ByDanJohnson.com

Wyp WingBoard developer, Aaron “Wyp” Wypyszynski.

For my weekend posts, I often like to check out something out of the ordinary. From the photos you see nearby, you can see I found a qualifying topic. However crazy as this activity — involving the name “WingBoard” — may look, it appears grounded in reality.

If you think of wingsuit sky diving as just “edgy,” then Aaron “Wyp” Wypyszynski‘s Wingboard could seem relatively tame.

Watching all his videos, I’d say Wingboarding was more akin to sky skiing, as in water skiing behind a boat, except a wider use of three dimensions than you get on water.

Start with the following video which gives a decent explanation of the project from the developer’s point of view.

Aaron “Wyp” Wypyszynski began flying full-scale aircraft at age 13, soloed at 16, and remains an active pilot (photo below). He was inspired by a cartoon, saying “Kit Cloudkicker [was seen by] millennials who grew up watching “TaleSpin,” and dreaming of carving through the sky like Kit on his airfoil.” Funny how something we experience as a very young person can stick with us our whole lives, eh?

Aaron went on to more conventional flying but was drawn back to Kit and his board. Having acquired real world skills, he was driven to try designing a real wingboard. You can ponder if this was crazy or inspired.

Look, I know it’s highly unlikely that you would ever try this but the idea is engaging. Sky divers do stuff somewhat like this all the time. Jetman inspired many with his stunts. BASE jumpers show incredible daring do. Maybe not you, but somebody will think this is the neatest invention ever, and it is actual flying, not like riding along in an automomous air vehicle.

The project has progressed through several stages from miniature to one-sixth scale to 40% scale (in December 2015) where the “pilot” — itself a pretty nifty bit of engineering — parachutes away from the board for landing. The wing has its own parachute. Let’s check it out further.

According to the WYP Aviation website, “WingBoard works through a close coupling of the rider, tow rope, and WingBoard itself. The best analog is to look at the WingBoard as a wakeboard [operating] in three dimensions.”

Staying true to his childhood fantasy Aaron WingBoard’s “rider” — he uses this term instead of pilot but it clearly involves piloting skills — “…stands in an upright stance, similar to a wakeboarder, allowing him or her to lean and twist in all directions, while still maintaining a stable stance to brace against the tow forces.” Aaron continued, “The rider is attached to the board via a binding, similar to a snowboard biding, providing a flexible connection to the board.”

If flying a WingBoard sounds a bit nuts to you, how about standing on it while doing so?

As a longtime hang glider pilot I can tell you this is not so very different than modern ultralight-aircraft-tow-launched hang gliding, except the hang glider wing is above the pilot not below him and you fly prone rather than standing. Yet essentially these are very similar and hang gliding enjoys an excellent safety record. A good friend, Malcolm Jones, has operated a hang glider tow park called Wallaby Ranch in central Florida for nearly 25 years. They have done several tens of thousands of tows with very few incidents.

How does Aaron plan to tow his WingBoard?

“A key design feature is the tow rope connection,” he wrote. “A single tow rope [splits into a Y-shape] approximately 10 feet in front of the rider. A lower line connects to the WingBoard, while the upper line goes to a tow bar, which the rider holds. The tow bar is then connected to the rider in a manner similar to a kite surfer, alleviating the loads the rider must bear.”

The hang glider tow crowd learned the hard way to use things like weak links in the tow line to keep pressures from getting too high.” Before a loss of control, a weak link triggers a release under tow, however, this makes me wonder how Aaron will cope with practical problems like this especially when it happens before parachute height.

“WingBoard is controlled via two methods. The primary control input is the rider’s position. Leaning forward and backward changes the angle of the tow rope triangle, thereby altering the WingBoard angle of attack, vertical position behind the tow plane, and amount of lift generated. The rider also leans and rotates to the side to place the board at that angle, using a side component of the lift vector to pull out to one side or the other of the tow plane. In addition to the rider’s position, force sensors in the foot bindings and on the tow bar allow the rider to input additional roll commands. These commands further aid in rolling the WingBoard to the side and also allow for spectacular aileron rolls.”

Aaron seems to have considered safety carefully. He is surely aware of some important things to work out about initial launch but he reports a cadre of high-time test pilots with backgrounds in piloting, skydiving, and wakeboarding.

As Aaron’s team prepares for manned flight, they figure to start with a helicopter-deployed rider and WingBoard. “The helicopter will allow for sufficient height to be obtained before starting testing, allowing the rider to detach and deploy their parachute at any time during the testing should need arise,” explained Aaron. As he learns more, he’ll proceed to fixed wing aircraft of varying description.

Here’s a link to their Phase 3 manned flight plans if you want read further. And if you’re so inspired you can help with crowd funding.

Compress Post ...

Icon A5’s use of an Angle of Attack indicator is the best implementation I have used.

Dynon’s SkyView digital instrument has Angle of Attack built in (with a minimal investment in hardware).

Bendix calls their AoA a Lift Reserve indicator, but I don’t find it as intuitive as Icon’s version.

Advanced Flight Systems also offers a digital version of AoA. Do you think you know how to use it properly?

Back in early 2014, Flying magazine online wrote, “There’s an old saying among pilots that ‘airspeed equals life.’ In other words, keep your speed up, and you’ll avoid stalling the wing during critical phases of flight, such as the base-to-final turn. But, that’s a misnomer since the stalling airspeed of a wing will change based on aircraft weight and load factor.”

Many ex-military pilots also insist AoA is a vitally important gauge. Air Force jet jocks are often shocked that civilian pilots are still flying based solely on airspeed.

FAA certainly caught the fever, proclaiming statements similar to this one: “Inadvertent stalls are implicated in almost half of the GA approach and descent accidents.” The implication is that AoA will cure this deathly problem.

Advanced Flight Systems was quoted as saying, “Nearly one-half of Experimental and over one-fourth of certified aircraft fatalities are the result of stalls and spins. The killer-turn from base to final is the leading culprit.”

Wow! You better get an AoA as soon as possible, right? Not so fast.

John Zimmerman, writing on AirFactsJournal.com back in 2013 (whole article here), took a more thoughtful approach to all the AoA buzz. While I see the value of AoA, I thought John summarized the situation well.

He wrote, “Icon’s new AoA instrument (photo) is nice, but it won’t magically make pilots safer. I think that’s hopelessly naive.” John added, “Pilots have to look at the instrument for it to be of any use. In the Asiana 214 crash in San Francisco, the crew managed to ignore the airspeed indicator for a long time, even as it eventually showed them being almost 30 knots slow. Another instrument wouldn’t have prevented this disaster.”

In his article, John referred to the breathless campaigns proclaiming the life-saving potential of AoA instruments. Since loss of control is indeed the number one cause of general aviation accidents, the AoA revolution could be the most important safety innovation in our lifetime, we heard. FAA declared affordable AoA instruments one of its most-wanted safety improvements and AOPA’s Air Safety Institute has enthusiastically supported the cause. However, enthusiasm and federal pressure cannot solve all problems.

“Besides looking at the instrument, pilots have to know how to react to its indications,” John explained. “For the [sport] pilot struggling to log 25 hours in a year, the physical stick and rudder skills may be more important than the recognition skills.”

“Here’s the simple fact that most AoA proponents know, but don’t like to admit: airspeed is a great proxy for AoA most of the time,” continued John. “[Sport] pilots fly in a very small envelope: +/- 10 degrees in pitch and 30 degrees of bank in most cases. Within those boundaries, monitoring airspeed is a perfectly good way to keep from stalling. If you’re doing aerobatics or flying a jet at FL410, an AoA instrument may be essential; in the pattern in a [light plane] it’s not going to tell you much more than the airspeed indicator.”

While I think John makes some excellent points, AoAs do appear to coming to our cockpits. In fact, any Dynon (and other digital instrument brands) already has AoA capability.

My own observation, though actual use, is that AoA indicators require training and acclimatization like any other cockpit instrument. As wonderful as I now find computer screens from SkyView to G3X to an iPad, all took some familiarization. Even that’s not right. I spend hours studying and practicing before I truly began to see all the potential of a glass panel. AoA strikes me as more of the same, albeit somewhat simpler.

I’ve flown quite a few hours with SkyView and for the most part, I ignore the AoA indicator. Airspeed is what I’m most familiar with and on which I primarily rely — that, and plain old seat of the pants flying where I use my senses to avoid getting too slow.

At the Copperstate show last fall, I flew with John McBean in his Kitfox equipped with AoA. He was very familiar with it and used it. I tried with John’s encouragement. Yet seeing my sluggishness at interpreting it, John referred me back to airspeed.

This summer when I flew Icon’s A5 (video pilot report), I found their portrayal of AoA far and away the best. I could actually use it and did so soon after takeoff — admittedly with encouragement and advice from my ex-military demo pilot Craig Bowers — nonetheless, I found it quite useful.

What do you think? Find my post on my Facebook page and add your comments, if you like.

Compress Post ...

As techies know the giant Consumer Electronics Show (CES) has been in the news over the last week and we’ve seen articles about cool stuff at the event. I don’t remember ever seeing anything about manned aircraft in CES coverage before though quadcopters have had a clear presence. At the 2016 event, though, one vehicle got a lot of attention: eHang 184, from China. You can check out their video below.

I found eHang very intriguing but I hesitate to call it an aircraft, at least compared to manned airplanes. It is more like an autonomous air vehicle and I say that because the occupant is not a pilot. As its developers tell the story, you get in, use the screen in front of you to tap where you want to go and eHang flies you to that destination. I’d be more likely to call it an “aircab.”

As currently portrayed and as seen at CES, eHang is something very different. It is a one person transport device though I imagine they are thinking more seats in the future.

When you think about modern drones — such as the dji-brand I am flying — you realize these things are already quite capable. My Phantom 2 Vision will automatically return to “home” if I lose signal, will automatically return home before its battery gets too low, and can be programmed with up to 16 waypoints to fly autonomously.

Is it so hard to envision eHang taking you to your doctor appointment or the grocery store?

Yet eHang is entering a field we may shortly call crowded. Let’s have a look at another example, one we know better. On several occasions, I’ve reported about Terrafugia’s Transition The brain trust at Terrafugia worked hard on their flying car even going to the trouble to get a weight exemption so they could meet highway regulations that are as onerous as FAA regs for airplanes. Yet it appears the Massachusetts company has set off a new direction.

Enter TF-X. What’s the difference? A lot, actually, as TF-X is driven like a car, rather conventionally, but only to a runway or helicopter-like pad where you tell the TF-X where to take you. TF-X does the flying for you, autonomously. Do you see a theme emerging?

TF-X unfolds short wings but then deploys electric-powered, folded propellers to achieve an MV-22 Osprey-like take-off that morphs to level flight. Once aloft and moving forward the spinning props retract and a high-horsepower engine pushes TF-X through the air at speeds around 200 mph until near your destination. Then the spinning props redeploy and resume a helicopter function, lowering you to the ground. After folding the empennages into the body again, you drive to your destination.

Like eHang, the TF-X’s “wow factor” is almost off the charts.

Even Transition has would-be competitors as I described in this article or this one. Most of these are dreams that may never happen although I-Tec’s Maverick has been flying for a few years and a limited number of examples were delivered.

I have also written about a China-developed “carcopter.” This is a twist on the Transition flying car, the Maverick dune buggy-ish powered parachute, or SkyRunner’s MK 3.2 “flying ATV.” However, all four of these entries are meant to be flown by someone, by a trained pilot inside the machine. Autonomous air vehicles such as eHang or TF-X (when airborne) are something different.

Of course, by now every knows about Amazon’s ambitious drone delivery plans. That, too, is something yet again.

One we know even less about due to a dark curtain of secrecy surrounding it is the Zee.Aero concept. All I know is what can be found by anyone digging through patent applications. I know one employee of the company but he will not say a word. I also know the founder who created some interesting hang gliders. I don’t know what Zee is planning but based on the drawings it sure looks like a — you guessed it — autonomous air vehicle, perhaps an aircab.

Why write about such non-pilot vehicles on a website frequented by pilots who want to be at the controls? Well, these developments are technologically interesting and they may start to occupy the air we use, just like drones are doing today (though conflicts are vanishingly small, at least so far).

These future of flight developments also make a favorite expression of mine even more relevant. As a Star Trek fan, I have long said that when we can “Beam me up, Scotty” the end will come for transport aircraft. Who’d sit in a crowded human mailing tube if you could beam to your destination? However, flying for fun will always have a place. Airliners may disappear in the far future but LSA, hang gliders, gyrocopters, aerobatic airplanes and other sport or recreational aircraft should continue as long as people want to play in the sky.

Following is eHang’s promotional video with a story that includes development failures. eHang’s time may be off in a distant future but given this level of determination, who knows?

You may have already seen this (it has almost 3 million views) but since Terrafugia is a U.S. company deeply involved with the ASTM standards and the LSA regulation, I include their impressive video.

Compress Post ...

Ruben Leon poses at Levil with his first, tiny AHRS unit.

Levil Technology started out making small CNC mills, an activity that continues.

Start Wars fans can be excused for thinking this is a miniature Death Star but it is actually a calibration device.

Levil devices found a powerful ally in the Apple iPad. One LSA has been fitted with three such devices as the only instruments. Pictured is iLevil² SW

If you ever read newspapers or watch network news, you can hardly avoid hearing about the meltdown in Venezuela following the early 2013 death of Hugo Chavez. That Cuba-emulating country was taken over by Nicolás Maduro and things deteriorated quickly. I start the story of Levil this way as I recently visited their Oviedo, Florida facility and I had to wait until proprietor Ruben Leon returned from travel. When I arrived at Levil headquarters I found he had returned to his former home, Venezuela, to vote in the elections. The elections won by the opposition served notice on the Maduro administration that his countrymen are fed up and want change.

How this all relates to the business of Light-Sport Aircraft products is a tale of one man’s resolve and determination. I found it fascinating and hope you will, too.

After completing his education, Ruben sought work in a country where finding a good job can be a challenge. As a bright, young fellow with an education he did find work but realized this was not as fulfilling as he wanted. Over time, he ended up starting a machine shop enterprise that continued for many years … until the arrival of Chavez in 1999. For a time, things worked for Chavez, a self-described Marxist who used oil revenues to pursue a socialist agenda, nationalizing industries and implementing social programs. However, the economy began to decay with increasing speed. As Chavez policies intervened, Ruben saw a dimming future and chose to leave his home country.

Ruben still owns the machine shop in Venezuela but he turned it over to his employees. However, that shop continues to make machine parts for some of Levil’s line of small CNC machines.

After a stop in Miami — that gateway to so many from South American countries — Ruben and his family ended up in Oveido on the northern outskirts of Orlando, Florida. Most Americans have no real idea what it is like to leave their home country and to essentially start all over. However, like other high-achieving immigrants, Ruben is powerfully motivated and was willing to learn new skills and take the risks necessary to succeed.

Ruben started his U.S.-based career building tabletop computer-controlled machine tools or mills. Levil’s machines — a little larger than a home microwave — are designed for small machine shops, jewelers, educational institutions and R&D laboratories that want to fit a complete CNC system into a small space.  The machines feature servo-control technology that enables high speeds and precision when machining small parts or prototypes made of a variety of materials, including plastics, aluminum and steel. Though small in size, Levil’s machines aren’t limited to small volume manufacturing. For example, the company’s second biggest customer in Malaysia uses their Levil machines for round-the-clock manufacturing of tiny plastic lenses.

While I found the small CNC machines interesting, my focus was on his aerospace devices. Now 60 years old, Ruben’s efforts have developed these twin high-tech niches. He enjoys serving as head of R&D for the two companies he launched in America. While he remains the leader of the business, Ruben’s “desk” is actually a workbench crammed with works in progress. I was most impressed with his versatility and drive. When he doesn’t know something, he throws himself into study and in seemingly short order, becomes expert in the endeavor. He is backed by family members who serve roles inside the company.

Turning to Levil‘s aviation business, Ruben said, “It didn’t start out as a business venture.” With a partner, Ruben fabricated a homebuilt aircraft, pictures of which adorn his walls. “There were a bunch of instruments I wanted to put on an airplane I was making,” started Ruben. “The instruments were expensive. I decided I could make them for a lot less money than I could buy them.”

Being a creative and restless entrepreneur, Ruben devised instruments that others admired and he thought to take some examples to an airshow to see how the market responded.

At one of these event, he showed one of his instruments to representatives of a big aviation company. “They liked it and asked him to build one customized for their need,” recalled Ruben. The helicopter company needed FAA certified instuments, a process then unknown to Ruben but, as usual, he threw himself into the effort and gained approval for what became on ongoing product.

His daughter, Ananda Leon, now works the airshows with her father. Ananda grew up flying with her father and is now a private pilot herself. “We started selling aviation products in 2008,” Ananda remembered. “That was the year I graduated from college, and I started working for the company.” Her focus is on the software side. With the introduction of Apple’s now-ubiquitous iPad, Levil’s special ability with electronic gizmos opened the door to a new line of products.

Today Ananda is General Manager and Chief Software Engineer of Levil Aviation. The Florida company manufactures standalone Attitude and Heading Reference Systems (AHRS) boxes that are designed to replace conventional mechanical flight instruments. The arrival of glass cockpits a few years into the LSA phenomenon followed by the iPad in 2010 provided the power to move Levil’s aviation enterprise forward.

The company claims to have developed the first iPad-compatible AHRS for general aviation. (Some others were in the game before, but had focused on supplying GPS signals, not digital flight instruments.) “All of your instrumentation can now be contained in a little box with a WiFi chip that sends flight data to an iPad,” said Ananda. With a smartphone or tablet — Levil now serves Android as well as iOS — she added, “Basically, you can have a full panel in the palm of your hand.”

Levil’s current line for LSA and Experimental aircraft includes the following products — Sport, iLevil2 SW, and iLevil2 AW. Here is a summary of their capabilities and other specs:

Levil’s hand-holdable $795 Sport provides AHRS, GPS, and a WiFi connection with an internal antenna. It offers a 12-hour battery life, a small solar panel, or external power, for example, from a USB or serial port. It weighs 5 ounces (141 grams).
iLevil2 SW is an $1,195 paneltop unit that provides AHRS, GPS, weather, traffic, and a WiFi connection. It offers a 5.5-hour battery life, a small solar panel, or external power. It weighs 10 ounces (283 grams).
iLevil2 AW is an $1,395 remotely mounted unit with a remote antenna that allows a full suite of avionics, including Pitot-Static data providing AHRS, GPS, weather, traffic, air data and a WiFi connection. It offers a 4-hour battery life or external power. It weighs 11 ounces (311 grams).
All Levil units offer WIAM or Wireless Integrated Avionics Module. WIAM is a term invented by Levil and refers to WiFi compatibility that integrates more than one flight instrument such as AHRS, GPS, and ADS-B.

Compress Post ...

David Clark’s best selling -13.4 model. Find out more here.

David Clark’s DC Pro model. Get more details here.

Question: What do space suits and headsets have in common? I bet that few of you can answer that question but the answer is “David Clark.” Yep, this 80-year-old company, which began business in 1935, started not with the ubiquitous green ear cup headsets but with flight suits worn by pilots of some very cutting-edge aircraft and spacecraft.

David Clark Company made full-pressure suits developed for test pilots who flew the X-15 to record speeds and altitudes of Mach 6.70 and 354,200 feet. The East coast company also made Gemini space program suits including the G-4C space suit for Ed White’s first U.S. space walk
Full-pressure suits worn by pilots of various high-altitude aircraft such as the F-4, F-15, U-2, and SR-71 Blackbird and space shuttle crew escape suits were all produced David Clark.

After all that, headsets may seem a bit mundane, although not for those who care about good cockpit communications and protecting their hearing.

The start of David Clark’s headset line is the H10-30, which began production in 1975, making a 40-year run for this very familiar unit. It sells for what seems a modest price of $300. No wonder it has enjoyed such a long life and continues to sell in the 21st century.

One step up the product line brings us to the H10-13.4 model, the largest seller of the company’s passive noise attenuation. A passive headset cancels noise by covering your ears through a combination of headset pressure, gel seals, and an ear dome that completely encompasses your ear. It lists for $351 Neither of these two models requires any power.

Looking nearly identical to the -30 and -13.4 is the H10-13X, David Clark’s version of active noise reduction (ANR) unit, which the company calls Electronic Noise Canceling or ENC. Some noise can sneak around the good seal provided by the -13 and -13.4 and when it does, ENC can cancel some frequencies powered by a separate power module. ENC primarily cancels low frequency noise. Aviation marketing manager, Dennis Buzzell, explained that studies showed low frequency sounds are the main contributor to pilot fatigue.

Retail price of the H10-13X is $700. While more expensive than the passive line, the -13X is still much less than the superpremium models that other brands sell. Of all David Clark models the most noise suppressing model is the -13X because it employs both passive and active noise reduction design concepts. Pilots operating the loudest aircraft would likely prefer this model.

Pilots who fly extended flights in quieter aircraft asked David Clark Company to make a lighter headset. When I sampled the -13X with ENC, I didn’t find it heavy, but for a very long flight or when moving your head rapidly, you might notice the heft.

Dennis then invited me to try the DCPro-X. It was indeed lighter weighing only seven and a half ounces (213 grams) compared to 18 ounces (510 grams) for the -13X. DCPro-X may not be as light as headsets that are basically foam ear plugs with speakers but the truly light Pro-X is more user friendly and more durable.

ProX also adds wireless Bluetooth functionality so you can use it with a music player or your smartphone. The lighter DCPro-X sells for $695 with ENC, Bluetooth and a separate carry bag, making it a relative bargain in the age of modern headsets. However, it does not contribute as much in passive noise reduction so might be best used in an aircraft that is somewhat quieter. I think most Light-Sport Aircraft qualify as those — primarily the ones powered by Rotax engines — tend to make less total noise either inside or outside the cockpit.

All David Clark headsets come with a five-year warranty. They are 100% made in the USA at the company’s only factory, in Worcester, Massachusetts. The H10-30, H10-13.4, and H10-13X are sold only from distributors. The newest DCPro-X is sold both by dealers and directly from David Clark. Find dealers and more information or purchase the Pro-X at the company website.

Hear more info and see all the products in the following video from the Flying magazine Aviation Expo in Palm Springs, shot in October 2015.

Compress Post ...

All color images from Internet; artists were not identified. My thanks to each for their creative artwork … and Merry Christmas to all!

As we near Christmas time and as children around the globe await the arrival that busy flyer, Santa Claus, did you ever wonder how the big man in the red flight suit manages the effort, specifically how he preflights the sleigh and controls his “engines?”

So far as we know, he only flies the reindeer-powered sleigh once a year. How do you maintain your flying skills with a single flight per year? OK, he probably flies locally around the North Pole doing touch and goes but apparently no one ever sees it happen. A better guess is that, like any good pilot, he reviews his Sleigh Pilot Operating Handbook before getting into his busy season.

You didn’t really think it was some magical occurrence, did you? Come on … you’re a pilot, no doubt a very good one. Would you go fly your airplane — or for that matter, your sleigh, assuming you were some rather chubby but jolly fellow with a snowy white beard — without first giving your sleigh a thorough check? Then, what about your powerplants? Do you think those reindeer are going to perform the task of delivering billions of Christmas presents without proper maintenance? I don’t think so.

How would you solve this problem? Well, of course, you’d refer to your Sleigh Mk II POH. Fine, I’m having a bit of fun for the Christmas holidays but a good friend at my home airport named Joe Friend (yes, that name is real) sent me a Sleigh Flight Manual and I was amused enough by it to make it a Christmas Eve post. I hope you will have some fun reading it.

Officially this 1947 document — hey, the Sleigh Mk I and Mk II have been around for a long, long time — is labeled “Pilot’s and Flight Engineer’s Notes.” First, let’s review selected portions of what is available.

An overall description of the Sleigh Mk II may be useful for those not used to unorthodox aircraft.

INTRODUCTION: Santa Sleigh Mk II is an eight engine transport, powered by magic reindeer engines.

FUEL SYSTEM: Mk II is equipped with eight fuel tanks, each connected to one engine. Particular care must be taken during refueling to guarantee equal tank filling for each engine. Not following this procedure can have catastrophic consequences including a petulant loss of engine during take-off or cruise plus weight and balance problems.

AIRCRAFT CONTROL: An automatic pilot is available. Heading entry is based on detection of a ground beacon signal labeled IHBN or, “I have been nice.” Before engaging the autopilot, verify all engines appear to be performing nominally. One unhappy engine can upset the flight and delay cargo delivery.

ENGINE CONTROLS: Engines are voice controlled. (Voice control seems very advanced for 1947, doesn’t it? One wonders if one of the reindeer’s offspring was named Siri.)

Having reviewed the POH general terms, you will want to carefully read certain checklists.

HANDLING
Pre-flight checklist
Starting the engines and warming up
Testing the engines and output
Take-off, assuring all engines are running contentedly
Climbing, staying aware of vital cargo security
General Flying … remember this an all-night flight
Diving … don’t do it!
Approach and landing
After landing

PRE-FLIGHT CHECKLIST
Reindeer full
Rudolph’s nose pre-heating
Inspect reindeer hooves
Check cargo loading by Elves
Pat on the back for each reindeer
Give additional cookie and milk to reindeer during warming up
Kiss Mrs. Claus goodbye

NOTE: Particular attention should be paid to engine exhaust. Any suspect leaks can become unpleasant to the Sleigh pilot and may trigger engine shutdown.

Finally before aligning the sleigh on the snow-covered runway up near the North Pole, a few more comments from the Sleigh manual should be reviewed. Remember, it’s going to be a very long night covering tens of thousands of miles and involving some very short roof landings.

DIVING: Engaging the Sleigh Mk II in a dive is forbidden under all circumstances. Exceeding the maneuvering speed with the cargo load of presents for millions of kids can have direct consequences on cargo wrapping and bow security. Also, remember children expect to hear reindeer’s bells not a Stuka diving horn.

APPROACH & LANDING: Particular attention should be paid to the landings, especially on slippery and highly angled rooftops. Weight and balance are considerably modified as the night continues and Sleigh handling can become tricky. Sideslips are never advised. No automatic landing should be attempted without reindeer identified as Rudolph performing well. For difficult take-offs additional cookies supplied to the reindeer engines can be helpful.

AFTER LANDING: Immediate care must be given to the reindeer engines. Particular attention must be paid to hooves. No Elves should touch them before checking the reindeer hooves to assure temperature is below 140 degrees Fahrenheit.

Joe Friend added one additional recollection: “Back in the day, FAA decided to give Santa his multi-“engine” check ride. After the briefing, hitching up the reindeer, and preflight, Santa was sitting in the sled and the FAA inspector walked up carrying a rifle.

Santa asked, “What’s that for?”

The FAA inspector replied, “Hey, it’s a check ride — I want you to remember you could lose one on takeoff.”

Here’s hoping you have no engine-outs on Christmas Eve and wishing you and yours a warm and wonderful Christmas with your loved ones!

Compress Post ...

EAA’s top e-Hotline story last week was, “The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on Wednesday passed S. 571, better known as the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 (PBOR2), bringing significant third-class medical reform one big step closer to reality.”

This week AOPA reported PBOR2 passed the Senate and is en route to the House.

This represents progress that many EAA and AOPA members sought, so smiles all around at the big member organizations.

PBOR2 must still pass the House and be signed by the president. Note that this is already the second attempt — hence the “2” — as an earlier version met resistance. Concessions had to be made to advance the proposed regulation. Even if it passes the House and is signed, it will take perhaps one year for FAA rulemaking.

It seems like everyone is on board. Why such a long delay?

Organizations like the Airline Pilots Association have come out against this proposed law and will probably continue to speak out against it. ALPA shocked EAA by announcing their opposition while AirVenture Oshkosh was happening this year.

PBOR1 was not acceptable to some politicians and had to be reworked. As EAA wrote, “A number of lawmakers made it absolutely clear that they would not support the legislation as originally introduced.” FAA also appears extremely cautious about relaxing the medical requirement. Essentially the same concern held up the SP/LSA rule for years. According to EAA, PBOR2 had 70 of 100 cosponsors in the Senate. At last tally, the 435-member House had 152 cosponsors of PBOR2, or 35% making passage much less certain. Plenty of fingers are crossed in hope.

OK, so the medical part had to be changed. How about the aircraft?

In exchange for tightening aspects of the medical relief, the aircraft size was considerably expanded. Two people in a four seater with a max of 180 horsepower on a single-engine, fixed gear airplane led to six seats, an aircraft weighing up to 6,000 pounds and no limitation on horsepower, number of engines, or gear type.

Day VFR only led to day and night VFR and IFR. Airspace use also opened from 10,000 feet max or up to 2,000 feet AGL to up to 18,000 feet.

Critical LSA Question — If PBOR2 passes all barriers, will the SLSA industry be able to sell more aircraft or less aircraft?

Many do not believe PBOR2 changes things significantly for newly-manufactured LSA. Does that statement surprise you? When this idea was first proposed this more than four years ago, many who wanted a reason not to buy suspended their interest in LSA … immediately. Like the stock market, the airplane buyer market quickly factored in the possibility of third class medical reform.

Potential buyers who spurned LSA then and since were probably not particularly strong candidates for a new LSA purchase anyway, so fewer LSA sales than anticipated were lost by the announcement of possible elimination of the third class medical requirement.

By all means, LSA sales were lost, however, most of that damage happened years ago.

The fact remains that many buyers will prefer a new, modern aircraft to an old, outdated one. Some will still choose the older ones, of course, but new is nice.

Does PBOR2 mean that pilots will purchase a used Cessna 172 or Piper Cherokee instead of a new LSA?

The short answer may be yes. However, to keep the purchase price much lower than a new LSA, a buyer must select something like a 20- or 30-year-old Cessna 172 and that is a quite-dated aircraft with analog instruments, higher-time engines and airframes, higher fuel consumption, plus worn interiors and faded paint. Plenty of such aircraft exist and many buyers will choose them over a new LSA but such old aircraft will not satisfy anyone seeking new technologies and efficiencies.

In addition, prices of those old aircraft will increase if this law is passed. Likewise, used LSA are also on the market though most are holding their prices quite well.

I have been giving a talk called “20-Plus Reasons to Buy a LSA.” I list 23 good reasons to consider a LSA and none of them are the lack of need for a medical. Some buyers see this logic.

So, what medical requirements apply?

Pilots need a regular or special issuance third-class medical issued within the 10 years preceding the legislation’s enactment. Otherwise, a one-time medical will be required. If your current regular or special issuance medical certificate expires before the new regulations take effect, you must renew it to keep flying.

Pilots who develop certain medical conditions — for specific cardiac problems, mental health, or neurological conditions — will have to get a special issuance medical one time only.

Pilots meeting these requirements will still need to visit their personal physician (not an aviation medical examiner) once every four years for a medical exam. Pilots must fill out a form with a short questionnaire. After the exam, both the physician and the pilot must sign the form and the pilot must make a note of the visit and keep the signed form in his or her logbook. According to EAA, this form “will include some of the items that are now part of the third-class medical exam but it will not require the doctor to make a ‘pass or fail’ judgment and no information about the exam needs to be provided to the FAA unless it is specifically requested.”

All pilots will be required to take a free online education course every two years. This will be provided by AOPA’s Air Safety Institute and will cover aeromedical factors.

PBOR2 rules regarding medications will not change. If you take a medication that the FAA disallows you will not be able to fly, however, because the FAA does not publish a list of disallowed medications, you should contact EAA or AOPA for advice.

What about insurance companies? How do they view this?

EAA wrote, “Insurance companies have not yet addressed how they will handle medical reforms and are unlikely to do so until medical reform becomes law.”

As movie script writers like to say, “This isn’t over.” Stay tuned for more.

Compress Post ...

Here’s something you simply never hear about … lightplanes in North Korea and flying one above the country. My LAMA Europe associate and friend Jan Fridrich alerted me to the existence of a handsome light aircraft allegedly developed and built in that isolated country.

I don’t know what your thoughts are about North Korea. Our government officials, media, and other critics have related stories of terrible human abuse by the ruling elite. I have no doubt this is indeed a repressive regime and I certainly don’t condone coercion. However, neither do I have any first-hand information about the country; I only know what I can see and read elsewhere.

Yet like most of you, I love airplanes and I enjoy viewing especially attractive airplanes. The one in the nearby images qualifies and according to those who have visited — and evidently gone aloft in it — this is a North Korean-designed aircraft. About the machine, Jan said, “The plane looks like combination of [the Italian] Pioneer with [Germany’s] Fascination and [Slovak’s] Dynamic.” However, this is a four seater, unlike those European LSA-like designs.

Singapore-based photographer Aram Pan publishes a website featuring photography of North Korea. He reports spending several years creating photos and video of the isolated, secretive nation. Aram also offers tours of the country and his latest feat is arranging what he calls “the first foreigners to fly over Pyongyang in a North Korea-built light airplane.”

A PetaPixel article on Aram’s work contains a 15-minute YouTube video of his pioneering aerial photo shoot. The airborne scenes depict the nation’s largest city, which looks comparable to any other national capital.

“We work together to … push the limits of what can be achieved in North Korea,” Mr. Pan told the PetaPixel website. “We work with the local officials to constantly make our requests known. Since 2013, I have been allowed to do things not previously possible and have opened up the avenues for new media possibilities.”

PetaPixel said that Aram shot the world’s first collection of 360-degree virtual tours back in 2013 and the first state-sanctioned GoPro footage in 2014.

Starting last year, Aram began petitioning the North Korean government for permission to shoot aerial photos and videos over Pyongyang, the capital city. In November 2015, the country launched the first helicopter joyrides in which picture-taking was allowed. Pan was personally invited by North Korean officials to take an exclusive ride on a one-of-a-kind locally-made light plane, reported PetaPixel.

The aircraft is not named or described anywhere and I could uncover no more about it. Another article shows an image of Kim Jung Un near what appears to be a Cessna, but no reference could be found of the airplane pictured in this article.

If any ByDanJohnson.com visitors know more about this mystery aircraft, please advise me and I’ll update this article. For now, at least we have some evidence of lightplane flying in North Korea.

All images here and more to be seen at the article link above are by Aram Pan. You can see some wonderful “spherical” photos of the inside of a Russian Ilyushin Il-1 on his website. I’ve been seeing some of this kind of imagery in Wall Street Journal (they make spherical videos which are quite interesting to observe on a mobile device as you can actually spin around and see all around you in every direction). Aram’s spherical still photos are excellent quality.

For the more adventurous among you, he is offering a tour to North Korea in April 2106. I have no idea if Americans are welcome on this tour but for those who may wish to inquire, you can visit his website for more details. The cost is surprisingly modest. Aram has already visited North Korea eight times.

On his website shows, Mr. Pan wrote, “Using photography as an outreach for peace and understanding, I have come to realize that all it takes is a wide smile and an outstretched arm to change the way people react and treat you.” I like his positive approach.

If you’re a social media fan, you can visit Mr. Pan’s Facebook page for more info and images.

I may be getting on some government list, having done an article about a Light-Sport Aircraft built in Iran and now a story about flying in North Korea. However, I think more knowledge of aviation around the world is a good thing.

Compress Post ...

Amazon’s newest drone is part quadcopter, part “conventional” airplane with this prop thrusting most of the flight to your back yard.

Loading the package (autonomously) at the fulfillment center …

… flying en route via more conventional means (Amazon said this an actual in-flight image, not a simulated one) |

… and dropping off your package in your backyard, apparently at a target you’d put out (see video).

I realize that for some readers I may be swimming upstream when I write about drones (or UAVs or RPVs, or whatever). First, many of you simply don’t care; your passion is for manned flight and I completely understand. Second, some of you see real danger to your manned flying due to a growing drone population. Those who guess the future think more than a million units will be sold this holiday season. Third, we have the matter of privacy. Probably like you, I don’t like the idea of some government agency or even a snoopy neighbor being able to peer into my yard against my preference.

This article presents a somewhat different, somewhat nuanced view of drone development and the reasons are financial, which may not be how you’ve seen this issue. Consider that FAA is — compared to most aviation businesses — an absolutely enormous organization. It has an annual budget of more than $15 billion and around 50,000 employees. Very few private airplane makers are bigger. Boeing is, as is Airbus. After that, it drops fast. Cessna’s parent Textron is smaller as is Gulfstream. The vast majority of airframe builders are much, much smaller companies.

The point is that compared to more than 95% of all aviation businesses, FAA is a massive behemoth funded by the American taxpayer. Of course, I know FAA accomplishes many worthy tasks but many feel the regulations they issue interfere as much as help. Many question if those thousands of pages of regulation truly advance safety, the agency’s prime goal.

Into this picture now come some truly mammoth entities. These are private businesses that have many tens of billions in annual sales and the sheer heft to afford armies of lobbyists and lawyers to advance their corporate mission. I don’t portray this as a good thing; in fact, it contributes to cronyism … where government gets cozy with the largest businesses. Nonetheless, when organizations the size of Google or Amazon want to bend FAA their direction, they have the might to achieve far more than your favorite airplane manufacturer.

In the Washington Post today, a story appeared about Amazon’s latest drone design. Part quadcopter and part airplane it has a range of 15 miles, the company claims. They also say it “part of a growing family of drones.” Expect to see lots more about the company’s plans to deliver packages to you via drone. This is not mere speculation or a means to get media attention (though it certainly does that, too).

As with Internet delivery, the so-called “last mile” is the costliest, referring to delivering services or products from a distribution center to your home. So for Amazon, it may truly make sense to bring products to you via drone. Their effort to develop the right flying machine is an ongoing juggernaut that is not likely to stop.

As you may have read, FAA has established a new office to guide drone regulation. I imagine that office will be on the regular beat of Amazon’s lobbyist battalion. In that future, unlike with hundreds of tiny aviation enterprises, FAA will be greeted by people who have deep pockets that even FAA cannot match. Is this going to change the game of drones? You bet!

Their pressure will cause FAA to pay plenty of attention to Amazon and the giant online retailer may achieve many of their goals due to the amount of horsepower they can apply. Your average drone-operating entrepreneur may have to meet a growing list of regs and compliance demands. Those demands can easily be met by Amazon, which can staff a compliance department, but will pose a major impediment for very small businesses.

Online journalist Mary Grady at AVweb included a letter from Tony Dziepak who wrote, “I would register my drone prior to flying it above 200 feet AGL. [However,] I think it is clear from U.S. v. Causby (1946) that the FAA has no authority to regulate “the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere” of my property, which in the Causby case is at least 83 feet AGL. Just as my driveway is not part of the federal highway system, the airspace above my property, at least to my treetops, is not part of the NAS.” I think Tony makes a good point. Is the air above his yard his to control or FAA’s?

My longtime friend and fellow publisher Ben Sclair weighed in the wisdom of drone registration. Being a witty guy he makes a lot of sense when he questions if mere registration can make drone operations safer. You can read his piece here. Alternatively, you can read a non-aviation viewpoint on FAA registration of drones from one of my favorite alternative sources, Reason Magazine here.

As Reason reported, when the Academy of Model Aeronautics (which is represented on the new drone registration task force) examined the FAA data in September 2015, it found that only 3.5% of the agency’s 764 recorded incidents were genuine near misses between drones and manned aircraft. Most of the “incidents” were nothing more than sightings. In any event, AMA reported, “… the most serious incidents in the FAA data — including all actual  crashes — involved government military drones, not civilian ones.”

I offer all the preceding as food for thought so you can come to your own opinions about drones. I plan to keep flying mine with the aim of providing you with better content but I’ll be darned careful around any manned aircraft. For the record, here and here are my two earlier articles on drones.

It is not my mission to promote Amazon (though I admit being a regular customer). I merely wish to show their vision of a drone-drenched future. Here’s their YouTube promo video …

Compress Post ...