Flight Safety

Sponsored by:

"Accident Technology"  by Gene Benson

Published: February 1, 2012

I love technology. I love all kinds of gadgets. The future that I read about as a teenager fifty years ago has been realized and surpassed. We have phones in our pockets. And not even foreseen fifty years ago, those phones have powerful computers that let us take pictures and video and send it anywhere in the world in a matter of seconds. We can easily access much of the world’s body of knowledge by typing a few words into our computers or even our phones. We have robot vacuum cleaners that operate independently. We find our way in our cars by following voice directions and a map that is getting information from satellites. Farmers accurately plant crops by using that same technology. Doctors can use a complex system of electromagnets to provide images of our internal organs and detect disease. The list goes on and on.

Aviation has enjoyed its share of technological wizardry. Advanced technology got a foothold in the airlines about thirty years ago. We used to call airplanes that had sophisticated flight management systems linked to their autoflight systems “magic airplanes.” Those systems cost several hundred thousand dollars so they were not about to be found in general aviation airplanes. But now, thirty years later, we can have systems with similar capabilities in our general aviation airplanes for a few thousand dollars. And pilots with more modest budgets can have a very capable device, even one that warns us of terrain ahead, for a few hundred dollars.

The airlines saw increased safety and efficiency by adopting this technology. Even though many general aviation airplanes are now equipped with sophisticated technology, GA has not enjoyed the same benefits. Why not?

I was an instructor for a major airline in the early days of this technology. Each pilot had to take extensive training on each system and demonstrate competence before being allowed to act as a crew member on a “magic airplane.” There have been a few, but very few, accidents in the airline industry that can be tied directly to a pilot’s incorrect or inappropriate use of technology. But general aviation has suffered numerous accidents that can be traced back to the pilot’s use, or attempted use, of technology. A year or so ago the NTSB was holding hearings to find out why so many technologically advanced general aviation airplanes were taking their pilots to their demise.

I believe that the difference in the level of success between the airlines and general aviation in adopting technology can be found in the training. A general aviation pilot can purchase technology ranging from an entire glass panel to a handheld GPS and go flying with little or no training in the proper use or the limitations of the equipment.

How many pilots no longer do much if any flight planning, but rely on their GPS to navigate for them. The problem is that unanticipated headwinds cause a slower ground speed and are not detected if the pilot is not keeping track of the time to arrive over various checkpoints. The slower ground speed causes a longer duration of flight and sometimes results in a dramatic reduction of cockpit noise a few miles short of the destination. Or how many pilots have ventured VFR into reduced visibility conditions because they believed that the GPS, with its terrain avoidance feature, would prevent them from colliding with anything. The terrain avoidance feature might work, only to have the non-instrument rated pilot suffer spatial disorientation and lose control of the airplane. The most blatant case that has come to my attention involved a non-instrument rated pilot flying a Cirrus SR-20 into Nantucket, Massachusetts. Weather conditions at the airport deteriorated as the pilot approached. The controller informed the pilot that the field was now IFR and asked if he was capable of executing an instrument approach to which the pilot said that he was. The controller cleared the pilot for the approach and the pilot, with the belief that his technology would allow him to automatically fly the approach, began to set it up. The pilot lost control of the airplane and had to activate the ballistic parachute system. I have many more examples of similar situations that resulted in accidents.

So we all need to take a deep breath, stand back, and look objectively at our technology. It doesn’t matter if we are using a hand-held GPS or a complete glass panel installation. We need to learn all that we can about our equipment. We need to realize the capabilities and limitations of our equipment, and we need to take training and frequently practice using the equipment.

 

Gene Benson

Gene Benson is a well respected FAA Aviation Safety Counselor with over 14,000 total hours under his belt. Through CNYAviation.com and his own website, genebenson.com, he hopes to spread the word about what we as pilots can do to keep ourselves and our passengers safe. He has been writing articles for CNYAviation.com's Flight Safety section since 2007.

 

Flight Safety Archive