Page 9 - Aug22T

mountain predominantly due to the fact that it is a forward-looking device. Alerts are programmed to annunci- ate as much as a full minute before a potential collision will occur. EGPWS has produced a terrific track record at reducing (indeed nearly eliminating) controlled flight into terrain. Still, it is a technology that is most effective when utilized as a backup to the more traditional method of “read the chart and visualize the flight path.” EGPWS alerts are terrific safety elements for those moments when a pilot becomes disoriented in IMC or at night. Yet the safety record is filled with examples of pilots responding inappropriately (or not at all) to EGPWS alerts. As helpful as EGPWS is, it was never intended to replace airmanship. Every approach to a new runway should be preceded by a briefing. Every approach briefing should include any specific threats associated with the airport or runway. Terrain and obstacles, where they exist, always represent a threat (this information is included on approach plates for a reason). The advent of moving maps makes conceptualizing terrain a much easier task, but pilots were getting the job done well before the proliferation of the iPad. Spatial awareness and reading the charts are tried and true. When you are aware of terrain around an airport, you will be much more likely to respond ap- propriately in the event you receive an alert. If you form a mental image of the anticipated flight path over the terrain you will be encountering, you will all but eliminate the possibility of an adverse event. If you form the habit of pretending you do not have the device, it will mean nothing if it gets jammed by 5G interference (or merely breaks).
Technology has intruded into nearly every aspect of our lives. It has changed the way we shop, communicate, travel, research and work. It has streamlined preflight planning and integrated many flight tasks resulting in greater ef- ficiency and fewer errors. It has improved the safety record of aviation but has also introduced new challenges for pilots. An in- teresting dichotomy with modern
aircraft is the ability for automa- tion to not only reduce workload, but potentially damage situational awareness. In the multi-crew envi- ronment (some years ago), a deci- sion was made to stop referring to the second pilot as “non-f lying” and instead as “pilot monitoring.” It is bet- ter to emphasize what a pilot is doing opposed to what they are not doing. Underlying this was an accident re- cord where non-flying pilots failed to either notice or verbalize an emerging threat. With automation and technol- ogy, we can fall into a familiar trap. The electronics are controlling the aircraft and keeping us safe; we are simply along for the ride. Not only is it rewarding to occasionally ignore the electronics and go old-school, it
also increases our situational aware- ness and facilitates safe operating practices. Trepidation at removing layers of automation is normal, but on a calm VFR day it provides an opportunity to refresh skills. If you f ly long enough, you will eventually stumble onto an occasion where you will be glad to be fresh on some old- school techniques.
Stan Dunn has 8,000-plus hours in turbine-powered aircraft, with three years of experience as an instructor and evaluator for airline pilots. Stan publishes detailed coverage of aviation accidents at bellmanmultimedia.com/ flying. You can contact Stan at Stan@ bellmanmultimedia.com.
Dan Moore Aero LLC
http://danmoore.aero
August 2022 / TWIN & TURBINE • 7