Plastic Pilot

London City Airport is on the list of my aviation projects and dreams. I love this airport, because of its a time saver, because it has a unique implantation, and because of the unique scenery it offers. However, this is for me kind of a Forbidden Land, because of all the constraints.

No private pilot can land there. No single engine (even single engine turbine) can land there. No private traffic can use this airport. All pilots operating there need to go through a special training. As I don’t want a job as professional turbine pilot, the chances for me to land there otherwise than as an airline passengers are low, if not inexistant. By the way, if you’re working for BAA / CAA and can arrange an exception (even a single ILS approach with go-around will do), or for an operator and can arrange a jumpseat flight, you’re welcome.

Before someone makes it possible for me to go there, here are some pictures, found on airliners.net. Click on them to see the full size version on airliners.net.

On this first photo, taken on final 28 on the glide path - it seems high, but look at the PAPI - one can see the construction works left of threshold. Note that the only possible way for departing aircraft is to backtrack ruwnay, and this seriously reduces the airport capacity.

The second photo, taken in 2008, shows the reason for these works: a partial parallel taxiway has been built. It is still necessary to back-track, but two planes can depart rather quickly one behind the other, and that shortly after a landing, making the runway capacity higher.

Finally, a photo taken on final for runway 10. It was also taken before the construction of the floating taxiway. The approach angle is also impressive, but the departure (go-around) path is much clearer than on runway 28…

PS: simple visit of the tower would be fine as well

Here we go again - 7 links to various aviation related resources on the web. Don’t stop before the end, or jump directly to the last one…

The blog of Eddie - Pilot in training
Eddie’s blog is rather new, and is one more instance of a dreamed I personally missed: blogging the process of becoming a private pilot. These days are well behind me, but Eddie is right in that now !

Most dangerous airports
I guess all is in the title. A classical theme, but well documented. Photos from St-Marteen, but also a video of the KLM 747 landing there. Courchevel is also part of it, with both photos and videos. There are also a couple of one I did not know, so a good variation on a known theme.

The bigger lego plane in the world
What can you do with 75′000 lego bricks (100 kgs), within 600 hours ? A Sinapore Airlines Airbus 380. Don’t ask.

Newlyweds fly to the reception
I took my introductory flight the day before getting married, and was 22. Rob Hoschner, 22, and Rachel MacKay, 23, made much better: together with their families, they flew from church to their private hangar, where the reception was held. That’s so romantic.

Jetwhine asking where is the best aviation blog
If you like to read aviation blog (apparently you do…) you probably know Jetwhine. They recently asked where is the best aviation blog, so many readers submitted their favorite blogs, thus creating a wonderful directory. Special thanks to Jess Sightler, who kindly submitted PlasticPilot.net.

Operation Pegasus - DA42 airborne for 13 hours
It was probably not a flight at full power, and flying for more than 10 hours in a light aircraft is not an uncommon thing (how do you guess we bring them from US to Europe ?), but it usually involves extra tanks. This DA42 flew for 13 hours non-stop using the standard tanks, and landed with legal reserves.

Surprise, surprise
This is not exactly aviation related, but has something to do with flying. When I saw that, I could not resist to publish this link. I look forward to have your opinion: post-production special effects, or real thing.

Read older “Best of the aviation web” posts in The Archives.

Yes, this is your favorite aviation blog, even if this post title sounds much more like the typical anoucenement for a patch for a mysterious software. Apparently, the problems with the Eclipse 500 Very Light Jet FADECs is now solved.

The FADECs software did crash when it received an out of range value from the trhottles. According to AvWeb: “Eclipse says its solution will increase the range limit of the throttle quadrant assembly to prevent the fault condition from occurring.” Given the kind of problem - both FADECs failing at the same moment, when throttle is pushed full forward - this is not really a surprise to me.

Eclipse will deliver a software update that will remove the problem. It is not the first time in aviation history that a software patch will solve a problem, but given the mediatic buzz around the VLJs, and the Eclipse 500 in particular, this is gets more coverage than an Airbus patch.

The name of the patch I mentionned in this post is a personal inventon, trying to be fun, and to make you think. The serious problem that affected the Eclips will be solved by simply uploading a new firmware. I don’t know however if the Eclipse interface uses USB or Bluetooth.

Jokes put aside, I know many pilots that will feel uncomfortable with the concept of flying a software controlled plane. Most of them associate “software” with their own experience at home, with their PCs. Airplanes are not all the same, airlines are not all the same, and software are not all the same.

The development standards, and quality of software used aboard aircraft has nothing to to with what you have in your PC. The hardware is also different, and there are no third products that you can download yourself in the FADECs, making the environment much more controllable.

Another thing that make software sounds mysterious (and then dangerous) is that most pilots don’t understand exactly what it is, how it’s made, how it works, and what it does. A magneto, alternator or carburetor is much easier, and these things can be seen, touched, examined, dismantled, and inspected. You can’t do that with software.

Shall we get rid of software in our planes ? Hell NO ! There is no efficient engine management without electronics and software. There is no GPS, no RNAV tools without software. Without software, no cockpit integration is possible. Things like TCAS, GPWS, Mode-S transponders, FMS, and many others are all software based. Did I mention autopilots ?

As any airplane part, software can fail. It’s not because something is computer-based that there will be more or less failures. Just like a crankshaft, pump, belt, servo, landing gear assembly, fuel line, piston, windshield, voltage regulator, intercom, or any other mechanical or electrical component, software can fail.

This is exactly why there are so many different computers on board. For engines management, avionics, navigation, and so on, each system uses its own, separate hardware and software, to avoid crashing all of them at the same time. That would be bad. At least as bad as a failing wing-root, or a lost engine making the plane out of balance.

So please don’t be affraid of software simply because it can’t be seen or touched, and don’t compare aircraft embedded software with “quickly downloaded - quickly deleted” kind of stuff that fulfills most harddisks. Software is the next step in aviation, just like voice replaced morse code, and composite slowly replaces aluminium.

With the highly demanding validation and certification standards required in aviation, the risk levels remain minimal. Not zero, but well acceptable. Remember that safety is not defined as the absence of hazards, but the absence of unacceptable hazards.