 12 by 14. Fatality rate was not reported in the 2010 Nall Report. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS SHOULD BE: WHAT TYPE OF “ATTITUDE” OR MENTALITY LEADS A PILOT TO CONTINUE FROM VMC TO IMC, OR FOR THAT MATTER TO DEPART KNOWING THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FAVORABLE FOR VMC FLIGHT? WHAT CAN WE AS INSTRUCTORS DO TO TEACH “ANITDOTES” TO THESE “ATTITUDES” OR MENTALITIES?
  • Three examples of accidents related to VFR into IMC are given here. The presenter may choose one or more. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS SHOULD BE: WHAT TYPE OF “ATTITUDE” OR MENTALITY LEADS A PILOT TO CONTINUE FROM VMC TO IMC, OR FOR THAT MATTER TO DEPART KNOWING THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FAVORABLE FOR VMC FLIGHT? WHAT CAN WE AS INSTRUCTORS DO TO TEACH “ANITDOTES” TO THESE “ATTITUDES” OR MENTALITIES? Here is an example #1 of VFR into IMC. Presenter may use it to motivate discussion. Slide shows bullets with key points from the following preliminary accident report. NTSB Identification: CEN11FA240 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Sunday, March 20, 2011 in Baraboo, WI Aircraft: CESSNA 150D, registration: N4178U Injuries: 2 Fatal.   On March 20, 2011, about 1827 central daylight time, a Cessna 150D, N4178U, impacted trees and terrain near Baraboo, Wisconsin. The student pilot and passenger were fatally injured. The entire airplane received substantial damage due to tree and ground impact. The airplane was owned and operated by the student pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed. The flight originated from the Lake in the Hills Airport (3CK), Lake in the Hills, Illinois, at an unconfirmed time and was en route to the Reedsburg Municipal Airport (C35), Reedsburg, Wisconsin.   The weather conditions at the Baraboo Wisconsin Dells Airport (KDLL), about 10 nautical miles northeast of the accident site included overcast ceiling at 700 feet above ground level, visibility of 2-1/2 miles, and drizzle. The accident site elevation was about 450 feet higher than the elevation at DLL. First responders to the accident area reported that search efforts were hampered by dense fog.
  • This is the second of three accidents. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS SHOULD BE: WHAT TYPE OF “ATTITUDE” OR MENTALITY LEADS A PILOT TO CONTINUE FROM VMC TO IMC, OR FOR THAT MATTER TO DEPART KNOWING THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FAVORABLE FOR VMC FLIGHT? WHAT CAN WE AS INSTRUCTORS DO TO TEACH “ANITDOTES” TO THESE “ATTITUDES” OR MENTALITIES? NTSB Identification: CEN11FA247 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Sunday, March 27, 2011 in Dickens, TX Aircraft: STINSON 108, registration: N97383 Injuries: 3 Fatal.   On March 27, 2011, about 0600 central daylight time, a Stinson 108, N97383, was substantially damaged upon impact with terrain near Dickens, Texas. The private pilot and two passengers were fatally injured. The airplane was mostly consumed by a post-impact fire. The airplane was registered to and operated by a private individual under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which operated without a flight plan. The flight originated from a private airfield at an undetermined time. The wreckage was found about 1300 in a pasture area by a local resident. There are no known witnesses to the accident. At 0553, an automated weather observation facility at Lubbock International Airport (LBB), located 52 nautical miles to the west, reported winds from 060 degrees at 9 knots, visibility 5 miles with mist, overcast skies at 500 feet, temperature 39 degrees Fahrenheit (F), dew point 36 degrees F., and a barometric pressure of 29.83 inches of Mercury. Updated on Apr 13 2011 12:11PM
  • This is the third of three accidents. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS SHOULD BE: WHAT TYPE OF “ATTITUDE” OR MENTALITY LEADS A PILOT TO CONTINUE FROM VMC TO IMC, OR FOR THAT MATTER TO DEPART KNOWING THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FAVORABLE FOR VMC FLIGHT? WHAT CAN WE AS INSTRUCTORS DO TO TEACH “ANITDOTES” TO THESE “ATTITUDES” OR MENTALITIES? See factual report in supporting documents. From the NTSB preliminary report: The recently certificated, non-instrument rated, private pilot took off in conditions of nighttime darkness from a coastal valley airport and climbed over a sparsely lighted area toward rising terrain. The airplane entered low stratus clouds that were not visible to the pilot until the airplane flew into them. He attempted to reverse course back toward the airport; however, during the turn the right wingtip contacted terrain in a plowed field and the airplane cartwheeled to the ground. The accident site was 4 miles from the departure airport and 120 feet higher elevation. The pilot obtained his certificate about 3 weeks prior and had 55 total flying hours, which included 5 hours at night. The pilot reported there were no mechanical problems with the aircraft.
  • To prompt discussion, ask the following questions: DO YOU TEACH THE TOOLS TO RECOGNIZE THE POSSIBILITY OF TSRA? WHAT ARE THESE TOOLS? DO YOU TEACH THE APPLICATION AND CORRELATION OF THESE TOOLS, OR JUST TO THE ROTE &/OR UNDERSTANDING LEVEL? DO YOU TEACH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SIGMET AND A CONVECTIVE SIGMET? “ How do you teach thunderstorm avoidance? “ How do you train TEACH pilots to know what to do if they encounter this weather in flight?” “ Do pilots understand the consequences of flying near or into a storm?”
  • To prompt discussion, note that a large portion of student pilot accidents are from the landing and go-around phases of flight. Use the 2 examples which follow as needed, followed by these questions to prompt discussion: DO YOU TEACH TOOLS TO RECOGNIZE WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED IN THE ABSENCE OF ATIS/ASOS/AWOS/WINDSOCK? “ How do we account for unexpected conditions pilots might encounter?” “ How can we safely train AND TEACH for low-level go-arounds to prepare pilots for similar situations?”
  • To prompt discussion, point out that the Private and Instrument PTS do not specifically refer to icing conditions. The Instrument PTS includes analysis of freezing levels in the Weather tasks. See handout for specific sections of the private and instrument test standards. Ask, “Do we need to train TEACH and test private and instrument pilots for knowledge of icing avoidance and escape?” What tools do you have your students use to determine forecast icing?
  • To prompt discussion, ask, “There have been accidents due to the pilot’s inability to achieve sufficient altitude and/or airspeed on climbout – do pilots understand what ‘density altitude’ is, beyond the basic definition? What defines “high density altitude?”
  • Refer to the Personal Minimums handout. Ask the audience for feedback – is this a good teaching tool? There is no direct reference to Personal Minimums in the PTS. Use the following example to prompt discussion. This accident includes a number of weather and judgment factors.   http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20101102X13215&key=1 NTSB Identification: WPR11FA032 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Monday, October 25, 2010 in Lander, WY Aircraft: MOONEY M20J, registration: N201HF Injuries: 4 Fatal.   On October 25, 2010, about 1352 mountain daylight time (MDT), a Mooney M20J, N201HF, collided with mountainous terrain near Lander, Wyoming. The airplane became the subject of a week-long search after it was lost from ground-based radio communications and radar tracking facilities about 45 minutes after it departed from Jackson Hole Airport (JAC), Jackson Hole, Wyoming, on October 25, 2010. …. According to information provided by representatives from Lockheed Martin (LM) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), on the morning of the accident, the pilot obtained his initial telephone weather briefing about 0920 MDT. About 1040, he telephoned again, obtained an abbreviated weather briefing, and filed an IFR flight plan. …. The destination was Pierre Regional Airport (PIR), Pierre, South Dakota, and the filed altitude was 9,000 feet. Both weather briefings included AIRMETs (Airmen's Meteorological Information) for mountain obscuration, turbulence, and icing along the planned flight routes and altitudes. The airplane departed JAC just after 1300, and was in communication with and tracked by FAA air traffic control (ATC) at Salt Lake City Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). The first radar target was recorded about 1309, and the airplane was tracked until about 1336, when it was at an altitude of 14,000 feet. About 1341, the pilot filed a pilot report via radio, which stated that he was at 14,000 feet, and was encountering light chop, and a trace of rime icing. The airplane was re-acquired by ground radar about 1346, still at the same altitude. About 1352, the last radar target associated with the airplane was recorded, with an indicated altitude of 13,300 feet. Shortly before that, the pilot radioed to ATC that he was unable to maintain altitude due to mountain wave activity….The pilot held a private pilot certificate with airplane single land and instrument airplane ratings. The airplane was first registered to him in January 2010. It was manufactured in 1977, and was equipped with a non-turbocharged Lycoming IO-360 series engine.
  • Hand out quiz to all those who wish to get Wings credit.
  • FAASTeam and SAFE - Weather

    1. 1. Weather
    2. 2. WelcomeWe’re here to:• Identify weather-related safetyissues among our pilots• Discuss how we, as instructorsand examiners, can improve pilottraining• Help current and future pilots flysafely!Aviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    3. 3. Weather and AccidentsWe’ll explore ways to address themost common scenarios, including:• VFR into IMC• Flight into storms• Icing• Weather-related landing accidents
    4. 4. Practical Test StandardsLet’s look at the weather tasks in the Practical Test Standards,and discuss how we train these tasks.• Private Pilot• Instrument RatingAviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    5. 5. The PTSWhat should pilots know about “reading and analyzing” this weather chart?Aviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    6. 6. What about Area Forecasts?The PTSME NH VTNRN ME...SCT040 BKN060 TOP FL250. OCNL BKN040. SCT -SHRA/ISOL-TSRA. CB TOP FL350. 21Z BKN040. ISOL -SHRA. WND W G25KT. 03ZSKC. OTLK...VFR.VT/NRN NH/RMNDR ME MTNS...SCT-BKN040 BKN060 TOP FL250. SCTSHRA/ISOL TSRA. CB TOP FL350. 03Z BKN040. OCNL VIS 3-5SM BR.OTLK...MVFR CIG BR.SRN NH/RMNDR ME...SCT040 BKN100 TOP FL250. OCNL BKN040 IN WDLYSCT -SHRA/ISOL -TSRA BECMG AFT 19Z SCT TSRA. TS POSS SEV. CB TOPFL400. 04Z BKN020. WDLY SCT -SHRA. OTLK...MVFR CIG SHRA BR.Aviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    7. 7. Risk Assessment Matrix
    8. 8. Risk Assessment Matrix
    9. 9. VFR into IMCThe most common -- and mostfatal -- type of weatheraccident.• Of 14 such accidents in2009, 12 were fatal *• 86% fatality rate• Let’s explore ways toaddress the pilot’s planningand decision-making for thisscenario.*2010 Nall Report of accidents in 2009: http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/10nall.pdf
    10. 10. What training wouldprevent this?• NTSB Identification: CEN11FA240• Baraboo WI, Cessna 150D• Student pilot and passenger – both fatal• Weather measured 10 miles from accident site:– 700 overcast ceiling– 2 ½ miles visibility– Drizzle• Additional question: Are there instructor andexaminer responsibilities here?
    11. 11. What training wouldprevent this?• CEN11FA247 Dickens, TX• Stinson 108• 3 fatalities• Closest observation– Winds 060 at 9 knots– Visibility 5 miles– Mist– Overcast 500 feet– Temperature 39° F– Dew point 36° F
    12. 12. What training wouldprevent this?• LAX00FA354 San Luis Obispo, CA on September 30, 2000• PA38 night flight• One fatality, one serious injury• Sheriffs Deputy . . . reported that weather conditionsconsisted of low clouds and fog with heavy drizzle . . .• A second deputy, who is a commercial certificated pilot,estimated the overcast ceiling was at 300 feet and thevisibility was near zero.• According to the Federal Aviation Administration . . . The pilotdid not receive a preflight weather briefing
    13. 13. ThunderstormsIs it enough to teach pilots to stayat least 20 NM from a thunderstorm?Aviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    14. 14. WindsMaximum cross-wind?Maximum gusts?Tailwinds?Wind shear?How do pilots develop theirown minimums?Elaine Kauh, 2011
    15. 15. IcingThe Instrument PTS lists specialemphasis areas including icingcondition operational hazards,anti-icing and de-icing equipment,differences, and approved useand operations.Is this enough?What about VFR pilots?Aviation Weather Services, Advisory Circular 00-45G, Change 1 (July 2010)
    16. 16. Density AltitudePersonal MinimumsHow do you teach and testfor conditions that canvary greatly in differentregions?
    17. 17. ADM and WeatherHazardous attitudes• How do they relate toweather-relatedaccidents?• Are you teaching andtesting for safe decision-making?
    18. 18. Conclusion• We can look at ways to use the PTS effectively• Scenario-based instruction is another tool toteach weather-related safety
    19. 19. www.FAASafety.gov www.SAFEPilots.orgThank you to Elaine Kauh for developing the weather forum.

    ×