| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monday, February 28, 2011
jetAVIVA Phenom Inventory Update!
Friday, February 11, 2011
Lessons Learned: What Boeing 747-400 Type Rating Training Can Teach a Single-Pilot Jet Operator
It sure felt real, but I was in a Level D simulator at Boeing’s Training Center in Renton, Washington, just outside Seattle. My training partner, Edwin Sahakian, a Cessna Citation Mustang owner-pilot who is a friend and client of mine, had wanted to train for a Boeing 747-400 type rating for quite some time. I was honored when he asked me to join him. It turns out that I’m not the only crazy pilot out there who has dreamt of flying a 747. We were able to find a couple of open weeks in our calendars that matched up and we scheduled the course.
After countless hours of studying the manuals, going through a web-based training course, and reading anything that we could get our hands on, we showed up at Boeing to start ground school. I now have just shy of 4,000 hours of flying time and I was one of the least experienced students in the gargantuan building. The biggest airplane that my training partner was type rated in was his Citation Mustang, which has a Maximum Ramp Weight of precisely 1% of that of the big Boeing. This was going to be quite a nut to crack for the two of us. Luckily, we had some of the best instructors in the world, including Mike Miller, who has 22 years of experience as an instructor at Boeing as well as previous military flying career, and Dominick Ruscitti, who was a Line Check Airman at United Airlines on the Boeing 747-400, among other types.
I may never fly a real 747, but in the course of my work helping people buying, selling, and learning to fly jets, I do fly single-pilot jets frequently, so as we went through the course, I took mental note of lessons that I was learning which could be applied to my regular flying. Here are some of the specific techniques and procedures that I intend to incorporate into my flying practices:
Checklist Execution
As we go through our flight training and flying careers, we all learn how important checklists are, but are we really using checklists in the most effective way? At most airlines, critical checklists like before takeoff and before landing are done by the “Challenge and Response” method. This means that one pilot reads a “Challenge”, or item to be checked, and the other pilot verifies that the item has been completed and says a “Response”.
Flying single-pilot, we don’t have the luxury of a second pilot, so we have to figure out a way to gain the same benefit working alone. Reading the checklist aloud is a good first step, but physically touching critical flight controls prior to reading the appropriate responses can force the brain to think in a way beyond just language and may help catch items not-yet-accomplished, similarly to what a copilot might do. For example, on the before landing checklist, if a challenge reads “Landing Gear”, touching the landing gear selector and pointing to the three green indication before saying the response “Down, 3 green”, will likely improve the chances of the item actually being checked.
Dealing with In-Flight Emergencies
When an abnormality is encountered in a two-pilot operation, the pilot flying usually takes over air traffic control communication, allowing the other pilot to focus on reading and accomplishing the appropriate abnormal or emergency checklist. In a single-pilot operation, we must use the autopilot effectively as our “pilot flying”, as we deal with the problem. In addition to engaging the autopilot initially, it is important to check the flight mode annunciator, attitude, airspeed, altitude, and direction of the airplane every few seconds. We must remember to always fly the airplane first.
I also learned the importance of going slowly to make sure that the correct checklist for the emergency is selected and flipped to after appropriate memory items are completed. Most Quick Reference Handbooks (QRHs) are bulky and complicated, so it can take some time to identify the correct checklist. These checklists should then be followed precisely, without the pilot second-guessing or trying to out-think the checklist.
It is also important to act quickly and land the airplane when the continued safety of the flight is in question. If completion of the appropriate checklist has not restored the safety of the aircraft, an immediate landing at the nearest suitable airport is critical to survival. We’ve all heard the adage “I’d rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air than be in the air wishing I was on the ground”. On the ground is the right place to investigate complicated problems, not in flight.
Rejected Takeoff and Emergency Landing
When rejecting a takeoff at a busy airport, after control of the aircraft is assured, a call on the radio should be initiated without delay. The radio call should include not only the fact that you aborted your takeoff, but also the runway that you aborted on and your present location on the runway. The control tower may know what runway you’re on, but the aircraft on final may not, and your call might help that pilot decide if he or she should immediately initiate a go-around. Especially at night or in poor visibility conditions, this action could be critical to your survival.
Also, whether rejecting a takeoff or making an emergency landing, if there is any possibility that you may need emergency vehicles to come to the aircraft, do not exit the runway. It is much easier for emergency vehicles to reach an aircraft on a wide runway than on a narrow taxiway.
I also learned the importance of practicing emergency evacuation procedures. If it has been a while since you practiced opening your emergency exit, donning your life vest, unlatching the fire extinguisher, and grabbing your flashlight, perhaps doing so before your next preflight might be a good idea.
One last very important lesson learned: If you’re going to learn to fly a Boeing, do it with a good pilot and friend, like my friend Edwin.
The course was a great learning experience and great fun, and in the end, both Edwin and I walked away with five new characters on our pilot certificates “B-747-4”; the Boeing 747-400 type rating.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
On December 31, 2010 at about 8:00 AM, we departed Ft. Lauderdale for Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. After stopping in Bangor, Maine, and Saint Pierre and Miquelon, France (which is a group of small islands near Newfoundland, Canada), we arrived for a night halt in Santa Maria, Azores, Portugal at 11:45 PM local, 15 minutes before they rang in the New Year on these islands about 700 miles west of Portugal in the Atlantic Ocean. Over the next 10 days, we delivered the airplane to Saudi Arabia and made training flights to Morocco, Malta, Greece, Lebanon, Bahrain, and Dubai.
I can now really attest to the amazing capabilities of this very sexy jet. The world is very small at 450 knots. For example, Casablanca, Morocco to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia is 2,880 nautical miles straight line, but with routings around relatively unfriendly airspace (like Libya and Israel), this quickly becomes a 3,100+ nautical mile flight. With only one stop, we made this trip in a total of eight hours (including refueling time), and it was very easy and comfortable.
The airplane climbs directly to FL450 with ease. Cruising at that altitude, you really can see the curvature of the Earth. Well above the all of the weather and in smooth air with a cabin altitude of only 6,600 feet, the flight is very comfortable. All of the amenities (useable lavatory, sink, cold drink drawer, hot water, etc.) make the passengers and crew very happy.
The airplane I flew was very well equipped. Some of the more important options for this kind of international flying include HF with SELCAL and Satphone. These "big airplane toys" options are very nicely integrated into the Phenom cockpit and make communication with air traffic control, handlers, etc. a breeze. I also got to make some calls back home to my fiance from 45,000 feet over the middle east, which means I can probably still marry her even though I was having all this fun without her.
It was a great adventure.
-Ben
Monday, December 13, 2010
Bart International features jetAVIVA's recent sale of Embraer Phenom 100 to Australia
http://www.bartintl.com/content/jetaviva-sells-delivers-1st-embraer-phenom-100-australia
Friday, December 10, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
First Phenom 100 Delivery to India ~
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Citation Mustang Delivery to Canada
After a week of flying around beautiful sunny so cal, we headed north. Another very happy customer.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Air-to-Air Photoshoot with a CJ3!
Air To Air Photo Flight from Ron Mohrhoff on Vimeo.
Enjoy!
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Phenom 300 Training
I just finished up the Phenom 100 to Phenom 300 “Upgrade Experience” course at Embraer CAE Training Services (ECTS) in Dallas, Texas. This five-day course is built to allow pilots already type rated in the Phenom 100 to transition to the Phenom 300. The normal initial type-rating course for the Phenom 300 is seventeen days.
I expected the differences between the two airplanes to be few but I discovered that they are many. It’s no wonder the authorities didn’t want the two airplanes to share a common type-rating.
The first day is all “ground school”. Well, it’s really all ground school because even the “flights” are made in a simulator. But day 1 was all in the classroom. Instructor Lowell spent the session comparing the similarities and differences of the Phenom 100 and the Phenom 300. We reviewed all limitations, memory items, procedures, and systems. For each of these, Lowell presented slides showing tables or photos contrasting the two types of aircraft.
The maximum takeoff weight of the Phenom 300 is 17,968 pounds, which compares to 10,472 pounds for the Phenom 100. With 3,380 pounds of thrust per side, the Phenom 300 has nearly double the thrust of the Phenom 100, giving it significantly better thrust-to-weight ratio. We were warned that the resultant acceleration would make it easy to exceed the relatively low maximum flap extended speed of 180 knots after takeoff. On my first sim session, I learned that it is necessary to pitch to approximately 18 degrees nose up after takeoff to prevent a flap overspeed.
One really nice optional feature of the Phenom 300, which is actually now an option on the Phenom 100 as well, is TCAS II. I have never before flown a G1000 airplane with TCAS II. The symbology is fantastic. With a Resolution Advisory (RA), you don’t only get a vertical speed target, you also get a pitch target. It looks very similar to a highway-in-the-sky box.
One of the many changes from the Phenom 100 to the 300 is the TEST panel. On the Phenom 100, the test panel is comprised of three buttons located to the left of the copilot control wheel. On the Phenom 300, additional test features such as the baggage smoke detector and ice detector, require more space, so the panel has been relocated to the lower left panel ahead of the electrical panel and is now a rotary knob.
The hydraulic system is significantly different. The 100 uses a single electric hydraulic powerpack to pressurize the hydraulic system. Hydraulic system users are the landing gear and brakes. On the 300, the hydraulic system is pressurized by an engine driven pump on each engine. The users include the landing gear and brakes, but also mutli-function spoilers (more on this later), the spring-loaded-rudder-booster system, and the stick pusher. On the 100, the stick pusher uses an electric motor.
The electrical system on the two types are nearly identical, except that the 300 has higher capacity starter-generators.
On the 300, upon activating the starter for the second engine start, the running engine automatically accelerates to 72% N2 to provide more current from that generator for the 2nd engine start. Curiously, it does this whether or not a GPU is plugged in and supplying power to the aircraft (at least in the simulator).
The 300 has a pressure refueling system. The 100 is fueled over-wing only. The pressure refueling system, also known as a single-point refueling system, is smart. The pilot can pre-select the desired fuel quantity in pounds and the system automatically shuts off when the desired fuel quantity is reached.
The multi-function spoilers serve three purposes: speed brakes, ground spoilers, and roll spoilers. Speed brakes may be deployed at any speed and are very effective in slowing the airplane. They may not be used with flaps. When flaps are extended, the speed brakes automatically stow. Additionally, the speed brakes automatically stow if decelerating below 110 knots and if the thrust levers are advanced. The ground spoilers automatically deploy on landing and during rejected takeoffs. The ground spoilers automatically stow at 30 knots on rollout. The roll spoilers provide supplemental roll control in the low speed flight regime when the flaps are extended (in any position other than up/0).
Another difference between the aircraft is pitch trim control. The Phenom 100 uses trim tabs at the trailing edges of the elevators. The Phenom 300 has a horizontal stabilizer that moves to trim. Tabs at the trailing edges of the elevators are used to lighten control forces automatically.
The Phenom 300 has a ventral rudder under the tailcone that provides yaw damping automatically when the yaw damper control is switched off.
There are two flap panels on each wing of the Phenom 300, as opposed to one flap panel on each wing of the 100. The 300 uses a relatively conventional drive system to actual the flaps, with a single electric motor actuating all of the flap panels simultaneously through mechanical linkages. The Phenom 100 has sophisticated computerized position monitoring system to prevent asymmetric extension of the flaps. There is no mechanical interconnect.
The pneumatic deicer boots on the Phenom 100 are replaced by bleed-air heated leading edges on the wings and horizontal stabilizer of the Phenom 300. Owing to this more sophisticated deicing system, the bleed air system on the Phenom 300 is a bit more complex than that on the 100. Pilots now have manual control of not only the Pressure Regulating Shutoff Valves but also of the Flow Control Valves for pressurization. Under normal circumstances, these are all controlled automatically, however the pilot can manually close any of the valves.
The maneuver profiles of the 300 are a bit simpler than that of the 100. For example, the flap position for all approach and landing maneuvers is position 3. It doesn’t matter if you’re making a precision or non-precision approach, single engine or two engine, and even circling, in all cases you use Flaps 3. Full flaps should be available someday, and then this simplicity will change.
On the 2nd day, our sim session was a cold, nasty day scenario out of New York’s JFK airport. We learned about how to operate the anti-icing systems, their limitations, and impact on flight procedures. The requirements for use of anti-icing systems on the 300 are identical to those of the 100; engine heat must be used in visible moisture with temperatures of 10C or below, all other anti-icing equipment must be used in visible moisture with temperatures of 5C or below. There are a couple of interesting differences, however. For example, when the wing and stabilizer anti-ice system is enabled on the ground, the surfaces do not begin to heat. Instead, an “ARMED” CAS message is displayed. Approximately at liftoff, the surfaces begin to heat up automatically. Another interesting difference is that the wing and horizontal stabilizer heat have an “anti-ice envelope”. For example, if you attempt to activate the system above 30C, the surfaces do not heat up and an “INHIBIT” CAS message is displayed. Like the 100, approach speeds are significantly higher with the anti-ice systems on.
Also on the 2nd day, we got our first crack at various types of instrument approaches and the airwork that must be flown on any type rating checkride.
Day 3 was a hot and high scenario. On takeoff out of 6,159 foot elevation Cheyenne, Wyoming with a temperature of 25C, I lost an engine at V1. I was quite pleased with the single engine climb performance, reaching 1,000 feet AGL and cleaning up the flaps quickly. We then came around for an ILS with a single engine missed approach.
My perception is that the 300 requires more rudder force during single engine takeoffs and go-arounds than the 100 does. Although the 300 has a rudder boost system, it also has about double the thrust of the 100. Your legs will feel it. I’ll have to visit the gym a bit more before my next 300 recurrent training.
Also on the 3rd day, we had the opportunity to practice TCAS II RA response and TAWS escapes, as well as an emergency descent. The emergency descent is made with gear down and speed brakes extended. 9,000+ FPM descent rates are expected.
My instructor got a bit mean toward the end of the sim session, giving me a right generator failure followed by a left engine failure. With a loss of both generators, the electrical system automatically configures to the “Electrical Emergency” mode, isolating the main DC busses and keeping the emergency and central busses powered. In Electrical Emergency mode on the 300, you lose ALL trims. This was a big shock to me. You don’t even have backup elevator trim. Changes in airspeed yield big changes in elevator force. It took quite a bit of strength and stamina to limp the airplane back to the runway on a single engine. With no flaps and no normal brakes, the landing roll was long. It was good to practice this worst-case scenario.
Day 4 was essentially a mock checkride. This session and the checkride are based out of JFK again. This checkride is like every other type rating checkride you might have already taken. The tasks that generally must be performed include steep turns, stalls, unusual attitude recoveries, two non-precision approaches, one of which must be hand-flown and one of which must have a course reversal, two single-engine ILS approaches, one of which must be hand-flown, a single-engine missed approach, a balked landing, a visual approach, and a no flap landing. There’s also a circle-to-land approach thrown in there somewhere.
Day 5 was the oral and practical test. On the oral, if you know the limitations, memory items, and basic systems functionality, you’re all set. There are no trick questions. The night before, I prepared by studying over dinner at Vito's Restaurant on the south edge of DFW airport. I highly recommend it.
I love this airplane. The design is very well thought out and the performance is breathtaking.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Companion Training at the 2010 CitationJetPilots owners conference
First off, the firm was tasked with putting together a flight training course for companions of single pilot jet owners. The course focused on what the companion would need to do to get the jet on the ground should their pilot ever get incapacitated. Here's a video of the training experience... it was a total blast!
2010 CJP jetAVIVA Companion Flight Training from jetAVIVA on Vimeo.
Additionally, jetAVIVA's Cyrus Sigari presented the state of the Citation pre-owned market to the owner base. jetAVIVA's Meghan Conley welcomed all guests who flew into the Colorado Jet Center at the Colorado Springs Airport.
Next year, the event will be held in Amelia Island, FL at the Ritz-Carlton hotel and resort. Should be good fun!
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Ohio to Australia: Phenom 100 Ferry Flight
It has been a few days since I returned home from one of the most amazing trips of my 9,000+ hour career. Every once in a while I have to “pinch myself” to believe that I had this opportunity of a lifetime.
I believe that most of us aviators chose to take that first flight lesson not thinking about a career in aviation or the flexibility that an aircraft can provide, but rather we did it for the adventure, the challenge, and the pleasure of flying.
This trip that I am about to describe was all about the adventure, the challenge, and the flying. It took Captain Edwin Sahakian and me 19 stops and about 10 days to fly an Embraer Phenom 100 from Ohio to Australia.
Our journey started weeks before the first takeoff. As one can probably imagine, 19 stops in 12 countries is not an easy task, and the amount of paperwork involved is overwhelming. After departing the US, every single landing requires some kind of permit, approval and/or previous arrangements. Most of these requirements are date-specific, meaning, for example, that our over flight permit for North Korea was good for the 12th but unacceptable for the 13th. Even though we were not in a hurry to get to our destination, we had to keep a very firm schedule to make sure that our permits were good for the trip.
Unfortunately, Murphy’s Law presented itself right on the very first leg. Upon our landing in Winipeg, Canada the hydraulic system gave up on us. After a pleasant ferry flight to Portland and excellent service coordinated by Embraer, we were quickly back in the skies.
From Portland all the way to Australia, our bird performed magnificently. There was not a single issue with the aircraft.
Our first stop after Portland was Juneau, Alaska. Unfortunately, we had to fly at night due to the fact that we were behind schedule. We couldn’t see much, but the scenery that we saw was beautiful. I can only imagine the beautiful scenery we would have seen had the flight been during the day.
After a quick turn in Juneau we proceed to Anchorage. Signature Flight Support has a great facility there. We chose to sleep in the crew room to save the time of getting to a hotel in order to get us back on the schedule with an early departure from Anchorage to Nome, Alaska.
When we arrived in Nome, I started to realize what I got myself into. Canada, Portland, Anchorage were no big deal, just like any other flight, but when you look at the map and draw a line from Northern Alaska to Northeast Russia, it hits you. We were about to depart for one of the most remote areas on the planet. And for guys and gals like me that lived during the Cold War era, flying over and landing in Russia is just something that I never thought I would do. In the back of my mind I was always worrying about a MIG on my tail.
The MIG never came and we had a nice flight to Anadyr, in the Northeastern-most reaches of Siberia. Welcome to altitudes in meters and distances in kilometers. We received a fairly confusing clearance for an ILS approach, but we were able to perform a safe landing with almost 100 ft to spare before CAT I minimums. The runway in Anadyr hasn’t seen maintenance since Gorbachev was in charge but we managed to take it to the ramp with all tires inflated. As we turned off of the runway, a huge Antonov was revving up those Prattskis getting ready to go. We were in Russia all right!!
Here are the highlights of our trip:
Route: Dayton, OH - Winnipeg, Canada – Great Falls, MT – Portland, OR – Juneau, AK – Anchorage, AK – Nome, AK – Anadyr, Russia – Magadan, Russia – Yuzho, Russia – Seoul, South Korea – Taipei, Taiwan – Hong Kong – Danang, Vietnam – Koh Samui, Thailand – Singapore – Bali, Indonesia – Darwin, Australia – Mont Isa, Australia – Sydney, Australia
Incredible sightseeing: The glaciers in Alaska are absolutely beautiful, with different tones of white and blue, their strange shapes and massive size.
Russia: difficult to explain, but it looks like they are running 20 years behind, from the hotel to the airport vehicles, almost everything is outdated. It was great to see the Russian officials wearing their uniforms. It felt like I just stepped into a Cold War movie.
Korea: Just like Russia, it was a little “funny” to fly through North Korean airspace and talk to a North Korean at Pyongyang Center; I kept checking my “6” for a MIG that never came.
Seoul was great; I have lots of memories from Seoul from the time that I used to fly MD-11s there almost 12 years ago. If Russia is 20 years behind the US, South Korea is 20 years ahead.
Hong Kong: We were able to spend a couple days in HK. It was another “pinch me to believe this is real life” moment. Wow!!, we are landing at Hong Kong International Airport, with only 747s and 777s in sight everywhere and here we come with our MTOW of little more than 10.000lbs. We had beautiful weather, a beautiful approach, and finally a couple days to relax and enjoy. We were officially back on schedule.
Vietnam: I knew that was a MIG coming!!! We landed in Danang on our way to drop our passengers in Thailand. After the warm welcome from the local authorities we watched a pair of MIGs landing just a few minutes after us. I am not sure if it was a good idea for an American on an American registered aircraft to be taking pictures of military MIGs in Vietnam but I couldn’t resist… Great stop, great people, and great pictures.
Thailand: I dropped the passengers in Koh Samui, a beautiful island on the East Coast of Thailand. With this landing, I became the first pilot to fly around the World on a Phenom 100. On a previous trip I flew from Los Angeles to Bangkok on an Eastbound route. Celebration followed with Don Perignon and pictures.
Singapore: Setelar airport is under construction, closing everyday at 18:00 local. If you arrive there a minute late, you will not be authorized to land and must proceed to the international airport where the landing fees and headaches are 3x more than Setelar. From the time that we reached our cruise altitude until talking to Singapore Approach, every single controller asked me what my estimate to destination was. It was actually 17:56, a whole 4 minutes to spare. After a few weather deviations, vectors for traffic and a last minute runway change, touchdown was at exactly 18:00L. I got a nice “attaboy” from the controller.
Bali: I enjoyed clear weather all the way from Singapore to Bali. Although I enjoyed having Captain Sahakian along for the flight, he had to get off in HK, and the passengers got off in Thailand, so I was alone on this beautiful flight. There were islands and volcanoes for as far as the eye could see. Upon landing in Bali, the local military approached the aircraft requesting my landing permit. I replied explaining to the officer that all documents were taken care of by our handler. Unfortunately, our handler forgot to send the permit to the local authority so I found myself detained on the local military base due to lack of proper documentation. I asked the officer what would be the consequences of not having a landing permit and he gently explained to me that the aircraft would be impounded and I would be transferred for the local jailhouse. After about 1 hour and a couple phone calls, the proper documents arrived and I was on my way to more comfortable accommodations. I had half a day to enjoy the local beach, food, and beverage.
Australia: Not much excitement to report in Australia besides the personal feeling of accomplishment. If was great to land and say: “Mission Accomplished”. It was a shame that I arrived late at night and taxied into the darkest ramp I have ever seen. It was so dark that I had to use landing lights for taxi. No pictures and no champagne.
Final thoughts: For a trip of this magnitude, the keys to success are experience, research, and preparation. There are many things that can go wrong, especially in the paperwork area. You just need one little mistake to be delayed for a few days or even spend the night in a jailhouse. It is also important to research opportunities to make the trip cost effective. We had quotes from $500 to $3,000 for the exact same service. Prices can vary drastically from one location to another and from one vendor to another at the same location.
I know that most jet owner/operators are busy individuals running a successful business, but if you have a passion for flying and adventure you must plan to take some time off and fly a trip overseas. I can guarantee you, it will be the experience of a lifetime.
Marcio Lucchese
jetAVIVA Acceptance and Delivery Manager