Page 39 - 207680_March19T

In Lumber-Lingo: Size Matters
As PIC, there are a million “gotchas” lying in wait and it’s our job to check for any new ones each time we fly a procedure; especially one to familiar fields with familiar procedures
because complacency will bite us in the nalgas (buttocks). An example of a chart change that snuck by some of us (i.e. me) was a recent change to the identifier, frequency and climb restrictions on the O’Hare Five Departure in Chicago. The ORD (Orchard Field) departure and VOR frequency had not been changed as long as anyone could remember (complacency). The old VOR was ORD/113.9 and the climb restriction on departure was 3,000 by 5 miles and 4,000 by 8 miles. I remembered and briefed the climb restrictions in nominal lumber-lingo as 3x5 and 4x8 (three by five and four by eight). The new name/frequency is GCO/108.25 and the climb restriction is 3,000 by 5.5 miles and 4,000 by 8.5 miles. Now, we all know that a modern 2x4 isn’t really 2 inches by 4 inches, but why’d they go and mess up an easy to remember DP (Departure Procedure) with dimensional lumber sizes instead of nominal? The change was less restrictive but this is not always the case and ATC may not be there to pry our tongue, or flying certificate, from the escarchado flag pole of a piloto deviation.
Coddled
Since we’ve grown accustomed to being coddled while in U.S. airspace, or perhaps because ATC cleared the airplane in front of us to do the thing that we want to do, we may wrongly assume that all is well with the wind, the weather, the runway and therefore, that once cleared by ATC, the procedure is “authorized.” But consider takeoff minimums, our aircraft category and a Cat III ILS. If we are so inclined (and I am not), when operating under Part 91, a zero-zero takeoff is authorized—not true for Part 121. And, as part of a full standard weather briefing, not to incriminate one profes- sion because of another’s actions, I once had a weather briefer needlessly give me, in my Duke, the NOTAM’s for a Copter ILS (helicopter category). On the other hand, if CAT III operations are in use at a busy airport, the sector controllers will often pro-actively query inbound aircraft to see if they are CAT III capable before allowing them into the terminal airspace— this is because non-Cat III participants would need to hold or execute a missed approach and thereby clog up the system. While a procedure may be loaded into our FMS database, we, our aircraft or the certificate under which we operate may not allow us to fly the procedure. Also, different crews oper- ating under different certificates or FARs will have different weather, wind and runway requirements for both takeoff and landing. And this is the coddling-conundrum faced by ATC controllers in clearing us for a procedure. Neither ATC nor the weather briefer know the capabilities and qualifications of every crew and their aircraft. Just because the weather guy briefed the changes to the Copter ILS, it doesn’t mean that I can fly my Duke at 50 knots on final to a 100-foot DH, nor your Citation to Cat III minimums, nor a P-51 into known ice.
The Fed’s Razor Strap
I have sat in a line of 50 cars at a four-way stop near O’Hare as drivers tried to advance their position by driving past the
Chart changes can sneak up on many users due to familiarity with the old procedure and an inadequate review of the new one.
March 2019 Twin & Turbine • 37 TWIN & TURBINE • 37