FAA Safety Briefing - May-Jun 2024

May/June 2024

IFR

Flying

6 It’s a Confusing World

Up There10 Into the Future 14 Maybe Not Today …

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Federal Aviation

Administration

ISSN: 1057-9648

FAA Safety Briefing

May/June 2024

Volume 63/Number 3

Pete Buttigieg Secretary of Transportation

Michael Whitaker Administrator

David Boulter Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety

Larry Fields Executive Director, Flight Standards ServiceTom Hoffmann Editor

James Williams Associate Editor / Photo Editor

Rebekah Waters Associate Editor

Nicole Hartman Associate Editor

Paul Cianciolo Associate Editor / Social Media

Sunghee Cho Art Director

Published six times a year, FAA Safety Briefing, formerly

FAA Aviation News, promotes aviation safety by discussing current technical,

regulatory, and procedural aspects affecting the safe operation and

maintenance of aircraft. Although based on current FAA policy and rule interpretations, all material is advisory or informational in nature and should not be construed to have regulatory effect. Certain details of accidents

described herein may have been altered to protect the privacy of those involved.

The FAA does not officially endorse any goods, services, materials, or products of

manufacturers that may be referred to in an article. All brands, product names,

company names, trademarks, and service marks are the properties of their

respective owners. All rights reserved.

The Office of Management and Budget has approved the use

of public funds for printing FAA Safety Briefing.ABOUT THIS ISSUE…

The May/June 2024 issue of FAA Safety Briefing

focuses on general aviation instrument flight

training and IFR proficiency. Articles in this issue address the importance of having both the right physical and mental flying skills required in today’s challenging IFR environment. We also review ways to help you stay proficient and be prepared for emergencies when flying in the clouds.

Contact Information

The magazine is available on the internet at:

www.faa.gov/safety_briefing

Comments or questions should be directed to the staff by:

• Emailing: SafetyBriefing@faa.gov

• Calling: (202) 267-1100

• Tweeting: @FAASafetyBrief

Subscription Information

The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office sells FAA Safety Briefing on subscription and mails up to four renewal notices.

For New Orders:

Subscribe via the internet at https://bookstore.gpo.gov/products/faa-safety-briefing ,

telephone (202) 512-1800 or toll-free 1-866-512-1800, or use the self-mailer form in the center of this magazine and send to Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC, 20402-9371.

Subscription Problems/Change of Address:

Send your mailing label with your comments/request to Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Contact Center, Washington, DC 20408-9375. You can also call (202) 512-1800 or 1-866-512-1800 and ask for Customer Service, or fax your information to (202) 512-2104.

May/June 2024 1The FAA Safety Policy Voice of Non-commercial General Aviation

6It’s a Confusing World Up There

The Specifics of Spatial Disorientation

by Nicole Hartman and Rebekah Waters

10Into the FutureHow Leveraging Technology Can Help Build Proficiency in a Busy World

by James Williams

14Maybe Not Today …Avoiding the Perils (and Regrets)

of VFR into IMC

by Sabrina Woods

18Broken Glass ProceduresUnderstanding and Navigating Glass Avionics Failures

by William Dubois

DEPARTMENTS

2 Jumpseat: an executive policy

perspective

3 ATIS: GA news and current events

5 Aeromedical Advisory: a checkup on

all things aeromedical

23 Checklist: FAA resources and

safety reminders

24 Drone Debrief: drone safety roundup

25 Nuts , Bolts, and Electrons:

GA maintenance issues

26 Vertically Speaking: safety issues for

rotorcraft pilots

27 Flight Forum: letters from the

Safety Briefing mailbag

28 On Final: an editor’s perspective

Inside back cover

FAA Faces: FAA employee profile

2 FAA Safety BriefingJUMPSEAT an executive policy perspective

LARRY FIELDS, FLIGHT STANDARDS SERVICE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

OF SOUND MIND AND BODY

When it comes to flying by instrument

flight rules (IFR), pilots need to learn,

practice, and understand a great deal to

operate safely in this visually restricted

environment. That includes everything

from expanding your aeronautical know-how, to executing the neces-

sary procedures and maneuvers with

precision, to being a subject matter

expert with the avionics to which you are entrusting your life. It’s a significant

step up from learning how to fly with a

real horizon always in sight. But there’s

one common, and sometimes over -

looked element in having what it takes

to be a successful and safe instrument

pilot — the human element.

Human factors loom large in the

world of instrument flying and it is something that needs to be both

acknowledged and thoroughly

reviewed to understand its impact.

And it’s not just human factors in the

physiological sense, but also in the behavioral sense. We can see the latter

more with how we’re able to effec-

tively interpret and understand tech-nology, maintain composure during

an emergency, and/or rationalize the

limits of our skills and abilities when external pressures are present.

Y ou’ll find human factors covered

extensively in many FAA resources,

including being front and center

in the Instrument Flying Handbook (Chapter 3). It’s also at the core of nine new FAA Safety Team online courses

that cover human performance, safety

culture, teamwork, and decision-mak-

ing, among several other areas. Go to

bit.ly/HFcourses to check it out.

This issue of FAA Safety Briefing

makes for another good resource to help better your understanding of IFR

flying and recognize its intersection with human factors. Y ou’ll find tips

and perspectives that can help you

not only navigate the Victor airways,

but also steer clear of the many aeronautical pitfalls an IFR environ-

ment presents.

For starters, IFR flying is a highly

perishable skill requiring a specific set of flight experience requirements to

act as pilot in command. But there are

myriad ways in which to practice and

gain that experience, including some you can employ from the comfort

of home. For more on this, proceed

direct to, “Into the Future. ” The article presents several good options to keep

your flying skills sharp and shows

how varying degrees of fidelity can

impact your choices toward gaining

and maintaining proficiency.

It’s well known that the accident

category that has traditionally had one of the highest fatality rates is VFR

flight into instrument meteorological

conditions (IMC). The article “Maybe Not Today” dives into many of the

reasons why this phenomenon con-

tinues to plague pilots of all skill levels and provides some sound strategies

to keep this killer at bay. It’s relevant

reading for pilots with or without an instrument rating.

Flying with no visual reference or

horizon can cause us humans to do

some odd things, many of which are

completely contradictory to basic safety if unprepared. For a closer look at spatial disorientation (an all-too-common term used in NTSB acci-

dent reports), see “It’s a Confusing

World Up There. ” The article pro-

vides a comprehensive overview of

“spatial D” and explains how the three-dimensional environment of

flight creates sensory conflicts and

illusions that make it difficult or even impossible to stay oriented. On that

same note, we also hear from the

FAA ’s Federal Air Surgeon, Dr. Susan

Northrup, on ways certain medi-

cations can sometimes exacerbate those disorienting conditions in the

Aeromedical Advisory department.

We hope the information within

these pages will help provide a pathway for being a more well-

rounded aviator with regard to IFR

flight. Remember — having an

instrument rating does not necessarily make you a competent all-weather

pilot. It is issued on the assumption

that you have the good judgment to

avoid situations beyond your capabili-

ties. Any instrument training that you undertake should help you learn the

essential physical flying skills, but just

as important is the ability to cultivate, maintain, and constantly refine the

proper mental skills that guide us to

safely conduct an IFR flight.

Safe Flying!

THERE’S ONE COMMON, AND

SOMETIMES OVERLOOKED ELEMENT IN HAVING WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A SUCCESSFUL AND

SAFE INSTRUMENT PILOT – THE

HUMAN ELEMENT.

May/June 2024 3

ATISGA news and current events

AVIATION NEWS ROUNDUP

Updated Advisory Circular on

Engine Power-Loss Accidents

The FAA recently released AC

20-105C, Reciprocating Engine Power-

Loss Accident Prevention and Trend

Monitoring , which focuses on the

circumstances surrounding engine

power-loss accidents and recommen-

dations on how to prevent them. The

AC also provides charts and advice for

engine trend monitoring.

The updated AC highlights and

discusses several operational causes of engine failure, including inadequate preflight inspections, fuel contami-

nation and misfuelling, collapsed fuel

bladders, exceeding time between

overhauls, poor engine operating

technique, and maintenance mis-handling. Lack of pilot training and

mismanagement of the engine control

systems by the pilot remains the leading cause of engine failure.

Y ou can find this AC at

bit.ly/AC20-105C.

FAA Expands B4UFLY Services for

Drone Pilots

The FAA is now

partnering with several compa-nies to offer drone

pilots more places

to receive official

airspace awareness

information. The B4UFLY service shows recreational drone flyers where

they can and cannot fly.

The FAA has approved Airspace

Link, AutoPylot, Avision, and

UASidekick to provide services

through desktop and mobile appli-

cations. These companies will offer multiple ways to access B4UFLY and

provide recreational flyers with the latest airspace awareness information directly from the agency. For more

information, visit bit.ly/b4ufly.

Drone pilots can also find FAA-

approved partners who provide

near-real-time airspace authori-

zations and information at bit.ly/LAANCsuppliers.

Laser Strikes Increase to

Highest Numbers

Dangerous laser strikes topped all

previous records in 2023. The FAA

received 13,304 reports from pilots

last year, a 41% increase over 2022.

Shining a laser at an aircraft is a

serious safety threat. Many types of high-powered lasers can incapacitate

pilots, many of whom are flying air -

planes with hundreds of passengers.

Pilots have reported 313 injuries since

the FAA began recording data on laser

strikes in 2010.

People who shine lasers at aircraft

face FAA fines of up to $11,000 per violation and up to $30,800 for multi-

ple laser incidents. Violators can

also face criminal penalties from federal, state, and local law enforce-

ment agencies.

To identify laser-strike trends,

the FAA ’s visualization tool shows

laser-strike data from 2010 to 2023 and highlights trends by geographic

area, per capita data, and by time

of day and year. The FAA shares the information, at bit.ly/49HdgRl, to draw attention to the danger -

ously high rate. Laser report data by year can also be downloaded at bit.

ly/3Uaakb1.

The FAA strongly encourages the

public to report laser strikes to the FAA and local law enforcement agen-

cies at bit.ly/reportlaser .

Learn more about the dangers of

lasers by visiting bit.ly/49swuJX and by reading the article “Blinded By the

Light” at bit.ly/BlindedLight.

FAA Accelerates ATC Hiring

by Enhancing College

Training Program

The FAA is working to accelerate

its training and hiring of air traffic

controllers through an Enhanced Air

Traffic-Collegiate Training Initiative

(AT-CTI) program. The Enhanced AT-CTI program will bolster the

current hiring pipeline by allowing

the FAA to hire more candidates who

can begin facility training immedi

ately upon graduation.

The FAA is authorizing institutions

in the AT-CTI program to provide the same thorough curriculum offered

at the FAA Air Traffic Controller Academy. After graduating from one

of the eligible schools, new hires can

immediately begin localized training at an air traffic facility. These grad-

uates must still pass the Air Traffic

Skills Assessment (ATSA) exam and

meet medical and security require-

ments. For more information, go to bit.ly/FAACTI.

The Enhanced AT-CTI program

is one of the many actions the FAA is taking to increase the number of

controllers and improve training

following the release of the National

Airspace System Safety Review Team

4 FAA Safety Briefing

ATIS GA news and current eventsReport. This includes year-round

hiring for experienced controllers

from the military and private industry,

filling every seat at the FAA Academy,

and finishing the deployment of

upgraded tower simulator systems in 95 facilities by December 2025.

New Pilot Minute Video Covers

BasicMed Requirements

Some pilots may wonder, if I’m on

BasicMed would I ever need to come

back through the FAA again? In a

recent episode of the Pilot Minute

video series, Federal Air Surgeon Dr.

Susan Northrup reviews the require-

ments for BasicMed and the mental

health, neurologic, or cardiac con-

ditions that would require a pilot by law, to be reexamined by an aviation

medical examiner (AME). See this

and past Pilot Minute videos at

bit.ly/FAAPilotMinute .

Latest GA Activity Survey Underway

The FAA ’s 46th annual

General Aviation and Part

135 Activity Survey (GA

Survey), reporting on the

calendar year 2023, is now

underway. The GA Survey

is the only source of infor -

mation on the GA fleet, the

number of hours flown,

and the ways people use GA aircraft.

Data from this survey

are used by governmental

agencies and industry to

compute safety metrics such as fatal accident rates; understand the impact of the GA industry on jobs,

economic output, and investments

in aviation infrastructure; track the

success of safety initiatives, including

avionics recommendations; determine funding for infrastructure and service

needs; and assess the impact of regu-

latory changes.

Selected participants will receive

an email or postcard invitation asking them to complete the survey online. A

mail survey is sent to those not com-

pleting online. The survey only takes 10-15 minutes to complete and your

responses are confidential.

The FAA and industry need accu-

rate data on a broad range of aircraft. Y our participation is voluntary, but

we need your help. We encourage

everyone who is contacted to respond

to the survey so that all aviation activity is represented. If you have

questions, call 800-826-1797 or email

infoaviationsurvey@tetratech.com.

Previous survey results can be

reviewed at bit.ly/GenAvSurvey .HAI Undergoes Rebrand to Encompass All Vertical Aviation

In response to the rapidly expanding

vertical aviation industry, Helicopter

Association International (HAI)

has changed its name to Vertical Aviation International (V AI). By

widening its focus to encompass all

vertical aviation, the association will

expand its advocacy with legislators

and regulators and provide a forum where all sectors of vertical flight can

collaborate on shared challenges, such

as vertical aviation infrastructure, certification of new technology, and

the safe integration of that technology

into the airspace.

The decision to rebrand stems from

the rapid expansion and technological evolution occurring in the vertical aviation industry. In addition to a new

logo, V AI has renamed its annual con-

ference and trade show VERTICON. The first edition of the show will be

held in Dallas in March 2025.

V AI is currently developing a new

website, verticalavi.org, which will

be launched in late summer 2024. In the meantime, visitors can go to

Rotor.org .

V AI is open to all manufacturers,

operators, suppliers, vendors, pilots, maintenance technicians, and aviation

professionals who serve or support

aircraft capable of vertical or short

takeoff and landing.

#FLYSAFE GA SAFETY ENHANCEMENT TOPICS Please visit bit.ly/FlySafeMedium for more information on these and other topics.

MAY

Human Factors —

emphasizing the benefits

of human factors training for pilots.

JUNE

Regulatory Roadblock Reductions —

how streamlining the certification/approval of GA safety equipment can help owners adopt these technologies.

May/June 2024 5

AEROMEDICAL ADVISORYa checkup on all things aeromedical

DR. SUSAN NORTHRUP , FAA FEDERAL AIR SURGEON

MISFORTUNE WITH MEDICATIONS

Given the IFR theme of this issue, I

thought it would be useful to review

several fatal accidents in which

spatial disorientation and/or med-

ication possibly contributed to the

outcome (special thanks to Dr. Loren Groff at the NTSB for his assistance)

and explain why we place restrictions

on some of these conditions/medica-tions. Here are a few examples listed

by the NTSB’s Case Analysis and

Reporting Online (CAROL) number

(carol.ntsb.gov).

CEN21LA089: A student pilot with

a passenger on board, took off into night, instrument conditions despite

having been advised that he could not carry passengers and was specif-

ically told not to fly that day due to

weather. At his Class III medical six

months earlier, he had not disclosed

his history of ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) nor

the use of Vyvanse, an amphetamine.

The latter’s concentration greatly

exceeded the therapeutic level and

both it and the ADHD would have made him prone to impulsivity and

poor decision-making. Following 20

minutes of erratic flight after take-off, he entered a spiral descent that led to

a fatal crash.

CEN14GA135: The commercial

instrument pilot impacted the terrain

on a fire-spotting mission in marginal VFR conditions. The Cessna 210 was

instrument equipped but not main-

tained for instrument flight. There was no evidence that the pilot obtained a

weather briefing prior to flight. Three

weeks prior to the accident, the pilot

had started nortriptyline, an anti-de-

pressant also used for chronic pain, and tramadol, a synthetic opioid used

for pain control. Neither is authorized

for use when flying. While the pilot had disclosed the chronic knee pain, he began both medications after his

last FAA medical examination.

ERA17FA180: The non-instrument

rated private pilot and his passenger

were in a fatal crash following con-tinued flight into IMC conditions

and probable spatial disorientation.

While the pilot did have over 80 hours of instrument experience, he had no

instrument time logged in the past

year and was not instrument rated.

The pilot had not disclosed the use of

imipramine, an anti-depressant not authorized for use by the FAA due to

cognitive impairment and sedation, as

well as doxylamine, a sedating antihis-tamine with a 60-hour no-fly period

following use.

CEN14FA042: A flight instructor

and private pilot impacted rising

terrain while on an instrument

approach during a combined business

trip and instrument training flight. The mishap was at night in instru-

ment conditions at the end of a long

day which began approximately 13 hours earlier and after almost 6 hours

of flying over three legs. Toxicological

testing showed the presence of dextro-

methorphan in the blood of the flight

instructor and diphenhydramine at therapeutic levels in the blood of the

private pilot receiving instruction.

Both medications cause cognitive impairment and drowsiness. The FAA period for the residual concentration to be clinically insignificant is 48 and

60 hours, respectively. It could not be

determined who was the pilot flying at the time of impact.

Looking at these accidents, it

is clear that experience does not

prevent spatial disorientation or con-

trolled flight into terrain accidents. Pilots ranging from students to

instructors, sport pilots to commer -

cial pilots are represented. What is

clear is that some medical conditions

and many medications can impair

both judgement and the ability to

control an aircraft. There are reasons

that these are considered incompati-ble with flying and disqualifying for

an FAA medical. Flying either as a

sport pilot or under BasicMed offers

no protection from the impairment

from these different conditions and medications. Of the total accidents

between fiscal years 2019 and 2023,

the percent positive for psychotropic medications (affecting the mind) rose

from approximately 8.5% to approx-

imately 13%. These medications

include antidepressants, antipsychot-

ics, anxiolytics, and stimulants with antidepressants the most common.

Please note that this does not reflect

accidents related to other conditions

or medications. Remember, some-

times the best decision is not to go;

you may save your life.WHAT IS CLEAR IS THAT SOME

MEDICAL CONDITIONS AND MANY MEDICATIONS CAN IMPAIR BOTH JUDGEMENT

AND THE ABILITY TO CONTROL AN AIRCRAFT.

It’s a Confusing World

Up There

The Specifics of Spatial Disorientation

By Nicole Hartman and Rebekah Waters

It’s sobering to search the National Transportation Safety

Board (NTSB) database for accidents caused by spatial

disorientation, or “spatial D. ” The query produces

page after page of accidents — hundreds of aviators have succumbed to this confusing condition. Statistics show

that between 5 to 10% of all general aviation accidents are attributed to spatial disorientation, and 90% of those are

fatal. NTSB data suggests that spatial D is a more common

occurrence at night or in limited visibility weather condi-tions. All pilots are susceptible to the optical illusions that

may cause loss of aircraft control at any time. Let’s take a

closer look at the causes of spatial disorientation, review

the types, and discuss strategies for preventing this source

of aviation accidents.

Seeing Isn’t Always Believing

Spatial orientation is our natural ability to maintain our body’s orientation and/or posture in relation to the sur -

rounding environment (physical space) at rest and during motion. The three-dimensional environment of flight is unfamiliar to our bodies and creates sensory conflicts and

illusions that make spatial orientation difficult. The numer -

ous sensory stimuli (visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive) during flight vary in magnitude, direction, and frequency

and can lead to sensory mismatches resulting in disorien-tation. This condition is known as spatial disorientation

— the inability of a pilot to correctly interpret aircraft atti-

tude, altitude, or airspeed in relation to the Earth or other points of reference.

Becoming spatially disoriented is the result of a prop-

erly functioning human system, which we are hard-wired

to trust, misinterpreting our actual position or orientation

in space. It goes against our natural instincts to accept that our orientation isn’t what it appears to be. Even a

brief loss of orientation while in flight for 10-15 seconds

can result in an unusual aircraft attitude putting the pilot

and passengers at risk for an accident. The sensory inputs

needed to maintain orientation automatically and subcon -

sciously used to orient ourselves include visual, vestibular,

and proprioceptive.

6 FAA Safety Briefing

May/June 2024 7Visual Vestibular ProprioceptiveThe human eye is responsible

for 80% of the sensory inputs

needed to maintain orientationReceptors in the skin, muscle, tendons, and joints account for

5%The system within the inner ear contributes

15%

The visual system includes the eye and its

component parts that are necessary for visual

acuity (focus), depth perception, and assessing

the body's position in space relative to other objects both fixed and moving. During flight, visual reference is the

largest contributor to accurate spatial orientation. By using visual references, the pilot can gather information about

distance, speed, and depth. Any condition that deprives

the pilot of natural visual references, such as clouds, fog, haze, darkness, terrain, or sky backgrounds with indistinct

contrast (i.e., arctic whiteout or clear, moonless skies over

water) can rapidly cause spatial D.

The vestibular system includes the sensory

organs contained within the inner ear that detect relative motion of the head in space within its

axes of movement. It consists of two major components: the semicircular canals that detect changes in rotational acceleration, and the otolith organs that detect linear

(straight) acceleration. Y our vestibular system’s primary

function is to detect rotational and translational move-

ments of the head and generate a corresponding response

signal. But this system was designed to function on the ground in a 1G environment (normal gravity). Accidents

can occur due to a combination of vestibular illusions and

poor visibility. When the body is subjected to certain forces

that cause a vestibular illusion, vision is often the only

sense that can contradict these false perceptions. However, in darkness or other poor visibility conditions, it is much

easier to be deceived by an illusion and to ignore informa-

tion provided by your instruments.

Proprioception is a term that encompasses

the human sensation of the body's (trunk/limbs) position as it relates to space and forms the foun-

dation about which the other sensory organs guide desired movements within that space. Proprioceptive sensory inputs give us a reference to posture and the relative posi-

tion of our body in relation to our environment.Prone to Puzzlement?

It is important to recognize that even when a pilot's visual,

vestibular, and proprioceptive systems are working prop-

erly, associated underlying medical conditions or human

factors can increase the risk for spatial D. There are both

external and internal factors that will increase a pilot’s

susceptibility to spatial disorientation. Any visual condi-tion that reduces a pilot’s ability to maintain orientation to

the horizon (i.e., clouds, haze, night conditions, terrain)

will increase the risk of spatial D. Additionally, a pilot may be more vulnerable to spatial disorientation as a result of

age, fatigue, stress, anxiety, or get-there-itis. Some medical

conditions, medications, smoking, alcohol, and other drugs

that affect the visual, vestibular, or proprioceptive sensory

inputs can also increase susceptibility. Be sure to read the Aeromedical Advisory in this issue for examples of how

certain medications can exacerbate spatial D.

Don’t Trust Your Gut

Without visual references (e.g., VFR at night/low visibility

and IFR flying), pilots can become disoriented, especially

in situations like low visibility or turbulent weather, where

sensory inputs can be conflicting or misleading. When

visual cues are absent, your body will turn to your ves-

tibular system for information. The vestibular system is complex and can be easily deceived in certain flight con-

ditions. When motion makes this system unreliable, pilots

experience vestibular illusions. These dangerous illusions are the most likely culprits of spatial disorientation.

There are six types of vestibular illusions you may

encounter while flying IFR. The most common illusion,

“the leans, ” occurs after a sudden return to level flight after

a gradual and prolonged turn. If the rotational acceleration of the turn is 2 degrees per second or lower, your vestibular

system will not detect this movement. When you level out

after a turn like this, you may experience the illusion that your aircraft is banking in the opposite direction. If you

rely on what your body is telling you, you might lean in the

direction of the original turn to regain what you think is

the correct vertical posture. The brain combines sensory signals (left) in order to maintain control of the body.

Vision

Vestibular

Canals

Proprioceptive

InputOrientation

in Space

Gaze

Stabilization

Balance &

Posture

8 FAA Safety BriefingIf a pilot is in a

turn long enough

for the fluid in the

ear canal to move

at the same speed

as the canal, the “Coriolis illusion” can

occur — the most

dangerous vestibular illusion. A sudden head movement,

such as looking down at something you dropped during a

prolonged turn can give you the false sensation of rotation

or acceleration on an entirely different axis. When disori-

ented by this illusion, you might maneuver the aircraft into

a dangerous attitude while trying to correct your aircraft’s perceived attitude. This is why it’s so important to practice

moving your head as little as possible during instrument

cross-checks or scans. Make sure you keep your head as still as possible when reaching for charts and other objects

on the flight deck.

A prolonged coordinated constant-rate turn could cause

the sensation of flying straight and level. This is when you

are in danger of experiencing the “graveyard spiral. ” Aircraft tend to lose altitude in turns unless you compensate for

the loss in lift. When making a con-

stant-rate turn, you

may notice a loss of altitude, even though

you aren’t experienc-

ing the sensation of turning. This creates

the illusion of being

in a level descent.

Y our gut might tell

you to pull back on

the controls in an attempt to climb or stop the descent. If

you listen to your gut instead of trusting your instruments,

the spiral will tighten and increase the loss of altitude. This could lead to a loss of aircraft control.

The “somatogravic illusion” occurs during rapid accel-

eration and creates the same feeling as tilting your head

backward. Pilots experiencing this feeling can mistake it

for a climb, especially while flying IFR. This disorientation could make you want to push the aircraft into a nose-low

or dive attitude. A rapid deceleration could make you feel

the opposite sensation and urge you to pull up, putting you

in danger of a nose-up or stall attitude.

When you make a sudden return to straight and level

flight after a climb, it can feel like you are tumbling backward. This is known as “inversion illusion. ” The

disorientation you feel from this might lead you to push your aircraft abruptly into a nose-low attitude, which can

intensify the illusion.Like the “inversion

illusion, ” the “eleva-tor illusion” is also

caused by an abrupt

change. A sudden

upward vertical accel-eration, as can occur

in an updraft, can

stimulate your otolith organs and create

the illusion of being in a climb. This could make you want to push the aircraft into a nose-low attitude. An abrupt

downward vertical acceleration, usually in a downdraft, has

the opposite effect making you want to pull the aircraft into a nose-up attitude.

Do Your Eyes Deceive You?

Spatial disorientation can also be caused by visual illusions. Y our mind believes what it sees, which can be dangerous for

pilots. “False horizon” occurs when your mind uses inac-

curate visual information, like a sloping cloud formation,

when trying to align your aircraft with the actual horizon.

This type of illusion can be disorienting and lead you to place your aircraft in a dangerous attitude. “ Autokinesis” is

another visual illusion that can happen when flying at night.

If you are attempting to align your aircraft with a stationary light, autokinesis could create the illusion that the light is

moving. When this happens, you become disoriented and

could potentially lose control of your aircraft.

Combating Spatial D

Reviewing the NTSB data reveals that there are many causes of spatial disorientation, but the outcome for the

majority of the accidents is the same — fatality. So, what

can you do to avoid these dangerous situations? “Preflight

weather planning is critical to avoiding an inadvertent

encounter with instrument conditions, ” said Katherine Wilson, senior human performance NTSB senior human

performance investigator. “But if a pilot finds themself in

that situation, it is important they trust their instruments and exit the conditions as quickly and safely as possible. ”

Y our first line of defense against spatial D should be

practice, practice, and more practice. Undergo regular

training on spatial disorientation recognition and recovery

techniques so you will be aware and prepared for potentially disorienting situations. Consider experiencing spatial D

firsthand, either with a flight instructor or in a simulator.

It goes against our natural instincts

to accept that our orientation isn’t

what it appears to be.

May/June 2024 9Y ou could also immerse yourself in the visual and vestibular

illusions that you might encounter at a spatial disorienta-

tion laboratory. Many universities and the military use labs

to simulate various flight conditions and scenarios to train

pilots to recognize and cope with spatial D. Experience

the disorientation in a controlled environment, and prac-tice overcoming what your body is telling you so you can

commit to trusting your instruments. To learn about train-

ing offered by the FAA go to bit.ly/FAACAMIED .

Set yourself up for success — to help prevent spatial

disorientation, pilots should:

• Obtain training and maintain proficiency with flying instruments before flying with less than three

miles visibility.

• Use and rely on your flight instruments, especially at

night, in reduced visibility, and in featureless and sloping

terrain. Be sure to test your flight instruments before

each flight as well as during your preflight and taxi.

• Maintain night currency if you intend to fly at night. Include cross-country and local operations at differ -

ent airports.

• Do not attempt VFR flight when there is the possibility of getting trapped in deteriorating weather.

• If you are flying with another pilot and start to experi-ence spatial D, transfer control. Pilots rarely experience

visual illusions simultaneously.

• Plan your transition to instrument flying before you

enter IMC. Start your instrument scan while you are

still in visual conditions.

• Avoid movements in the cockpit that are prone to

cause spatial disorientation when flying by reference to

instruments. Sudden head movements, or the classic

“reaching down to pick up a dropped pencil” may

bring on sudden disorientation.In addition to these tried-and-true methods of combat-

ing spatial D, it is also important to:

• Study and become familiar with unique geographical

conditions in areas where you plan to operate.

• Check weather forecasts before departure, enroute, and at your destination. Be alert for weather deterioration.

• Consider practicing maneuvers that illicit illusions with your flight instructor to maintain proficiency.

• Contact your FSDO for opportunities to use a full motion simulator and experience the illusions you

might encounter.

• Set personal minimums for VFR and IFR flight

designed to minimize your exposure to conditions that

increase your risks.

Remember, once you enter instrument conditions,

completely commit to instrument flying. Attempting quick

transitions to visual flight because you spotted a hole in

the clouds or caught a glimpse of the ground below may

cause spatial disorientation that could have been avoided by maintaining a proper instrument scan. Although it's

tempting to reengage in visual flight when going in and out

of clouds, keep the instrument scan and don’t transition back to visual flying until you have the necessary visibility

and visual references to do so safely. Resist this temptation,

and follow the strategies mentioned above to make sure

you have a safe and successful flight no matter what flying

conditions you encounter!

Nicole Hartman and Rebekah Waters are FAA Safety Briefing associate editors and techni-

cal writer-editors in the FAA’s Flight Standards Service.Y our first line of defense against

spatial D should be practice,

practice, and more practice.

LEARN MORE

Spatial Disorientation Fact Sheet

bit.ly/SDFactSheet

Pilot Safety Brochure & Visual Illusions Brochure

bit.ly/PilotSafety

Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), Chapter 8

bit.ly/AIMweb

Instrument Flying Handbook, Chapter 3

bit.ly/43H2Ygx

NTSB Visual Illusions Safety Alert, SA-052

bit.ly/NTSBSA

NTSB Reduced Visual References Safety Alert, SA-020

bit.ly/NTSBSA

Condition Inspection, a look at specific medical conditions, FAA Safety Briefing,

Mar/Apr 2020adobe.ly/3alrx7z

10 FAA Safety Briefing

INTO THE FUTURE

How Leveraging Technology

Can Help Build Proficiency

in a Busy World

By James Williams

The most indispensable resource of this, or any age,

isn’t money. It’s time. Time can be used to gener -

ate money, build experience, enjoy yourself, or any

number of other things. But time is finite and flows in

only one direction, at least until Doc Brown can get the

flux capacitor working and the Delorian up to 88 miles per hour. Concurrent with the passage of time, we have

the natural trend that erodes the skills we work hard to

attain/create. But what does any of this have to do with IFR (instrument flight rules) flying and how does tech-

nology play a role in keeping pilots' skills sharp?

The Triangle of Proficiency

With instrument training, there is a tendency to some-

times conflate currency with proficiency. Currency is easily

defined (see Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14

CFR), section 61.57 (c)). Proficiency is more challenging

to delineate. While proficiency is defined in the Airman

Certification Standards and Practical Test Standards testing documents, on an individual day-to-day basis, it is based

more on an individual's assessment. It’s similar to art in

that it’s subjective and based on an individual’s appraisal. There is a test for both proficiency and art. In art, a piece is worth what someone will pay for it. Proficiency is safely

completing your flight in the conditions as they exist.

Y our flying skills, particularly instrument skills,

decay if they are unused, and the essential resource to

prevent that degradation is time spent exercising those skills. While money is certainly a consideration, time is Modern Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) software allows you to practice skills like flight planning

and briefing anywhere and anytime.

Garmin Photo

May/June 2024 11genuinely the most constrained resource. With limited

resources to address a problem, the first step is to state

your objective. How do we define proficiency in a mean-

ingful way we can use?

Our former editor, Susan Parson, covered this topic in

2010 with her concept of the “Proficiency Triangle. ” The three sides of this triangle are Planning , Performance , and

Procedures . These components are core facets of profi-

ciency and give us areas to focus on and exercise. While we tend to think of proficiency in terms of the latter two

aspects (performance and procedures), planning is prob-

ably more important. Planning is critical, as it can prevent

you from having to test the other two components in a way

that you may not be able to pass. We also don’t think of planning as a perishable skill we can practice, but it is. In

fact, it can be practiced easily and from anywhere.

Performance is a prominent component. If you can’t

control the aircraft, it’s all moot. But aircraft control is best thought of as being on a sliding scale. How does

your ability to control an airplane in clear blue smooth

skies compare to that in a large turbulent cloud? Even for

proficient pilots, there are bound to be differences. And that leads into the final facet of the triangle, procedures.

Being unfamiliar with a process or procedure means that

you likely to need to focus more of your attention on that

process. That means less attention on things like aircraft

control. We have a limited amount of what physiologists call attentional resources, so the more of that resource that

goes into the process's basic function, the less that can be

allocated to aircraft monitoring and control (and that’s without going down the rabbit hole around multitasking

and whether humans can do it in a remotely effective

way). But to be sure, having experience and proficiency

with procedures allows you more attention for other tasks.

Improving any of these facets is good, but maintaining pro-ficiency in all three is the best way to maximize your safety.

So, how do we accomplish this?

A Mixed Approach

The best way to stay proficient is to fly several times a

week, if not daily. But this presents a significant chal-

lenge for most of us who aren’t professional pilots or have

more disposable income. In addition, training conditions

(smooth low clouds without the threat of thunderstorms or icing) to truly hone instrument skills can be challeng-

ing to find, even if you don’t have obstacles like full-time employment to worry about. This is where fidelity becomes

essential. We can practice flight planning and go/no-go

decision-making relatively easily. With modern flight brief-

ing and planning suites, it’s simple to have a few canned

flight plans you can brief, review, and decide on in a few minutes, even if you don’t intend to fly.

Where we need to get more creative is with performance

and procedures. Obviously, practice approaches and pro-cedures in the real world are the best in many ways, but we have limitations. We can’t control the weather and using

view-limiting devices doesn’t quite capture the real expe-

rience. But whether we are trying to practice performance or procedures does change our approach to some extent.

Focusing on procedures could start with a computer or

tablet. Garmin offers software that will let your machine

“run” simulated Garmin avionics to allow you to manipu-

late the systems virtually and learn how to operate them. While this is a lower fidelity approach, it is an excellent tool

for learning how these systems function so that you already

have a base knowledge level as we add stress factors. From there, aviation training devices (ATD) will add actual

hardware switches, buttons, and knobs that replicate the

real cockpit systems. This is a nice validation step, but

ATDs aren’t always available as that high-quality hardware

and validation increases the cost of acquisition out of reach for many people. But you can always use a computer and

commercial flight simulator software to get many benefits

in your home.

The Virtual Super Skyway

I’ve been a long-time proponent of using simulation for proficiency and training. I used a computer with an old-

school monitor and X-Plane 6 to pre-fly my cross-country

flights in my dorm room the day before training. Even

with the much lower-quality visuals of the late 1990s to

early 2000s, it was a great way to see the route before a flight. Since 2020, the flight simulator space has enjoyed a

renaissance with the return of Microsoft Flight Simulator

2020 (FS2020) after more than a decade out of the market. Microsoft is planning a follow-up Flight Simulator 2024 to

be released later this year with various improvements over

the current program. This means we have two high-quality Y our flying skills, particularly

instrument skills, decay if they are

unused, and the essential resource

to prevent that degradation is time

spent exercising those skills.

A RedBird ATD.RedBird photo

12 FAA Safety Briefing

commercially available flight simulators that can drive

innovation. See "Fly into the Matrix" (bit.ly/FlyInVR) from

our Jan/Feb 2021 issue for a deeper dive into personal

computer simulation. The bottom line is that FS2020 and

X-Plane are great programs that can be useful. I prefer

X-Plane for a couple of reasons, including slightly better physics/airplane handling and easier flight setup. FS2020

has a better visual presentation, especially if you have a

higher-end graphics processing unit (GPU), but it isn’t quite as well set up to “do work” in terms of ease of set up

for specific tasks. These are relatively small differences

overall, and the situation hasn’t changed much since late

2020, when I wrote the other article.

Both programs are available on a trial/demo basis for

free or very low cost. X-Plane, as a downloadable demo, is a great way to ensure it will run well on your system

before investing in a full copy. FS2020 is available as part of Microsoft’s monthly subscription, Game Pass. A PC-only

Game Pass subscription is a relatively cheap way to test

FS2020. Even at lower visual settings, both programs are

a great way to hone your skills in weather that would be

dangerous to try in real life without support. This lets you practice both the flight performance and procedures you

want to brush up on.

To add even more realism, there are services like

PilotEdge and V ATSIM (Virtual Air Traffic Simulation

Network) that provide virtual air traffic services so you can practice procedures with ATC, in some cases guided by

actual air traffic controllers. This kind of extension of com-

puter-based flight sims allows for very realistic IFR oper -

ations and practice. Especially on a weak point for many

pilots, radio communications. Getting virtual radio reps

can make you more comfortable and means you have more

attention to focus on other tasks. The addition of air traffic

services is a significant advancement since I was learning to fly and allows you to practice IFR operations in a much

more realistic fashion than having your instructor provide

canned instructions.

To VR or not to VR …

That is the question. There are additional costs, both financial and time, that virtual reality (VR) imposes

versus a traditional monitor-based PC system. Y ou will

need more powerful and expensive components and will

also have to spend time getting everything properly set

up. However, VR technology, once properly qualified, could help bring down the cost of flight training and

make routine training more attainable.

The advantage VR provides is best summed up in one

word — immersion. It does make you feel much more connected to the experience. For practicing the perfor -

mance aspect, immersion can help. I still remember when that fact really hit me. I was practicing a touch-and-go, and my final approach got a bit unstable. I could “feel” it

in a very similar way to what I would in a real airplane.

That connection makes the experience a much higher

fidelity one. Regarding practicing aircraft control, the

higher the fidelity, the better. Unlike process and proce-

dure practice, where reducing fidelity can be valuable, aircraft control is a different beast. Especially in a con-

sequence-free virtual environment, you want the most

realistic conditions.

Building Your Own Triangle

We’ve discussed dissecting proficiency into planning, performance, and procedures. From there, we looked

at ways to hone each of those facets. I would propose a

second triangle, a fidelity triangle. The fidelity triangle

consists of high, medium, and low-fidelity approaches. It’s

not necessarily equilateral, but varies based on available time and conditions. High-fidelity training, i.e., flying the

airplane, will likely be the short leg in this shape. Lining up

the conditions, an instructor, and disposable income can be challenging. It’s also a good block of time. The minimum

time commitment for a flight would be 2-3 hours total

for an hour in the air. This isn’t to say you shouldn’t take

advantage of the opportunity; it's just that the chances will

be limited in our busy lives.

The medium-fidelity training would be ATD or com-

puter simulation. There’s a spectrum in quality from a high-end ATD, to a VR setup, to a basic computer. While it’s not the real thing, it offers better availability and

A PC based system with VR.

May/June 2024 13

controllable conditions. When possible, try to work in

periodic sessions in an ATD as a good check-up. It can

be a cost-effective way to ensure you are on a good path

regarding your proficiency. ATDs may also allow you to

log the time and experience under certain circumstances.

Y ou can use your home-based system to brush up on any deficiencies the ATD sessions uncover. If you're working

from home, you can also pop in and do a quick approach

or any other procedure that’s giving you trouble before your next check-up.

Low-fidelity training can still serve a purpose. This

would include things like practice briefings and planning.

Although I would argue that the task's fidelity is high as

it’s functionally the same regardless of intent to fly, from an effort and ease of operation standpoint, it is much more

accessible than the above-listed tasks. Y ou can even do it in

a waiting room before an appointment or meeting. Other

low-fidelity tasks include working with training software

to dig into your avionics suite or reading manuals or safety publications like this one. Keeping your mind engaged in aviation is an excellent way to keep proficiency a priority. It

also can inform your priorities for higher fidelity training.

Did you see conditions in a briefing or accident report and

wonder how you might deal with them? Why not give it a

try in the virtual environment of an ATD or PC sim? That experience can then feed back into your personal mini-

mums and future flight planning.

How you balance that triangle in pursuit of a well-honed

proficiency triangle will depend on your circumstances. Over time, you can refine your triangle and balance your

fidelity needs to stay proficient. This will change over time

and will require rebalancing. The wide variety of technol-

ogy available to us today gives us many daily opportunities to work towards greater proficiency. But once you have a

base, you can work from there and find the right mix to

keep you safe and proficient in the future.

James Williams is FAA Safety Briefing’s associate editor and photo editor. He is also a pilot

and ground instructor.

LEARN MORE

“A Virtual Plan for the Real World, ” FAA Safety Briefing, Nov/Dec 2017

bit.ly/3VFGjRtThe wide variety of technology

available to us today gives us many

daily opportunities to work towards

greater proficiency.

14 FAA Safety Briefing

MAYBE

NOT

TODAY …

Avoiding the Perils (and Regrets) of VFR into IMC

By Sabrina Woods

(Editor’s Note: This article originally appeared in the Jul/

Aug 2018 issue of FAA Safety Briefing and was updated

for this issue.)

In 2009, a non-instrument-rated pilot originally

planned for a much-anticipated cross-country trip,

but instrument meteorological conditions (IMC)

conditions at the airport prevented the pilot from leaving

on the intended day. After two days of waiting, IMC

still prevailed; however, several witnesses observed the

pilot and the pilot’s son at the fuel dock. They all assumed that the pilot would taxi back to the hangar since the

ceilings were between 200-400 feet above ground level

(AGL). Instead, the airplane departed and disappeared

into the overcast clouds. Multiple witnesses heard the

airplane continuously change speed and direction, fol-lowed by the sound of the airplane impacting the ground.

Airplane components were found in two locations —

at the main wreckage site and along a debris path that consisted of the outboard portions of the left wing and

left stabilator. Both the pilot and son suffered fatal inju-ries in the crash.

May/June 2024 15

In 2019, a non-instrument-rated commercial pilot

encountered fog shortly after departing for a visual flight

rules (VFR) aerial application flight in an aircraft not

equipped for instrument flight rules (IFR). The pilot

attempted to fly above the fog layer and divert to a local

airport. However, aircraft tracking data shows the airplane entered two spiraling turns, the second of which involved

a rapid descent in the direction of the fatal accident site.

Investigators determined this to be consistent with the effects of spatial disorientation in IMC conditions. They

also were not able to determine if the pilot received an

official weather briefing before the flight.

In 2021, a non-instrument-rated pilot departed in a

helicopter shortly after sunset in visual meteorological conditions (VMC). About an hour into the fight, the pilot

encountered snow showers and IMC conditions that were

forecast to move through the route of flight. Radar data showed that after entering the area of weather, the pilot

began a right descending turn and the helicopter crashed

in a rural, wooded area. Investigators believed that operat-

ing in a helicopter not approved for IFR flight and with no

instrument rating, in addition to the overcast skies, snow showers, and a lack of terrestrial illumination in a remote

area, were conducive to spatial disorientation and subse-

quent loss of control in this unfortunate fatality. There was

also no evidence the pilot reviewed the weather or received

a briefing before the flight.

Shocked!

Each year, the Richard G. McSpadden Report (formerly the Joseph T. Nall Report) provides a detailed analysis of

general aviation (GA) accident data and safety trends. A

look at the most recent finalized data from the report in

2021 indicates there were 938 non-commercial, fixed-wing

accidents, with an overall lethality rate of 17.7%. More than 80% of the accidents that occurred in IMC were fatal,

compared to 15% of those that occurred within VMC. As

the preceding accident summaries demonstrate, flying VFR into IMC is still one of the most lethal causal factors for

GA mishaps. For this reason, the National Transportation

Safety Board (NTSB) has determined it to be a significant

safety hazard for the GA community.

What stands out is that, unlike most of the other

mishap causal factors, this particular rate of occurrence has remained stubbornly fixed — drifting between a 79

to 92% fatal accident rate for VFR into IMC over the last several decades. Decades ! This is despite several significant

upgrades in weather forecasting technology and a continued safety awareness effort focused on this subject. My research

left me shocked and more than just a little concerned about

why this particular phenomenon keeps occurring.

So Why Does It Still Happen?

The FAA, NTSB, and various aviation safety advocates from industry and academia alike have tried to determine

what happens when a pilot finds themselves in the incred-

ibly hazardous situation of being VFR and then flying into

IMC conditions. Some researchers have theorized that

cockpit technologies are insufficient at depicting meteoro-logical conditions in real-time. Others believe that pilots

get distracted or overestimate their aeronautical abilities.

Others even go so far as to accuse aviators of being willful in disregarding the dangers and deem flying VFR into

IMC as negligence.

While I think some of these ideas have merit (others,

not so much), I, too, have a couple of different theories to

offer on how VFR into IMC can happen. I humbly present to you what I call the “just around the river bend” bad idea;

the “where’ d everybody go?” gaffe; and the “there’s no place

like home” hot spot. Let me explain further ….

It’s Just Around the River Bend … ?

In this situation, a pilot is flying along when the visibility starts to deteriorate. Instead of diverting from the unde-

sirable condition or even just landing the aircraft, the pilot

continues, thinking that clearer conditions might be just

“around the river bend. ” Or worse, they rely on the latest

weather app to “shoot the gap” and try to fly through the inclement weather.

Flying VFR into IMC is still one of the

most lethal causal factor for

GA mishaps.

Others even go so far as to

accuse aviators of being willful in

disregarding the dangers and deem

flying VFR into IMC as negligence.

Adrian Eichhorn photo

16 FAA Safety Briefing

As you might notice in a previous article I wrote,

“Weather … Or Not? Weather Technology in the Cockpit”

(adobe.ly/3VmDMf0), I discussed the FAA ’s Weather

Technology in the Cockpit (WTIC) program to educate

pilots on the inherent inaccuracies, latencies, and limita-

tions of weather displays in the cockpit. Information that you see on your favorite weather app might not be real-

time, with lagging delays of up to 20 minutes! This means

that the hole a pilot might try to slip through is no longer there upon arrival.

Another reason some pilots are reluctant to turn around

is what human factors scientists call “sunk cost bias. ” In

general, we are often reluctant to turn away from something

when we feel we have already put a certain amount of time, effort, and money into it. We would rather hang on just a

little longer because we value the very real “wasted” effort

more than the intangible hazard. Regardless, waiting for a hole that might never manifest, prioritizing the extra money

you burned, or trying to get to your destination is just a bad

idea when dealing with foul weather or poor visibility.

Where’d Everybody Go?!

Another reason pilots might unwittingly find themselves in a bad “VFR into IMC situation” is because the conditions

change without the pilot observing it happening. Picture

this: Y ou are flying along in VFR conditions when you take

a moment to fiddle with your radio that keeps emitting a

high-pitched squeal when you key the mic. Once satisfied that the squelchy situation is resolved, you look up to find

yourself on the cusp between marginal VFR conditions and

IMC. The soup is getting worse with every passing minute, and the “where’ d everybody go?!” panic starts to set in.

This scenario is more common than you might think

and is often the result of distraction — when something

not pertinent to the task at hand captures and holds your

attention; or fixation — when you are overly focused on one specific task to the detriment of all others. Poor

situational awareness, lack of experience in interpreting

changing weather conditions, and overestimating one’s own abilities are also common culprits in missing the shift from VMC to “not-VMC. ” These mistakes can break down

the efficacy of your aeronautical decision-making making,

which can lead to additional errors and an increase in risk. Mitigate them by creating systematic procedures that work

for you and your aircraft type, and by creating and closely

following a scan pattern.

There’s No Place Like Home

Very similar to the “just around the river bend” bad idea is the overwhelming desire to just get home. Colloquially

this is called “get-home-itis" or “get-there-itis”; however,

most theorists refer to it as plan continuation bias. It is

like the former because the aversion to sunk costs is the

same. But get-home-itis often goes much deeper because the pilot is particularly keen to accomplish their goal even

though things have changed and there are indications that

doing so is very risky (see the Air Safety Institute video in Learn More). Sometimes complacency — I’ve done it

before, so why shouldn’t it work this time? — over-reli -

ance on technology, and good ol’ fashioned pride can get in the way of a person’s making the safer, albeit seemingly

inconvenient choice.

Victims of plan continuation bias can be internally

motivated (e.g., wanting to get home to a waiting family member), externally motivated (e.g., wanting to get the rental back to avoid additional charges), or a combination

of both. When it comes to flying VFR into IMC, this bias

can compel a pilot to make unsafe choices in their aeronau-

tical decision-making. An excellent and rather sad example

is in the very first paragraph of this article. Even though we all know there is no place like home, sometimes it is better

if the getting-there desire waits in deference to a safer

course of action.

An Ounce of Prevention …

Benjamin Franklin once penned that “an ounce of preven-tion is worth a pound of cure. ” Granted, Mr. Franklin was

talking about fire safety; however, the axiom rings true

today and is easily applicable to a host of different situa -

tions. Thorough pre-flight planning and being conscious of your skill set and experience level aids in thwarting VFR into IMC tragedies. The best time to take preventa -

tive measures is by building a solid “Plan A ” and a “Plan B” before you go fly. If you are anything like me, you will even build a “Plan B++. ” In your plans, you should consider Even though we all know there is

no place like home, sometimes it

is better if the getting-there desire

waits in deference to a safer course

of action.

what alternate courses of action will be available if the

weather or visibility starts to turn sour, when you should

consider adopting those courses of action, and a realistic

assessment of your own personal minimums so that you

know exactly what you need to do to avoid ever getting

close to a bad situation.

Trust me on this. Being in the thick of things is no time

to try and reconnoiter and develop a Plan B. Spatial dis-orientation, in particular, often goes hand-in-hand in VFR into IMC accidents. When it comes to deteriorating weather

conditions, if you are not instrument-qualified, the best

course of action is to remain in VFR conditions and land

the plane as soon as possible.To put a different twist on an oft-quoted line from the

famous final airplane scene in Casablanca: If that plane

leaves [VMC], you'll regret it — soon and for the rest of your life. Because if you do the right thing, then maybe not

today, and maybe not tomorrow, you will eventually get

where you’re going, but without the regrets that you — or the loved ones you leave behind — would have if you fall

prey to a VFR-into-IMC accident.

Sabrina Woods, Ph.D., is a human performance investigator with the National Transporta -

tion Safety Board (NTSB) and a former editor of the FAA Safety Briefing. She spent 12 years

as an aircraft maintenance officer and an aviation mishap investigator in the Air Force.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of the NTSB or the United States.

LEARN MORE

SKYbrary “Inadvertent VFR into IMC”

bit.ly/3VLDTkD

AOPA Air Safety Institute, “Accident Case Study: In Too Deep”

bit.ly/4alhf6u

TURBOJETS • TURBOPROPS

RECIPROCATING AIRCRAFT • GLIDERS • BALLOONSATTENTION

AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND OPERATORS

*Surveys were sent to a sample of aircraft owners and operators. Have you completed your 46th Annual

General Aviation and

Part 135 Activity Survey?*

The FAA and aviation industry value your

responses to understand the size, activity, and

characteristics of the GA fleet.

Questions? Call 1-800-826-1797 or email infoaviationsurvey@tetratech.com. Contact us today for your

SHORT-FORM SURVEY!3+ AIRCRAFT?

BROKEN

GLASS

PROCEDURES

Understanding and Navigating

Glass Avionics Failures

By William E. Dubois

Instead of “break glass in case of emergency, ” in the

modern flight deck, “broken glass” is an emergency in

and of itself — a first-rate emergency that can spiral out

of control with mind-numbing speed. Sure, modern glass avionics are the gold standard for reliability — much more

reliable, on average, than their analog pneumatic- and elec-tric-gyro predecessors. That said, anything that humankind

makes can break. And when reliability meets Mr. Murphy,

the next steps for pilots flying glass are different from those flying steam.

To understand what those operational differences are, we

first need to look under the cowl and understand the magic

that drives the displays. While the system architecture of

glass panel avionics varies by manufacturer and model, all share some basic DNA: the “glass” display itself, the pilot

interface, and the black boxes that drive the system. Let’s

start with the boxes.Little Boxes

A glass panel system is controlled by two different black boxes, in concept (more on that in a moment). The first

box is called an attitude and heading reference system, or

AHRS in our acronym-laden lexicon. The AHRS is respon-

sible for interpreting pitch, bank, and heading info. It does

this using accelerometers, mini gyros, a magnetometer, and

18 FAA Safety BriefingWhile the system architecture

of glass panel avionics varies by

manufacturer and model, all share

some basic DNA: the “glass” display

itself, the pilot-interface, and the

black boxes that drive the system.

May/June 2024 19

… well … magic. The second box is the air data computer,

or ADC, and it’s responsible for altitude, airspeed, and

vertical speed number crunching and display.

There may be one of each type of box in the aircraft, or,

in some installations, there may be dual AHRS and/or dual

ADCs. Increasingly, there are units in the field where the ADC and the AHRS systems are combined into a single

box, called, you guessed it, an ADAHRS. And, in some

systems, the boxes themselves are gone, with the hardware for both built right into the pilot display, an approach that

greatly simplifies installation, and reduces weight, cost,

and complexity.

All this variability, along with the rapid pace of techno-

logical advancement in contemporary avionics, means that you need to spend some time with the Pilots Operating

Handbook (POH) and/or flight manual supplement for

any glass panel-equipped aircraft you fly so that you know how the systems are laid out. Flying glass without

this knowledge would be akin to jumping into a strange

airplane without first understanding how its fuel system is

designed. Not to mention, it’s your responsibility under 14

CFR section 91.103, Preflight action, to familiarize yourself with all available information regarding the flight, which

includes the proper use of avionics installed in the aircraft.

Pilot Interface

The newest glass panel systems are driven by touch

screens that feature smartphone-esque icons sporting

highly intuitive menus. That said, the bulk of the glass

systems found in the general aviation fleet are still button,

knob, and softkey driven, often with less than intuitive

menus and button press chains required to achieve the desired results. These analog-entry glass panel systems all

feature inverse workload: once mastered, they are great

workload reducers in the air; but to master them, expect significant ground study.

:(

ERROR

To avoid draining the aircraft’s battery, a ground power

supply is recommended for in-airplane ground work. As an

alternative, investigate the availability of flight simulators

or training devices in your area that match up to the avion-

ics in the aircraft you will be flying. Sims have several other

advantages over sitting in the airplane pressing buttons and

practicing flows, including the fact you can practice (safely) in simulated flight, as well as on the ground — and they are

cost-effective compared to burning avgas or JetA.

Additionally, some glass avionics systems have “emula-

tors, ” or desktop computer programs that mimic the flight deck systems so that you can learn — and keep sharp with

— the flows from the comfort of home.

Two Screens

The vast bulk of contemporary glass installations on light GA airplanes feature a pair of display panels, the pilot side

panel being called the primary flight display, or PFD; and a

second display of the same size on the copilot side called an

MFD, for multi-function display. The PFD is generally used

to display the flight instruments, while the MFD displays navigation and in some cases, engine data.

The beauty of two screens, beyond being beautiful to the

eyes of many pilots, is the fact that the screens can often flip-flop data. So not only do the dual screens provide a

greater ecosystem of situational awareness, but they also

serve a redundancy role. If the PFD screen suffers a failure,

the flight data can merely be shifted to the MFD or in some

cases, a backup electronic display.Contrary to popular belief, a glass

panel system isn’t totally high tech.

The ADC still uses the aircraft’s ol’

fashioned pitot static system to

connect to the flight environment.A peak behind the panel of a modern glass cockpit.

20 FAA Safety Briefing

Of course, now everything you need to see and know to

control flight is on the wrong side of the airplane. So here’s

your first tip and challenge: on your next instrument profi-

ciency check, shoot an approach using the MFD. Flop your

data and dim, or cover, your PFD — as, generally speak-

ing, most manufacturers discourage disabling the PFD by pulling its circuit breaker.

Bonus points for getting with a flight instructor to get

some right-seat time. If you are flying alone and lose your PFD, that experience will make MFD flying more natural.

That said, if you are not an instructor yourself, you might

find the landing sight picture (and the opposite hand

throttle/yoke operation) disconcerting at first, which is why

some practice with an instructor is in order.

Of course, in a real-life display failure, you are now

essentially flying on one mag. Sure, like magneto systems, the odds of losing both are pretty remote, but why take the chance? If you’ve lost one display, it’s time to get on the

ground at the nearest airport.

Reliability’s Weakness

Despite the greatly improved reliability of glass avionics

compared to legacy avionics, if there is a failure in a glass

system, their architecture makes them more prone to

system-wide failures. That means you can lose all of the

flight data, compared to analog systems failures, where

you are more likely to only lose either the air-driven or power-driven instruments — leaving you with at least a

50% solution.

Hence, in glass flight decks, there is a need for

standby instruments.

Standbys

Standby, or emergency backup instruments, might be a set

of analog instruments, or they can be an independent min-

iature glass panel system. Either way, the standby system is

your lifeboat in the “IFR sea. ” Should the worst happen to

your primary system in hard IFR, you can still aviate and

navigate to an island of safety.

At least in theory.

Because the reality is that standbys are both small and

inconveniently located, typically low down on the panel.

Y es, you can fly on them. And yes, it will be a “stressfest. ”

So that’s your second tip and challenge for today: on your

next IPC, shoot a hooded approach on your standbys.

It’s Not as Modern as You Think

Contrary to popular belief, a glass panel system isn’t totally high-tech. The ADC still uses the aircraft’s ol’ fashioned

pitot static system to connect to the flight environment.

That, in turn, means that contemporary glass panels can

fall victim to the same pitot-static failures that legacy

avionics do, so it pays to review the symptoms of pitot and static blockages. Also contrary to popular belief,

the systems won’t necessarily alert you to a pitot-static

problem, and, for the same reason, it can be hard for pilots to recognize such failures in analog systems — they are

subtle and tricky to recognize.

Power Hungry

When it comes to being prepared for emergencies, the

number one thing to understand about glass avionics

actually has nothing to do with the glass itself directly, but

rather with the glass's food. Modern avionics have fero-

cious appetites for electricity. So much so, that an alternator

failure is possibly a greater emergency than an avionics failure. This is because once the battery is drained — and

the battery-backup, if so equipped — the glass shuts down

along with the radios and all the rest.

An alternator failure in a glass-equipped flight deck is a

much more serious matter than it is in a legacy flight deck. First off, once the battery is dead, all flight instrument

data on the glass is lost — rather than just a portion of it.

Additionally, the time from alternator failure to system failure is dramatically reduced, due to the power-intensive

nature of glass avionics.

In the case of an alternator failure in a glass flight deck,

it’s critical to quickly shed load on the electrical system. Unplug any personal devices that are suckling on the

airplane’s USB ports. Then promptly follow the checklist to

shut down any unnecessary aircraft power usage.

Speaking of unnecessary power use, in IFR conditions,

consider proactively lightening the load on your electri-cal system. This means not taxing the aircraft’s electrical In the case of an alternator failure in a

glass flight deck, it’s critical to quickly

shed load on the electrical system.

May/June 2024 21systems by using it as a charging port for crew and passen-

ger tablets, phones, or laptops — their charging load can

increase the risk of an electrical system failure.

Lastly, don’t expect the lights to stay on as long as the

POH says they will after an alternator fails; that number

is based on a factory-new battery. As batteries age, their stored load capacity decreases. In an alternator failure, the

clock is ticking on your glass avionics. Actually, it’s not so

much a clock, as a stopwatch. It is critical to get to VFR conditions, or safely on the ground as quickly as possible.

The Right Stuff

In all flying, the key to emergency survival is preparedness. In the case of glass IFR flight, avionics failures are less

likely, but when failures happen, they are more likely to be

widespread. Additionally, know that glass avionics are more

vulnerable to aircraft electrical system failures than legacy

systems are, and be ready to act swiftly.

For maximum preparedness, take the time on the

ground to study the architecture of the glass panel systems of any glass aircraft you fly. Practice flows — standard, atypical, and abnormal/emergency — parked on the

ground, in a sim, or using an emulator. And review those

tricky pitot-static failures, and how they would manifest on

your glass display.In the air, put those IPCs to good use by practicing with

the MFD and the standbys. Consider some right-seat time.

Right-screen, right-seat practice equips you with the right stuff for a glass emergency.

In flight, keep the load light — the power load. Just like

weight affects aircraft performance, so too does the load on

the electrical system.

And should it happen — should the infamous red “Xs”

appear, or a screen go dark — unplug and navigate to the nearest port in the storm, be that below the weather, above

the weather, or on the ground at the nearest airport or airstrip. Time is not on your side. But if you are prepared,

there will be time enough.

William E. Dubois is a widely published aviation writer and the ground school program man -

ager for Infinity Flight Group. He holds a commercial pilot certificate with an instrument

rating and is a dual-accredited master ground instructor.

LEARN MORE

Instrument Flying Handbook, Chapter 11, Emergency Procedures

bit.ly/43H2Ygx

“How One GPS Source Crashed A Pilot's Navigation Equipment In IMC, ”

Boldmethod, June 14, 2018

bit.ly/3TRI6BV

“Flying With A GPS Failure Below Class B Airspace, ” Boldmethod, May 28, 2020

bit.ly/43BdvMa

“As the Gyro Spins, ” FAA Safety Briefing, Sep/Oct 2015, Page 17

https://bit.ly/SepOct15For maximum preparedness, take

the time on the ground to study

the architecture of the glass panel

systems of any glass aircraft you fly.

May/June 2024 23

CHECKLIST FAA resources and safety remindersJAMES WILLIAMS

CHECKING YOUR CHECK

As we delve into all things instrument

flight rules (IFR) in this issue, we see

that currency and proficiency play a

big part in flight safety. Many of us

aren’t everyday aviators, so when we

get a chance to take to the air, we want to use that time to do something fun,

not just bore holes in the sky, pun

intended. This can lead to an attempt to minimize the “work” we must

do to stay proficient. Sometimes we

clear the bar just enough to meet the

legal standards and move on to more

enjoyable endeavors, an approach that can put us in a potentially deadly

situation. When it comes to flying,

especially instrument flying, being just good enough isn’t good enough.

Where to Start?

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations

(14CFR), section 61.57(c) lays out

the basic currency requirement to fly

under IFR: six approaches, holding,

and intercepting and tracking of

courses, all within the last six calendar months. This would be the “easiest”

way to stay current as these can be

done using actual or simulated instru-

ment conditions and don’t require

evaluating your skills. Y ou may need a safety pilot if you are meeting the

requirements using a view-limiting

device, but the safety pilot is not required to be an instructor. This is

the equivalent of your take-offs and

landings for passenger currency. So long as you do them, and the aircraft is airworthy after that, you’ve met the

requirement. Y ou may also complete

the same tasks in paragraph (c) in

an approved Aviation Training

Device (ATD) without the involve-ment of an instructor.

The other path to IFR currency is

found in 14 CFR section 61.57(d), the instrument proficiency check (IPC).

An IPC may be accomplished instead

of the requirements in paragraph (c)

above but must be completed if cur -

rency lapses. Some pilots prefer to do

an IPC because, from a time and cost

perspective, they can be “cheaper. ”

Even the most efficient routing is unlikely to allow you to do six

approaches, holding, etc., in less than

a few hours of flying time, especially

in busier areas where you may have

to be sequenced in long queues. The requirements of an IPC include air

traffic control clearances and proce-

dures, flight by reference to instru-

ments, navigation systems, instrument

approach procedures, emergency operations, and postflight proce-

dures. For more information on how

to conduct an IPC, the FAA issued Advisory Circular (AC) 61-98D.

While the AC covers many different

checks, Chapter 5 is the most relevant

to this subject. Chapter 5 is brief (less

than four pages) but covers almost everything you need to know about

an IPC from an instructor’s point of

view. From there, we can extrapolate what will likely come up on an IPC as

a participant.

Lean In

In the AC under Preflight

Considerations, there is a key state-

ment that may get overlooked: “The

flight instructor should structure an IPC like that of the flight review, tailoring the check to the needs of the pilot . ” [Emphasis mine]. It goes on

to suggest that the instructor should analyze the pilot’s experience, back-

ground, and abilities utilizing realistic

scenarios to ensure that the pilot is ready to encounter IMC on their own.

The instructor is then supposed to

review their plan of action with the pilot so that everyone agrees on the

check terms. This is where it’s essen-

tial as the pilot receiving the check

that you are really honest with the

instructor. Rather than trying to get away with the minimum, you should

lean in and use the IPC as a real test

of your skills. It may make for a longer

IPC, but the end result is a higher skill

level and greater confidence, which may make the difference when things

start to get rough.

James Williams is FAA Safety Briefing’s associate editor and

photo editor. He is also a pilot and ground instructor.

LEARN MORE

AC 61-98D, Currency Requirements and

Guidance for the Flight Review and Instrument

Proficiency Check

bit.ly/AC6198DIPC RATHER THAN TRYING TO GET

AWAY WITH THE MINIMUM,

YOU SHOULD LEAN IN AND

USE THE IPC AS A REAL TEST

OF YOUR SKILLS.

24 FAA Safety BriefingDRONE DEBRIEF drone safety roundup

REBEKAH WATERS

KEEPING YOUR EYE ON THE DRONE

Anyone who’s ever played baseball

likely remembers the first thing they

learned: “Keep your eye on the ball. ”

Y ou’ve probably passed on this sage

tip at least once. Well, when it comes

to drone flying, keeping your eyes on your drone is not only a great tip, but

it’s also mandatory.

Whether you are a part 107 pilot,

or you fly for fun as a recreational flyer, you must maintain visual line

of sight (VLOS) with your drone

at all times. This requirement can be

one of the most confusing parts of flying a drone. One reason is that the

FAA has not set a maximum distance

for this requirement. This is because the maximum distance you can

maintain VLOS depends on several

factors, such as the size of your drone,

weather conditions, your visual acuity,

and obstacles, to name a few.

Why VLOS?

To understand how to effectively

keep your eye on the drone, let’s look

at why this is a requirement. Section 44809(a)(4) tells recreational flyers:

“The aircraft is operated in a manner

that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft. ” Drone

pilots must “see-and-avoid” manned

aircraft. Some might ask, “Why can’t

I use my camera to satisfy these

requirements?” With today’s tech-nology, even the best cameras cannot

replace the function of a pilot’s ability

to see-and-avoid. In a crewed aircraft,

the pilot can turn and look in any

direction quickly to scan for obstacles. An effective scan must encompass all

areas of the environment in which a

hazard could be present. In this case, think about yourself as the pitcher

instead of the batter. If you have

“tunnel vision” from relying on your camera, would you notice the runner trying to steal second? Y ou must use

your eyes, unaided by any device

other than corrective lenses, to see-

and-avoid other aircraft, people, and

property on the ground.

The “And” and “Or” of VOs

Another common area of confu-

sion is that the FAA uses both “and”

and “or” when talking about visual

observers (VOs). Section 107.31(a),

Visual line of sight aircraft operations ,

says “the remote pilot in command,

the visual observer (if one is used),

and the person manipulating the

flight control of the small, unmanned

aircraft system must be able to see the

unmanned aircraft throughout the

entire flight. ” It goes on to list four

things that must be accomplished

by VLOS: know the location of the drone; determine its attitude,

altitude and direction; watch the

airspace for other air traffic or

hazards; and make sure the drone

does not endanger the life or property of another. But in section

107.31(b) it says, the ability to do these four things must be exercised by the remote pilot in command and the

person manipulating the controls, or

the visual observer.Let’s help this make sense. First,

how can the remote pilot in command be someone other than the person

manipulating the controls? Well, you

may be training someone to fly, but

you are still the one in charge and ulti -

mately responsible for the flight. Next,

is it and or is it or ? VOs could be used

for several reasons like allowing you

to use your camera for photography

or giving you time to look away from

the drone to complete other aspects

of your operation. What section

107.31(b) says is that no matter what is happening, at least one person in

your operation must have eyes on the

drone and the surrounding airspace. What section 107.31(a) says is that

everyone involved in the operation

must have the ability to see the drone

even if one of them looks away from

the drone. In other words, if your VO alerts you to a potential hazard, can

you immediately put your eyes back

on your drone?

Remember, when it comes to

VLOS, your primary responsibility is to see-and-avoid other aircraft.

Y our drone is the ball, not the image

sent back to you by the camera. So, whether it’s you or your visual

observer, make sure you always keep

your eye on your drone!

Rebekah Waters is an FAA Safety Briefing associate

editor. She is a technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight

Standards Service.

LEARN MORE

AC 91-57C, Exception for Limited Recreational

Operations of Unmanned Aircraftbit.ly/AC91-57C

AC 107-2A, Small Unmanned Aircraft System

bit.ly/SmallUAS

May/June 2024 25

NUTS, BOL TS, AND ELECTRONS GA maintenance issuesREBEKAH WATERS

MASTERING BALLISTIC PARACHUTE SYSTEMS MAINTENANCE

A pilot entered the clouds in instru-

ment meteorological conditions

(IMC). Around the same time, he

experienced engine failure and the

aircraft descended abruptly. With all

the alert systems squawking, he didn’t have time to wonder if his ballistic

parachute system was properly main-

tained and inspected. He only had

time to make the split-second deci-sion to deploy it and bring the aircraft

down safely. If he had waited even 30

seconds longer, it could have been too

late. He, and his passenger, escaped major injuries thanks to this system,

and the story has a happy ending.

Ballistic parachute systems are

designed to safely return an aircraft to the ground in the event of an emer -

gency, such as engine failure, struc-tural damage, or other hazards that

might lead to a crash. The systems are launched by a solid rocket that

fires at over 100 miles per hour and

deploys a parachute in less than one second. They come installed standard

on some Cirrus aircraft and can be

installed on many other small aircraft,

including helicopters.

These systems require regular

inspection and maintenance as speci-fied by the manufacturers. Mechanics

must receive proper training on

the maintenance procedures spe-

cific to the system installed on the aircraft they are inspecting and/or maintaining. Before beginning main-tenance, it’s important to familiarize

yourself with the emergency precau-

tions related to the deployment and

operation of the rocket to prevent

major injuries or even death from accidental rocket activation.

When conducting a maintenance

inspection, look for signs of wear,

corrosion, or damage as directed by the manufacturer. Always follow the

manufacturer-recommended replace-

ment schedule for components such

as the rocket motor, parachute, and lines. Just because it is sitting, unused,

doesn’t mean it has maintained being

in a safe condition for flight. These systems also need periodic testing.

Always follow the manufacturer's

directions for testing. Don’t forget

to document what you’ve done.

Maintain detailed records of inspec-tions, replacements, and any main-

tenance performed in the aircraft

maintenance records.

Other required maintenance

includes mandatory and unscheduled canopy inspections and repacks by the

factory. This involves removing the

parachute container from the aircraft for inspection and repacking them at

regular intervals. These intervals vary

depending on the style and whether

the system is mounted internally or

externally. Check the manufacturer recommendations for specific sched-

ules. Unscheduled factory inspections

are required in certain situations. These include signs of damage or

tearing and any time the parachute

is deployed, whether accidentally or intentionally. These systems must also be sent back to the factory when-ever there is a breach of the inner

cap on the canister or upper cap, or

if the parachute itself has gotten wet or exposed to other contaminates. Finally, if there is any situation where

you might be uncertain of the reli-

ability of the unit due to any type

of abuse, exposure, or wear, remove

it and send it for an unscheduled canopy inspection and repack.

Rocket replacement is another

important part of periodic mainte-

nance. All rocket motors have expi-

ration dates and must be replaced accordingly. These dates are printed

on the placards on the sides of the

parachute container and rocket. But

don’t ship the rocket back! Without

the proper packaging and documenta-tion, it is illegal and dangerous to ship

loaded rockets and propellant. Instead,

contact the manufacturer for service instructions on how to safely disassem-

ble and dispose of the rocket properly.

Even when inspected and main-

tained correctly, these systems have

a maximum service life, so check with the manufacturer to know when

the system will need to be replaced.

Hopefully, most pilots won’t ever need

to use this last resort feature. If the

time does come to use it, it will be too late to make sure it’s in good shape. So,

if you inspect an aircraft equipped with a ballistic parachute system, always

follow the manufacturer’s guidelines.

Routine inspection and maintenance

are crucial and could make the differ -

ence between life and death.

Rebekah Waters is an FAA Safety Briefing associate

editor. She is a technical writer-editor in the FAA’s Flight

Standards Service.ALL ROCKET MOTORS HAVE AN

EXPIRATION DATE AND MUST BE REPLACED ACCORDINGLY .

Cirrus photo

26 FAA Safety Briefing

VERTICALLY SPEAKING safety issues for rotorcraft pilotsGENE TRAINOR

SIMULATORS SAVE LIVES

Since people began flying helicop-

ters, weather has played a large role

in accidents. Unintended flight into

instrument meteorological condi-

tions (UIMC) is among the most

dangerous situations that can con-tribute to an accident.

For the layman, UIMC occurs

when pilots unintentionally fly into weather where visibility is so limited

that all they can see are clouds and/

or precipitation. It also can occur over

unlit terrain or a large body of water

on moonless nights when a visual horizon is not visible.

If pilots

fly lower in an attempt

to main-

tain visual

contact with

the ground, they risk

hitting towers, wires, terrain, or other obstacles. If they continue at

their present altitude or higher, they

risk UIMC. This can result in spatial disorientation, which occurs when

pilots cannot determine a helicopter’s

position, motion, and altitude relative to the earth or their surroundings.

Pilots will then need to rely on their

helicopters’ instruments to maintain

aircraft control, turn around before

entering these conditions, or just land. Without adequate training, this can be

a terrifying and dangerous situation.

Consider Simulators

Simulators allow pilots to experience

hazardous situations as if they were in

an aircraft but in a safe environment.

The FAA urges pilots to use simula-tors to practice how to recover from

UIMC. Pilots also can assess the risks

of continuing with a flight. The United States Helicopter

Safety Team (USHST), a govern-ment-industry safety advocacy group,

issued a helicopter safety enhance-

ment (H-SE) in 2018, calling on the helicopter community to increase

simulator training. Not only do sim-

ulators help pilots navigate UIMC,

spatial disorientation, and other risky

weather-related conditions, they can also help with better decision-mak-

ing; loss of control; loss of tail rotor

effectiveness; and vortex ring state

conditions. Several of these situations

occur simultaneously.

We recognize that some pilots may

lack access to simulators. Properly trained instructors using view-limit-ing devices in flight represent a good

alternative and provide real-world

conditions conducive to spatial disori-

entation training.

Simulator Training Matters

The Rotorcraft Collective, a gov-

ernment-industry group, recently

published a video that retells the time

flight instructor Terry Palmer met some pilots waiting for their helicop-

ter to be serviced in Shreveport, La.

While they waited, she offered UIMC instruction in her flight simulator.

The pilots crashed in every scenario.

These pilots had traveled to

Shreveport under visual flight rules.

Clouds were minimal, and the pilots could see obstacles and terrain

several miles ahead of their helicop-

ter’s flight path. After their UIMC training, the pilots were en route

back to Boston when they encoun-

tered weather outside New Y ork City.

They landed their helicopter. They

knew they lacked the expertise to push through thanks to the simula-

tor training. One of the pilots called Palmer to tell her that she saved

their lives. According to Palmer, they scheduled additional simulator

training to improve their instrument

proficiency. Watch the video at

bit.ly/3xsHFFp.

The USHST Safety Analysis Team

(SAT), the group that developed

the simulator H-SE, among others,

studied 104 fatal helicopter accidents from 2009 to 2013 and determined

that 52 accidents fell into three

occurrence categories: UIMC, loss of

control, and low-altitude operations.

Of these 52 fatal accidents, the team determined that 21 could have been

avoided through simulator training.

More than half (12) were UIMC.

“This H-SE targets greater use

of simulation at all levels … initial professional helicopter training and

during recurrent training sessions, ”

the SAT’s report states. “This will allow pilots to learn from their mis-

takes in a safe environment and will make them less likely to repeat the

error during actual flight. ”

UIMC is a risk every pilot faces.

Be prepared. Train in a simulator.

Gene Trainor is a technical writer/editor in the FAA’s

Aircraft Certification Service.

LEARN MORE

USHST Video, 56 Seconds to Live

ushst.org/56secs

USHST Video, Simulation: Learn From Your Mistakes

bit.ly/4amizpI

“A 360-Degree Approach to IMC, ” Rotor, March 2021

bit.ly/43u9mcI (PDF)

Spatial Disorientation Induced by a Degraded

Visual Environment

ushst.org/recommended-practices

RedBird photo

May/June 2024 27

letters from the FAA Safety Briefing mailbagFLIGHT FORUM

Check out our GA Safety

Facebook page at

Facebook.com/groups/

GASafety .

If you’re not a member, we encour -

age you to join the group of nearly 16,000 participants in the GA com-munity who share safety principles

and best practices, participate in

positive and safe engagement with

the FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam),

and post relevant GA content that makes the National Airspace

System safer.

Auspicious Admission

I was a Delta Airline pilot for 34

years, and now I’m retired and flying general aviation operations.

I was familiar with the Aviation

Safety Reporting System (ASRS) and Aviation Safety Action Program

(ASAP), and we used to be able to

report within 24 hours an incident

and then get maybe get a letter of

caution or warning instead of a violation, if warranted. Do we have

anything like this self-reporting pro-

gram for me now? Thank you!

— Chris

Hi Chris. Thanks for reaching out

and welcome to the general aviation

community! Fortunately, the ASRS

also applies to part 91 flying, and we

encourage you to participate!

NASA ’s ASRS welcomes all users

to report any safety issue, especially information that could

help prevent

an accident. They protect

your iden -

tity and the identity of all

other parties involved. The

personally

identifying

information

will not be shared outside of NASA,

including with the FAA, unless the

report involves criminal activity or an

accident. Further, if the event became

known to the FAA by some other means and the FAA takes legal enforce-

ment action, then the FAA will not

impose any civil penalty or certification

suspension if certain criteria are met.

Regarding the 24-hour period for

filing a report — while you can submit a report at any time, you are encour -

aged to complete the report in as timely

a manner as practical. Doing so helps

ensure that any critical safety-related

information is relayed by NASA to the

FAA sooner. It also helps you as the reporter to remember all the details of

the event. However, if the reporting is

to be used for waiver of legal enforce-ment sanction, then the report must

have been filed within 10 days after the

event (or the date when you became

aware or should have been aware there

was a violation).

ASRS collects the de-identified infor -

mation and the reporter’s narratives to spot deficiencies and discrepancies in the National Airspace System (NAS). These narratives provide a rich source of information for understanding the nature of hazards and enhance the basis for human factors research and

recommendations for future operations.

For more information on voluntary

reporting, read “Sharing is Caring”

at bit.ly/48OV0Va, “See a Safety Issue? File a NASA Report” at

bit.ly/49NJN8N, and “Break a Rule?

See a Safety Issue?” at bit.ly/4a94Sdw.

Remember, report as many times

as you need, as often as you need — there’s no limit!

From the FAA’s GA Safety

Facebook Group

Real-Life IFR Flight into IMC

One contributor to the Facebook

group posted a video of his expe-

rience with the conditions and interactions with ATC in total IMC.

Thanks for sharing!

Check it out for yourself at

bit.ly/4a9z88Q .

For more stories and news,

check out our blog

“Cleared for Takeoff”

at medium.com/FAA .

Let us hear from you! Send your comments,

suggestions, and questions to SafetyBriefing@faa.gov. You can also reach us on X (formerly

known as Twitter) @FAASafetyBrief or on

Facebook at facebook.com/FAA.

We may edit letters for style and/or length.

Due to our publishing schedule, responses may

not appear for several issues. While we do not

print anonymous letters, we will withhold names or send personal replies upon request. If you have a concern with an immediate FAA operational issue, contact your local Flight

Standards Office or air traffic facility.

ON FINAL an editor's perspective

TOM HOFFMANN

WITH MY HEAD IN THE CLOUDS

Many people say imitation is the sin-

cerest form of flattery. I agree in some

cases, but I’ d argue there’s great value

in authenticity. Various businesses

have touted that truth in campaign

strategies over the years. A few that stand out to me are Coke (It’s the

Real Thing), Wild Turkey (Accept No

Imitations), and Porsche (There is No Substitute). It harkens to consumers

having a “genuine” experience. While

these are all fairly subjective regard-

ing what is actually the best, there’s

something to be said about enjoying or experiencing something that is

the standard-bearer, or as many soda

drinkers would affirm, the real thing.

In this IFR-focused issue, we point

out the many ways and means that pilots have to gain flying experience

when solely guided by instruments. It

might involve simu-

lation training firmly on the ground using

a full flight simulator,

flight training device,

or an aviation training

device. If it’s a nice

sunny VFR day,

it might involve

launching into

the air with a

view-limiting

device, or if the

weather works

out, flying in

actual instru-

ment meteoro-

logical condi-

tions (IMC)

— the real deal.

While receiving training for

my instrument

rating during a

New England fall, I didn’t have to rely much on the first two options as IMC was pretty

plentiful. Up to that point, I had only

received limited IFR training under a

hood or view-limiting glasses. I have

nothing against those at all, as I know IMC opportunities are difficult to

seek out in some parts of the country.

However, having the experience of real-world instrument conditions did

make a big difference, in my opinion.

First, there are some visual, aural,

and sensory experiences offered by

IMC flight that are difficult to recreate in a simulated environment or with

view-limiting devices. On the latter,

they can help improve your instru-ment scan, but gaps in these devices

can inadvertently clue in a student to

the type of scenario or unusual atti-

tude a flight instructor is attempting

to present.

There are also a few subtle things

you can only experience in actual IMC, like the buffet you might feel

when you first enter a cloud layer, the

sounds and varying levels of visual obscuration you might encounter

when flying through precipitation, or

simply just seeing your windshield completely enveloped in gray. To a

novice flyer, these experiences could

be quite startling and anxiety-in-

ducing, especially during an initial

encounter. I felt that having the ability to see, hear, and feel these subtleties

during training provided me with an

additional layer of confidence and preparation that I carried with me on

subsequent IFR flights.

The gradual and often hard-to-de-

tect onset of IMC conditions during

flight is also difficult to simulate. Real-world inadvertent IMC encoun-

ters don’t typically mimic the binary

situation experienced when donning a hood that instantly places you in the clouds. There’s value in being able

to see and experience firsthand that

gradual loss of visibility and ground

reference leading up to IMC, and

being able to correctly react before the situation worsens. Look no further

than the sheer volume and fatality rate

of VFR into IMC accidents to see the life-saving value of this experience.

Y et another benefit is the ability to

set more realistic personal minimums

based on these real-world experiences.

Personal minimums should be set to provide a solid safety buffer between

the skills required for the specific

flight you want to make, and the skills

available to you through training,

experience, currency, and proficiency. An essential step in establishing per -

sonal minimums includes assessing your experience and comfort level with certain flight conditions (e.g.,

low ceilings and visibilities).

Be honest in your assessment, but

don’t be afraid to adjust those min

imums as you gain experience with certain conditions. Having pre-set

hard numbers based on specific per -

sonal parameters you’ve established with firsthand experience will make it much easier to make smart no-go

or divert decisions than having a

vague sense that you can “probably” deal with the conditions you’re in.

It’s a case where having your head

in the clouds can actually help you

see more clearly.THE GRADUAL AND OFTEN

HARD-TO-DETECT ONSET OF IMC CONDITIONS DURING FLIGHT IS DIFFICULT TO SIMULATE.

28 FAA Safety Briefing

FAA FACESFAA employee profile

PAUL CIANCIOLO

STEPHEN BROWN

Aircrew Program Manager, FAA’s Boston Flight Standards District Office

What do a lobster, a pot, and chowder

have in common? To New England

local Stephen Brown, they are the

three components needed to make

a five-star instrument-rated pilot —

translated to qualification, currency, and proficiency. A safe pilot under -

stands all three.

Our crustacean friend can nav-

igate the depths without the need

to see, even when Poseidon churns

up the seafloor, causing subaquatic

instrument meteorological conditions

(IMC). One could say he’s a qualified captain, but that doesn’t mean he

won’t get caught in a trap.

“Each year, we have so many

people who are instrument-rated and continue into IMC conditions

they should be avoiding. They think

they can do it because they are rated, ”

Stephen explains. “Being qualified is great, but that should be considered a

knowledge/decision skill, not a regu-

lar operational skill. ”

If you don’t want to go from lobster

pot to stock pot, stay current. Think of currency as your license to learn.“What I see as being current for

IFR flights is that you have demon-

strated the skill set to go out and

learn more, ” he notes. “Y ou can fly in

selected conditions to improve your

skills and have an instructor conduct an instrument proficiency check. Y ou

need to hone and develop those skills. ”

This is where our culinary trifecta

is perfected into a good cup of chow-der — with proficiency. That means

you can apply those skills in varying

conditions and situations and know

the conditions and situations to avoid.

“ A proficient pilot knows that

the hardest decision is the internal debate to cancel before a flight, ” he said. “Being a proficient pilot also

means being able to fly your aircraft

without automation in difficult

situations. It involves being able to change the level of automation you are using at any given moment with-

out it being a factor. ”

With more than 8,000 hours as an

airplane and glider flight instructor, Stephen is still all about improving his

skills and flying as much as he can. He

has flown more than 100 makes and

models ranging from powered para-chutes to gliders, ski planes, and small

corporate jets.

Before joining the FAA in 2009,

Stephen earned a bachelor’s degree in

aviation from Daniel Webster College and a master’s degree with a focus in

simulation from Embry-Riddle Aero-

nautical University. He has worked or flown for Comair, Embry-Riddle,

Sporty’s Pilot Shop, and Cape Air. He

was also an aviation program director at the University of Cincinnati and Daniel Webster College.

At the FAA, Stephen’s most memo-

rable role was his nine-year stint as an FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam) pro-gram manager where he was integral in educating fellow pilots. Now, he is an aircrew program manager in the

Boston FSDO assigned to Cape Air.

He oversees the regulatory involve-

ment of the regional airline’s aircrew

designated examiners.

“The funny thing that led me to

the FAA is an intervention at Air -

Venture in Oshkosh. I would occa-sionally help with what is now the

KidVenture portion, maybe do a

seminar or two, and would just be

generally involved, ” he reminisces.

“One day, a bunch of us were watch-ing the aerial performance from

some picnic tables, and I realized

that all the FAA people I had worked with were sitting around me. One of

them looked at me and said, ‘Steve,

this is an intervention. ’ That’s when I

decided I needed to come to work for

the FAA, somehow, some way. ”

So, this is your intervention: next

time you fly for that $100 hamburger — try upgrading to a lobster chow-

der. And to keep you safely out of

the stock pot, remember the three ingredients needed to make a five-star

instrument-rated pilot: qualification,

currency, and proficiency.

Paul Cianciolo is an associate editor and the social media

lead for FAA Safety Briefing. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran

and an auxiliary airman with Civil Air Patrol.

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Federal Aviation

Administration

800 Independence Ave., S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20591

FORWARDING SERVICE REQUESTED

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Look Who’s Reading

FAA Safety Briefing

When not breaking the sound barrier,

NASA Research Test Pilot Nils Larson

keeps current on general

aviation safety.