I will flat out make a prediction: a whole new type of flight is here…and it will change everything…and I mean everything about how we fly.

I was musing the other day, while catching up on the latest multi-rotor RC model technology with which to populate my Christmas wish list, about how long it would take before we saw a serious effort to build ahuman-carrying version.

Clearly I was way behind the buzz curve: talk about instant gratification! E-volo of Karlsruhe,Germany has just made a lightspeed leapfrog over pretty much every other vertical takeoff/landing design or project I’ve heard about.

The gamechanger: the just-maidened VC200 Volocopter.

Watch the video, then read on.

This project and others like it is going to change flight as we know it, make no mistake.

It would even be a legal S-LSA since it carries a max two occupants and,well, look at it: no way that can weigh more than 1320 lbs. since it’s all carbon-fiber composite. There is one glitch though, or rather 18 of them: it has more than the single legal piston-powered motor mandated in FAA’s LSA spec.

No matter: this nicely sculpted, mechano-buglike craft not only looks right, but could lead to a wave of simplest powered flying vehicles ever…unless you’re thinking powered parachutes, which is sort of like saying beating a bowl of eggs into submission with a cement mixer is the simplest way to make an omelet. (No offense intended against PPCs: they’re a ton of fun to fly.).

So even though FAA has yet to finalize a spec for electric propulsion for LSA, ASTM has just done so, with the Feds expected to follow suit soon.

More significant I believe is this: No force on earth will keep this burgeoning technology out of the hands of eager pilots…and those who have always dreamed of simply flying without hours and hours of flight instruction just to get the feel of how an airplane or chopper must be controlled to fly safely. The multi-rotor flying concept will, as it evolves and is refined, be more like learning to drive a car than fly an airplane.

As such, E-volo’s impressive accomplishment signals a paradigm shift in manned flight.

Similar flying machines like the eternally-in-development Moller Skycar or the recently announced Terrafugia TF-X, projected to debut in, oh, about a decade or so, riff on the vertical rotor concept by sporting tilt-rotor designs.

The E-volo VC200 dismisses in one 18-brush stroke all the mechanical complexity and expense that tilt rotors are heir to, thanks to its ability to instantaneously migrate thrust to each and several – or all – of the rotors independently, entirely through electronic computer control.

And how does that work, you ask? Rather intuitively I would imagine, once the control synchronization is perfected, and so easily that it should revolutionize piloting forever.

Want to take off? Give it full power to climb straight up. Want to move forward? Piece of cake: Push the yoke and the rear array of motors automatically increases thrust while the forward motors decrease thrust. Result: the “nose” of the circular motor array dips down as the “tail” raises up and you slide forward.

I imagine it would feel very much like accelerating in a chopper, or catching a big wave on a surfboard. Kind of exciting, in other words.

Think about it a bit more and you’ll realize you can do the same thing in reverse…I mean back up just like driving a car, without changing heading first. Or slide (not bank or turn, but slide,to the left, or to the right, or in any direction.)

You’re not required to bank at all to turn in fact, like you would with a rudder (airplane) or tail rotor (helicopter). The same variable-thrust concept works, and rather finely nuanced I would imagine, with 18 motors each providing its increment of thrust vectors, to turn you anywhere you want to go…without adverse yaw or stalls to worry about either. As long as those props are turning, you’re flying.

Consider all this hybrid versatility: You will be able to fly the VC200 like an airplane, but also make vertical takeoffs with it like a helicopter, or hover in position and rotate around the vertical axis. Quadcopter and multi-rotor RC models have been demonstrating these traits for years now, and with excellent, refined control. It’s a hoot to fly the models…imagine flying in a full-sized one!

I’ll be doing my next column on this technology simply because it’s potentially the most exciting, revolutionary flight concept to come along since possibly the first, unheralded flight ofGustave Whitehead, who flew a powered aircraft in 1901 – two years before theWright Flyer.

It’s all part of the Remote Control technology that led to the explosive development of UAV (drone) flight and huge and ongoing advances in electric powerplants, battery technology and computer control.

And this is just the beginning folks.

Follow the link above for more from E-volo, and look for my column in the Jan/Feb issue, on sale in Dec.

Some quick specs (and remember: this is just a prototype):

• 6 blocks of batteries power the 18 rotors
• Current endurance: about 20 minutes, with one hour anticipated and extended range as technology evolves.
• Cruising speed projected at 54 knots and max altitude of 6,500 ft. I’ve seen You Tube videos of small quadcopters flying well over 100 mph…speeds will increase as the complex aerodynamics of several simultaneously spinning propellers is better understood and refined.
• Redundant power wiring: three batteries power each “arm” of rotors, so two batteries could fail and the VC-200 would still be able to land safely.
• A ballistic parachute system will be on board for backup in case of catastrophic power failure or mid air collision. Conceptually, the rotor array would be jettisoned first: now thatwould make for a fun ride. Another check in the plus column over helicopters: shed a rotor blade there and you’re toast.
• E-Volo’s goal: to make this mode of flying safer than any air vehicle in history.
• More redundancy: 20 small but powerful computers are the brains of the operation…andany single computer can fly the VC-200 on its own.
• The several-minute maiden flight, with multiple landings and takeoffs, was held in an indoor arena. Early indications were that the craft performed better than expected, in particular with less vibration although 18 motors were doing the heavy lifting.
• It was also much quieter than anticipated; you can hear on the video what a nice, whirring-sans-eggbeating sound it puts out.
• Visionary Erik Lindbergh presented his Lindbergh Prize for Innovation to e-volo in 2012 for its single-seat experimental multi-copter,saying, “We believe that the development of the Volocopter holds significant promise to radically change short distance transportation.”

The post Quick, say “Octodecacopter”…and Welcome the Future appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

Last year, Vans Aircraft came out with its Signature Series, an even dozen pre-built SLSA. They were built by Vans kit builder support company Synergy Air of Eugene, Oregon.

Now I’m not trying to set you up for a fall, but even though the company did just announce another 12 RV-12 batch, priced at $123,000 each (loaded), the odds are reasonable that by the time you read this, they’ll be gone too. My apologies for bringing good, then potentially bad news.

My pessimism derives from the last batch. See,they were snapped up so quick that the next 50 or so eager customerson the list -with checks in hand -were turned away.

By the way, that $123,000 sticker includes ADS-B, two-axis autopilot, wheel pants, and premium paint schemes with pinstripe. The base model goes for $115,000.

Don’t mope around just yet though: just in case there are some left, and you want one of the mostspiffy, beautifully handling, comfortable low wing sport planes out there, don’t hesitate to contact Vans!and have a $5000 deposit ready to go just in case so nobody cuts ahead of you in line.

The Signature models came with all the available options Vans carries installed, and in only one paint scheme. The new batch has seven paint schemes and buyers can choose whatever options they want, including Dynon SkyView avionics, LED lighting, and more.

Vans says its small batch approach is their plan for maintaining good service and providing accurate!and short! delivery dates — a major challenge of just about every aviation company that’s ever existed.

Synergy Air meanwhile is a powerhouse company in its own right. The RV kit builder training center was formed by a band of successful previous builders and offers all kinds of video help online too, along with personal hands-on support for kit buyers who can come to Eugene. I used to live there: Eugene’s a fun college town.

Synergy Air-built aircraft have won a lot of major awards at airshows. Sounds like a good time for builders. If I had the bucks I’d be there in a hot second. I started an early Kitfox kit in 1984. But while I had help from friends old and new who would drop by the hangar intermittently, I had my fair share of problems, chief of which was my out-of-control perfectionism! A couple parts were out of spec too, which needed factory help to correct. End of story: that 400-hour kit became a 1750-hour experience.

Of course, those first kits back in the mid-80s have come a long, long way. I hasten to add in the intervening 25 years, Kitfox in particular has really gotten its act together. I hear the kits today are fabulous and a lot easier to build than mine was.

And if I’d had a place like Synergy to go to, I’m sure I would’ve whipped that puppy out in six months or less.

Nonetheless, building an airplane is an unforgettable experience. I recommend it to anyone who likes to work with their hands.

Synergy Air is quick to let people know that builders who go there shouldn’t expect to have a kit built for them. Their operating philosophy is “to help builders learn strategies, techniques and skills” so they can build their own aircraft with confidence while having a lot of fun, and of course avoiding a lot of the pitfalls that first-timers inevitably fall prey to.

The post RV12s, Hot Off The Griddle! appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

A story posted by Daniel McCoy, a reporter for the Wichita Business Journal, claims the star-crossed Cessna 162 Skycatcher will likely not enjoy the longevity and success of other notable Cessna icons such as the C-172 and C-150/152.

The Skycatcher was one of the first SLSA out of the gate for the new category created by FAA in 2004. But troubles with manufacturing and two highly publicized airframe parachute deployments during flight testing, including an airframe redesign after the first one,contributed to the dark cloud that seemed to follow the once-bright promise of Cessna’s entry.

The market-perceived lackluster specifications sheet and barebones/industrial interior finish relative to many other LSA entries also contributed to the steady attrition in the once-1000-plus order sheet for the Skycatcher.

The news came yesterday at the NBAA (National Business Aviation Association) confab in Las Vegas. Company CEOScott Ernestmade the remarkthat Skycatcher had difficulty attracting market share and had lost a sizable percentage of its multi-year back orders. Ernest said he saw “no future” for the aircraft.

Cessna’s prop aircraft division jumped into the discussion soon after by stating that there are still Skycatchers available for delivery in the aviation giant’s inventory and that the C-162 is still officially in the company’s product line.

McCoy goes on to cite GAMA (General Aviation Manufacturers Association) data that shows nodeliveries of the troubled LSA through the second quarter of 2013. Just 19 were delivered in 2012. Although there was a surge in deliveries, once production wrinkles were finally ironed out at the main assembly factory in China, it now seems likely Cessna will not overtake Flight Design as the top-selling LSA manufacturer.

Skycatcher was the brainchild of former Cessna top dog Jack Pelton, who moved on rather abruptly in 2011 to take over the reins at EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) after a reported $38 million dollar loss at the Wichita-based company.

Originally targeted byPelton to cost under $100,000, once the design was stabilized, it debuted at $109,000. Still, more than 1,000 would-be owners signed on. The general consensus for the surge credited Cessna’s proud history at producing quality aircraft for the strong initial market support.

Then came setbacks – years of them – and the gradual attrition from the order book rank and file. When the price skyrocketed to $149,900 in 2011, the airplane likely lost whatever enthusiasm remained.

Perhaps some hard bargainers will be wrangle a lower price for those Skycatchers in inventory. We can assume Cessna will continue to support the fleet, which will in time likely number around 300 delivered.

Meanwhile, perhaps the best lesson from all this for industry watchers is best attributed to AvWeb’s Paul Bertorelli, who put forth the notion that if Cessna can’t successfully build a cheap LSA, perhaps we should stop complaining about what is clearly impossible.

Indeed, I’ve long urged us to instead celebrate the variety, sophistication, reliability and entry-level affordability the current fleet brings us today. Remember, a new Cessna 172, the mainstay of entry level flight training for decades, now costs north of $400,000.

Although LSA registrations in general were down a bit in 2012 for a variety of reasons that had more to do with delivering existing inventory and conservatively slower production rates than lack of support for the industry, 132 SLSA models have been accredited to date thanks to the successful ASTM/FAA partnership program.

Meanwhile, rest in peace, Skycatcher: we hardly knew ye.

The post Skycatcher: To Be or to Be, Not appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

It’s been a delight not to drop with exhaustion at the end of a long day slogging around the miles of paths and thousands of exhibits, planes and aviation sundry.

Here’s some more cool stuff from my travels across the great cement/grass/asphalt immensity known simply as “Oshkosh.”

The post Freakish Oshkosh Weather Continues! appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

The post The Big O Photo Jam appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

That’s a timely reprise of an old show tune to bring our attention to the Paris Air Show, which is sending out some ripples in the “What’s New” Dept..

I’m always thinking about electric flight. If we manage to survive as a species from at least another century or two of fossil fuel burning, (Peak Oil? What, me worry?), chances look better every year that electric flight will be a major player in how we take the air.

And for those of you who think that’s just a bunch of hot air, you could be right too! Read on.

Jason Paur who writes for Wired magazine gets to do all the fun stuff I just get to fantasize about…specifically, electric flight. He’s at Le Bourget Field in Paris and filed this report on an exciting new electric prototype that fits nicely into the Light Sport Aircraft specification.

Here are some highlights and you can read the rest first hand at the link above.

First, it’s an electric aerobatic trainer…not a combo of descriptors that’s all that common. It’s called the E-Fan and comes to us from one Didier Esteyne, the same engineer/pilot who brought us the electric Cri-Cria couple years ago. That bizarre little creature – the aircraft, not the pilot – mounted a couple small electric motors onto the nose of an existing single seat homebuilt airplane and showed us that you can indeed have electric flight right now and have fun doing it too – the Cri Cri is also aerobatic.

Now comes his E-Fan, a significantly more sophisticated entry into the wattflight sweepstakes, a joint effort with EADS, the aerospace giant that produces the Airbus A-380.

Jason reports EADS gave Esteyne the go ahead last October, and just a few months later, he wheeled it into Paris (the maiden flight won’t come for a few months) for the 50th anniversary of the show. Nice.

Leading some exciting new innovation wrinkles are the electric ducted fan units on either side of the fuselage. If you’ve seen the near-legendary A-10 ground attack jet you know what a ducted fan is: essentially a shrouded prop that has some performance and efficiency advantages over sticking a prop all by its lonesome into the relative wind.

Wikipedia serves up a good summation on the efficacy of ducted fans:

• propeller blade tip vortices are reduced, bringing higher thrust efficiency especially at low speeds and high static thrust level (as in airships and hovercraft…and the A-10)
• With proper design, air velocity is controlled through the fan to bring more efficiency at higher air speeds
• A ducted fan can produce the same thrust as a larger diameter free prop. One benefit: lower-to-ground landing gear
• Quieter operation
• limited thrust vectoringpossible (think:tiltrotors)
• Greater safety on the ground – you can’t accidently walk into a ducted fan blade, at least not from the side

Since electric flight realities are still challenged by a high weight-to-power ratio (heavy batteries are the culprit here since electric motors are highly efficient and smaller than equivalent-powered gas engines), anything that might help shift the ratio toward the power side is worth considering. That was Esteyne’s rationale: small motors, big thrust.

And smaller motors means, you guessed it, a smaller battery payload, which as we know is still the big stumbling block. Bonus: lighter weight overall, and less money to build…and sell.

As designed, the E-Fan motors along just fine with just 20 kW power per engine. “Just fine” means one hour’s flying duration at around 110 mph.

Some initial specs:

• wingspan: 31 feet
• max weight: 1,212 pounds, right in the LSA wheelhouse.
• batteries: two, 250 volt, 40 amp-hour, multi-cell lithium ion battery packs in each wing root.
• ground help: Paur reports, “To maximize flight time, one main landing gear wheel has a small electric motor that can propel the airplane up to 35 mph, which is more efficient than using thrust to taxi.”

As an acrobat, E-Fan’s endurance drops to 30 minutes. That’s about the turn-me-loose endurance level of most acrobatic students anyway. Still, we’re talking a two-seat electric airplane, folks.

The stated goal of the project is to produce a certified electric aircraft for the market. We’ll be keeping an eye on the E-fan. Meanwhile, perhaps Yuneec can work out whatever has delayed its two seat, beautiful E-430 electric LSA soon so we can get some of these aircraft in the air and really get the excitement going.

Now for the “hot air” segment of our blogcast:

Although it’s not an LSA-worthy contender, this new breakthrough, also debuting at Paris, is just too good to pass up.

Wait for it…a hot air-driven helicopter!

The Sherpa, by a new Belgian company named Sagita, intends to make the case that choppers can be less complex and more efficient, reliable and affordable.

The technology eyebrow-raiser here: Sherpa’s rotors are directly driven by enclosed turbines which are in turn powered by hot air and exhaust fumes from the helicopter’s conventional power plant. Sagita claims an 85 percent efficiency doing things this way…and another big plus: no tail rotor needed.

Here’s a sketch of how it works: the Sherpa’s engine drives a compressor which has an air intake at the rear of the helicopter. Some of its compressed air goes back to the engine to bo0st combustion, but the rest of it first extracts heat from Sherpa’s cooling system, then mixes with engine exhaust fumes to heat the air to 212º F. That hot air mix then feeds to two turbines, which directly drive the eggbeater’s two contra-rotating rotors.

Sagita says no additional cooling measures are needed, and fewer moving parts mean reduced maintenance.

There’s a full-scale mockup at Paris, but to date, only a 1/5 scale RC model has flown. Sagita calculates the 573 lb. full-scale helicopter will be capable of lifting 377 lb. of payload, cruise at 85 knots, reach out 250 miles and endure for 3 hours. Ceiling: 6,600 ft.

Consider Sherpa a proof-of-concept that could lead to a whole new generation of simpler, safer, cheaper choppers…or possibly UAVs. Why not, everybody else is jumping into that market. Target price: $200,000. First flight is projected to 2015.

Finally, to address the sad realities we must at times endure in the world of flying.

I learned this past week of the passing of a man who was the kind of pilot and person we all can admire and hope to meet in our travels through the world of personal flight.

His name was Don Sharp. I met him last year at Oshkosh where he and a team of young pilots and flight instructors helped me demo the Pipistrel Alpha Trainer for my story on the new composite trainer. Don lost his life during a personal flight in an Alpha flown by 22-year-oldcommercial pilot Zachary Jenkins.

The two were aloft at night over the north Texas panhandle northeast of Amarillo when their engine lost power. According to early reports, the cause could have been fuel starvation – headwinds were apparently much stronger than expected – and rather than risk an out landing at night in rugged canyon country, the onboard airframe parachute was deployed.

The deploy was successful but winds were so ferocious that the aircraft was dragged across inhospitable terrain for 1 1/2 miles. Don was so badly injured inside the Alpha’s kevlar-reinforced cockpit, although it maintained its integrity even after the tail was torn off, that he died at the scene, according to a newspaper report from Pampa, Texas.

Ironically, the crash occured on a ranch owned by oilman T. Boone Pickens, in an area inaccessible to vehicles…but just two miles from an airstrip on the ranch. The private strip isn’t lit at night. If they’d been flying during the day, or known about the strip, they could likely have safely landed there even without power.

I didn’t know very Don well, but he was the kind of guy you feel like you’ve known for a long time, the first time you meet him. Kind and soft-spoken, with an ever-ready smile, Don was a 30,000-hour pilot and respected Pipistrel dealer for Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. He was by all reports a hard-working flight instructor who was well-liked, and I’m sad to know he’s gone.

Above you see him with Pipistrel’s Tina Tomazic and the student and licensed CFI’s he introduced me to last summer, young men he was working with on a combination motorglider/Alpha Trainer program at Purdue University. They all universally described him with this simple praise: “He’s the best.”

We wish him Godspeed and offer his family our deepest condolences.

The post Fantasy in Paris, Reality at Home appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

It’s the third day at Sun ‘n Fun. Breezy, hottish (high 80s), humid: in other words, classic Florida Spring weather.

The attendance seems steady if not overwhelming. I’ve been hanging out a lot in the new Paradise City Light Sport/Ultralight area and grass landing strip in the southeast corner of Lakeland Linder Airport, and enthusiastically report it is vastly improved over previous years.

Biggest news is probably the merging of Dan Johnson’s LSA Mall showcase for Light Sport manufacturers right next to the grass demonstration flying strip. Now industry reps can show their wares, then roll said wares right across the grass to the strip and give their customers a demo flight. How cool is that? In the past, the Mall was near the main entrance, and Paradise City seemed much more remote than it does now. Well done, Sun ‘n Fun, for making such an improvement!

There have been some kinks in the demo flight information about who can do what, when, such as a rumor that flew around a couple days ago that anyone leaving the 3-mile TFR from Paradise City (a common practice for potential customer demo flights) would not be able to return until the TFR was lifted at day’s end.

Obviously, a ridiculous damper on the purpose of the entire restructuring of Paradise City if true, but the info was mostly a misunderstanding. Restrictions were in place only during a couple acts of the main airshow. The rest of the time, it was ops as usual in Paradise, including allowing demos even during the airshow except as noted, another improvement.

Another welcome change to go along with the extended runway and filled-in runway-end ditches that used to make landing sometimes daunting is the road from the main part of the show to Paradise Valley. Now it curves down nice and close to the runway, there are regular trams from the main gate to the area, and all in all the entire operation makes the Mall and Light Sport/Ultralight flying activity dramatically more accessible and appealing: easier for folks to find, get to and enjoy.

So come on out to the show, have fun and support the winged troops, folks!

The post Live From Sun ‘n Fun 2013 appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

With all the concern around the FAA’s officially announcing the closing of 149 ATC control towers, Pilot Workshops of Nashua, NH is getting with the program to help ease pilot anxiety about the transition.

The company just put out three free videosthat are aimed to help us all refresh our memories aboutNon-Towered Airport operations.

PilotWorkshops founder Mark Robidouxhad this to say: “With the recentannouncement of 149 tower closures, there will suddenly be thousands ofpilots flying into and out of airports that had ATC services one day, andnone the next. While all of us are trained in these procedures, it’s easy tobecome rusty if you aren’t using a skill. We wanted to make this refresheravailable to all pilots for free in the hopes that it makes flying a bitsafer for all of us.”

PilotWorkshops.com LLC was founded in 2005 and is best-known for its free”Pilot’s Tip of the Week” emails received by over 100,000 pilots each week. They’re crafted by severalnationally known flight instructors and experts, andcover single pilot IFR operations, weather, airmanship, ATC, emergencies and more using a unique, multi-media format.

PilotWorkshops also creates and sells a range of pilot proficiency programsincluding IFR Mastery scenario-based training.

Many thanks to the group for jumping right in to help us brush off the cobwebs. Check out the whole list of offerings for their other refreshers.

The post Getting With The (Tower) Program appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

UPDATE TO POST BELOW:

CHICAGO – Mar 22 – Associated Press announced that the FAA put the final list of air traffic control tower closures at 149. The process of shutdown will start early in April.
One key point: closures will not force the airports themselves to shut down, but all pilots will use unicom frequencies to communicate their position and intentions to other pilots in the vicinity.
“We will work with the airports and the operators to ensure the procedures are in place to maintain the high level of safety at non-towered airports,” FAA Administrator Michael Huerta said in a statement.
In what could be a major impact on smaller regional airports such as Salinas Municipal in California, Lakeland Linder Regional in Florida (home of the Sun ’n Fun show next month), and Wittman Regional in Wisconsin (home of Oshkosh Airventure), airlines have yet to say whether they will continue offering service to airports that lose tower staff.
With the huge increase in air traffic at both those Oshkosh and Sun ‘n Fun, it’s likely that both venues will hire tower staff at least for those events. It’s impossible to imagine them without ATC!
So far, Airlines for America said its member carriers have no plans to cancel or suspend flights as a result of the closures.
It’s all part of the Sequestration budget cuts. FAA’s mandate from Congress is to cut $637 million by Sept. 30. The agency said it had no choice but to subject most of its 47,000 employees, including tower controllers, to periodic furloughs and to close air traffic facilities at small airports with lighter traffic.
The airports targeted for tower shutdowns have fewer than 150,000 total flight operations per year. Of those, fewer than 10,000 are commercial flights by passenger airlines.
Airport directors, pilots and others in the aviation sector have argued that stripping away an extra layer of safety during the most critical stages of flight will elevate risks and at the very least slow years of progress that made the U.S. aviation network the safest in the world.
For example, one of the facilities on the final closure list is Ogden-Hinckley Airport in Utah, where air traffic controllers keep planes safely separated from the F-16s operating out of nearby Hill Air Force Base and from flights using Salt Lake City International Airport.
The 149 air traffic facilities slated to begin closing on April 7 are out of a total of 516 control towers in the FAA’s national network.
The targeted towers are all staffed by contract employees who are not FAA staffers. There were 65 other facilities staffed by FAA employees on the preliminary list of towers that could be closed. A final decision on their closure will require further review, the FAA said.
The agency is also still considering eliminating overnight shifts at 72 additional air traffic facilities, including major airports like Chicago’s Midway International and General Mitchell Airport in Milwaukee. There was no word Friday on when that decision will come.
John Lampson, who took me through my Sport Pilot training, is one of the busiest CFIs at Hartford Brainard, CT, wrote me to say:
Thanks for addressing this. Earning my Private ticket at a non-towered airport, I was fortunate to learn from the start that non-towered airports are not “uncontrolled” fields…that is to say, there is plenty of order and regard for safety in that environment Calling a fairly busy towered airport my home for the past decade, I can also absolutely see the value in having an operating control tower at certain airports.
In my opinion, either environment can be operated within quite safely. One issue, however, that may arise from the abrupt closure of these control towers is the adjustment period, mixing ’towered’ students who are used to taking directives from a controller, with non-towered pilots, who are quite comfortable relying on the “transmit in-the-blind”, and using 45 degree-entry mehtods of arriving and departure.
And that is without even mentioning higher-speed, heavier, corporate-type fixed-wing and rotorcraft traffic that frequent many towered airports on a regular basis, day and night.
Form a teaching standpoint, I’m not sure exactly how Private Pilot applicants will obtain the Class D experience they can now so easily access.
It is my hope that for both the pilot community, as well as the controllers who do such a great job helping keep things running smoothly, calmly offering assistance when needed to the fledglings in the pattern, and helping to keep us all separated and safe on a daily basis, that this otherwise well-oiled machine is not dismantled and left to rust while government continues to create new problems and wastes more money.
Meanwhile, back at the political ranch, the Senate and House have both passed budgets at long last, each of which is pretty much guaranteed not to get through the opposite house.

ORIGINAL POST:

You’ve probably heard by now that part of the fun of the so-called sequestration budget cuts across the U.S. economy includes the planned closure of as many as 238 FAA and contract control towers — nearly half the national figure of 515. Other reports cite 177, 189 and 212 airports. No matter who you believe, it’s a major change that will affect thousands of FAA and contract employees and could have a negative impact on air safety and traffic control, just for starters.

Local FBOs and pilots, aviation organizations like AOPA and EAA, GA business commuters to name just a few have raised a hue and cry from coast to coast.
FAA has been notifying airports that their towers are scheduled to close in the coming weeks. The list spreads the pain nationwide and includes names most of us are at least aware of, and many have flown into at one time or another:
Mobile Downtown in Alabama, Santa Monica in Southern California (one of 9 in So Cal alone!), Front Range in Colorado, Orlando Executive in Florida, Hartford-Brainard in Massachusetts (the busy GA airport where I got my Sport Pilot ticket) and Cuyahoga County in Cleveland, Ohio.
Only six states escaped the cut, with the largest, most-active GA states such as California (23), Florida (20) and Texas (19) among the hardest hit.
Here’s a complete list of ATC facilities that could be closed:
Most airports that have their towers shut down will transition to uncontrolled fields. That should be interesting, to put it mildy, in places like Santa Monica, Collin County Regional in Dallas and Orlando Executive.
There may be hope on the near, congressional horizon though:
Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas (think Wichita Tin) proposes a bill to restore funding to nearly 200 FAA and contract control towers. EAA applauds the effort but cautions against “undermining other FAA programs that would provide long-term benefits.
Sen. Moran’s proposed amendment would move $50 million of undesignated funds from FAA research and capital projects to fund contract control towers throughout the nation.
EAA’s VP of Government Rrelations, Doug Macnair, said, “With general aviation bearing more than 90 percent of the FAA’s mandated budget cuts under sequestration, it’s gratifying to see Congress engaging in a discussion about maintaining safety through important GA services that have been proven cost-effective. While the contract tower program is very important to busy GA airports, we must be mindful that diverting R&D funds to support contract towers is not without significant consequences.”
One downside, says EAA, would be the loss of the Piston Aviation Fuel Initiative, a program was designed by industry and the FAA to evaluate viable unleaded replacement options for 100LL avgas. Cuts would affect most GA operators, in an atmosphere of the Environmental Protection Agency’s attempts to kill leaded aviation fuel altogether.
LSA aircraft will not be impacted by such a shelving, at least not the S-LSA which use Rotax or other powerplants that run just fine on mogas (auto fuel), which is nearly the entire fleet.
Online aviation readers across the country are weighing in. Here’s a sample from various aviation websites:

• Many of these towers should have closed years ago. GA has declined while the number of towers has increased. Uncontrolled fields work very well when the traffic is low.
• Alas, “everyone” DOESN’T agree that the federal government spends too much money. To wit: Until we agree on what we want the government to do, we don’t know if it’s spending “too much” or not…What’s clear is that we’re not paying for what we’re currently asking the government to do, so something definitely needs to change to get that into rough balance.
• Flying in and out of a non-towered airport is easy. Folks get nervous when their routine is disturbed or their workload changes.
• I like the folks in our local control tower, but from a financial and traffic count point of view, I have to say that the local tower makes no sense. Must be really boring to sit there and see nothing going on hour after hour.
• Most of the airports scheduled to lose their towers should have them closed. Those towers are …relics of past glory days or as political gifts to support a local politician’s delusion of grandeur.
• In looking through the list, there are airports on there I could never figure why they had a control tower to begin with!
• I regularly fly into a good number of the airports on the list, especially in Florida. Most every time I wonder why they have a tower, they are just not that busy!
• Pew just did a study asking people about 19 different potential areas for cuts – and the public answer was essentially none of them. In the abstract, people say “spend less”, but in specific terms, the answer changes. We need to get over that and make some hard decisions.
• Oh no!!! Not Roswell!!! Little green men might die!!! Rather than picking 100, out of that list of 200 towers, why don’t we just close all 200 of ’em?
• This reminds me of electricity and its supply. People oppose all aspects of its expansion – no new generation plants, no new transmission lines etc. But demand is increasing! At some point everything will collapse then what does everyone do? Blame the government of course.
• The meat-axe is a ****-poor way to do this…(“Tea-Partiers”) have finally shut off the Federal government spigot and cost jobs and safety. You will soon learn how vital the government really is, and it may cost a few pilots’ lives, and some on the ground, to re-learn that aviation safety is a TEAM effort, not just a “pilot” thing.
• Fundamentally this is about maintaining the current tax structure enacted under President Bush while President Obama wants to go back to a tax structure that looks an awful lot like the tax policy of the Clinton years…and which produced better results? Spending cuts Republicans are proposing are very much like the current UK austerity program. Look at those results – the deeper the austerity, they deeper the deficit.

As you can see, opinions range all over the map.
My take: politics aside, intelligent leadership at all levels must include a willingness to compromise for the good of all. That has traditionally been the only rising thermal that lifts all aircraft.

The post Towering Inferno appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

My flyin’ pal,industry leader and co-blogger Dan Johnson suggested recently that I throw some tips your way about how I put together and do air2air photography. Since I’ve done around 600 in my 30 year career, it’s not a topic I have to research, always good news. So for those of you interested in what it takes to pull off such an undertaking, here we go.

First big challenge: finding a decent photo ship. That’s tougher away from your home airport (mine was for many years Santa Paula Airport north of Los Angeles, and Long Beach Airport just south.)

My birds of prey have included:

• single-seat ultralights, flying with one hand and holding the camera with the other – that was lots of fun although I was constantly anxious about dropping the big old Nikon SLR camera I used back in the early ’80s.
• homebuilt gyrocopters and choppers(airframe vibration is a big challenge here: faster shutter speeds are important)
• Piper Saratoga/Cherokee 6, Beech Bonanza. I’ve flown many missions in these fine aircraft with the rear door and often also the cargo door removed. That brings a nice big open window to shoot out of, from the 2 o’clock back to near 6 o’clock, with the target able to be placed high, level or low relative to the camera. One of my favorite shots is putting the target above the horizontal stab, just left of the vertical fin, in a slight climb so I can get a near-head on shot of the airplane and a bit of the horizon for reference too…all without any of the photo ship intruding into the shot, which is a no no. Another advantage is it’s easier to see hand signals when the photographer’s entire body is visible.
• Cessna 150/152/172/182: All these mainstay, ubiquitous birds have one thing in common: they’re high wingers and decent photo platforms on the (relative) cheap. Your view is more restricted than a low winger, especially upward and around the wing strut, but you can still pull off a decent shoot and I’ve done a couple hundred out of these workhorses. They’re easy to find and rent everywhere, and a lot of pilots can fly them well enough as a photo ship to get the job done.
• Patty Wagstaff’s Beech Baron was a hoot: the rear seats were 86’d, I could shoot out of either rear side window, left or right, and there was a magical door in the floor, about 9″ on a side, for straight-down shots: almost impossible to get with any common GA airplane. One of my two favorite all time platforms, the other being a B-25 Mitchell medium bomber (you know, the 30 Seconds Over Tokyo bird the Doolittle Raiders used). Yeah, like we can all afford to rent one of those!
• Speaking of Warbirds: I’ve shot out of AT-6 Texans (Navy version SNJ) with a greenhouse canopy, a B-25, an Extra 300and Saia Marchetti whilst shooting aerobatics (in formation, and yes, I got sick but I didn’t barf in the airplane…only after we landed). You can shoot in the B-25 from the tail gunner position. In my case, photographing the Glacier Girl P-38 and two P-51 Mustangs in formation, you crawled down the tail tube, clipped into a couple constraints to keep you from sliding all the way out the tail and into one or a couple huge, spinning props – yes, it was completely open – and got what you got as quick as you could, since the rental was a couple thousand dollars, or more, per hour. Nothing better for head-on shots, which are impossible to get like this, hanging out the side of an airplane.

Next, the formation pilots: both yours and the target airplane’s. Without reallygood formation pilots, you’re taking unnecessary risks, plus you likely won’t get many quality shots.

Likewise, your photo ship pilot is as vital to success, and safety, as the target pilot: perhaps more so, because he/she’s got to keep the airplane stable – no sudden turns or changes in altitude or airspeed without plenty of communication firstby radio (from photo pilot or me) and hand signals (me). Surprises are enemies in formation work.

I have had my share of shoots where a willing target pilot, of course only eager to help and be part of the fun, said something like this: “Aw hellfire, I been flying formation for years, you just tell me where you want it and I’ll nail it right there for ya.”

Once airborne, that old stick’s version of “nailing it” proved akin to the inability to hit a barn with a soccer ball from three feet away. Not to be unkind: most likely, “formation” for these willing folks meant anywhere within 300 yards of me. For cross country flying, that’s fine. For photo work, that means images with a mosquito-sized airplane in the frame.

A corollary: if either pilot does something that makes you bark something like, “Pull up! He’s crossing under the plane!” or “Don’t look over your shoulder at the target, you’re turning into him!” or in general you don’lt feel it’s going well, bingo the shoot and go land to talk it over. Sweaty palms and muttered curses for more than 30 seconds do not a safe shoot make.

Moral: don’t force it. If you can’t get a target pilot to give you what you want – solid, stable positions where you need him/her to be, blow off the shoot and regroup with a different pilot. It’s not worth getting scared sick or killed for.

I always tell people in the preflight brief, “If I ask you to do anything you’re not comfortable with, just say ‘Can’t do that,’ and I’ll try something else. I once had my photo pilot tell me that the target pilot, an ex-military combat instructor type at that and an excellent stick, tell me, only after we were in the air, that the target pilot was uncomfortable getting close enough for what I needed for the story, and didn’t want to do inside turns. I got a little hot under the collar. My first question was, “Why are you telling me this now? We should have talked this out on the ground.”

My point was, things happen fast: light is constantly changing, especially during formation 360-degree turns which are great for getting lots of different looks without flying all over Creation. Inside as well as outside turns are important to get lots of variety for the art director (or you wife/husband) to appreciate and choose from.

I’m getting ahead of myself though. More basics:

The light is everything. Don’t shoot between 10 and 4 if you can help it. The first hour after sunrise and last hour before sunset (and sometimes beyond sunset) are magical golden light times. Mid day, everything picks up the blue of the sky. Warm light is much more pleasing to most people, shadows are longer and define the ground more aesthetically too.

In the air, the closer the airplane to you, the better, for you and for the target pilot . Closer equates to less zoom, which means less chance of motion blur. The more zoomed in you are, the more like trying to photograph through a telescope it becomes. In even light turbulence, forget it.

Close formation also means it’s easier for the target pilot to react to changes in the photoship’s altitude…up to a point. Bill Cox, one of the best formation pilots any photographer will ever have the good fortune to fly with, taught me this.

The photo ship should generally be the stable anchor, or “lead” of the shoot, which means the target plane should be briefed to fly on you. That means the photo ship holds whatever attitude (straight and level, climbing, descending, in a left 360 at 45 degree bank) and the target ship does its best to stay with you. Some people like to shoot with the photo pilot flying on the target, even when the photo plane is ahead, which can work if the target pilot is not a formation pilot but can at least hold heading, speed and altitude. The challenge there is the photo pilot has to be doing a lot of constant estimating of distances, while flying the plane, and looking over his/her shoulder when the airplane is behind. That’s a bit of a nerve-wracking experience, at least for me. I like keeping the piloting challenges to a minimum, and always prefer to set up shoots with us in the photo ship in the lead, providing the stable platform.

For variety, say a shot of the target doing a break as seen from behind, I’ll have it pull ahead, so the “lead” changes hands. “I’ve got the lead,” is a common radio acknowledgement. Then your photo pilot gets to show his formation chops by staying right where you ask him to stay, relative to the target. Often I’ll ask my pilot to call a break over the intercom as I’m focusing on the framing, something like this: “Tell him I want a left break, dropping the left wing down rather than z0oming up so he doesn’t disappear behind our wing, in five seconds, and count it down for him please.” Then I put all my attention into getting the shot as the break happens.

The 3 C’s: Communicate communicate communicate: Talk it out before you take off, be on radio with each other constantly and make no moves, especially putting the photo ship into a turn, without letting the target know exactly what you’re doing, backed up by a visible hand signal from you, the photographer, and when possible, sun angle permitting, only after you’ve gotten a nod and/or radio acknowledgement from the target pilot.

Don’t shoot through plexiglass if you can help it. It distorts the picture, makes the target plane less sharp, shows reflections of whatever’s catching light in your cockpit – including your bright yellow shirt! – and when they’re tinted, it’s even worse. Shoot through open air, even through a vent if you must. Most Cessna windows will open all the way up to the wing: you just have to unscrew one window strap before takeoff.

Be flexible: unless you don’t feel safe because of pilot skills or weather such as rough turbulence, keep trying things. Swap the lead: maybe your pilot is better at formation than the target pilot.

Shutter speeds: If you want a full shiny prop arc, you need to be going toward the sun within an hour of sunrise or hour before sunset, to reflect the low sun angle. Heading should be maybe 30 degrees to either side of the sun, so you’re not on a heading that blinds your target pilot.

If it’s a three blade prop and it’s turning near full throttle, 1/125th second should give you a pleasing disc. A two-blader might require 1/90 or even 1/60 second, which without a lens stablizer such as Canon and Nikon et all have, will mean lots of unwanted blurs.

For shots where prop discs aren’t so important, rack up the shutter speed as high as you can. I will shoot around 1/400th sec. or faster when I know the “propsicle” – frozen prop as if the engine had quit, which looks pretty crappy frankly – isn’t going to be a factor in the shot, such as aprofile or when the plane is going away from you or other times when it’s just not visible at all. A useful mid-range where you get some prop blur, again where it’s not a big factor in the quality of the shot, is 1/180, 1/250 or 1/320.

But technical considerations like this are always a factor of what’s required at the time, which means you need to be thinking technically to be sure you don’t muff the shot, but also creatively, for instance if you’re in a 360 and you need to move the target up in time to be just above the top of the mountain peak you know is coming up – because you saw it in the last 360 and you told both pilots to keep the turn going until you call it off.

There’s a lot more: if anyone is interested in hearing more, please leave a comment or questions.

Meanwhile, the key point is: everything is a thousand times better with two excellent formation pilots and a constant expectation that talking to each other on the ground and in the air are the most important imperatives. I’ve only had a few close calls in my career. I remember every one of them. All could have been avoided with better communication, quicker reaction when one of the pilots surprised me and the other pilot – or both.

The post Wrangling An Air2Air Photo Shoot appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.