Beyond the Book

It has often been said that, with the exception of the nuclear power industry, aviation is the most regulated activity in the country. In many ways we must fit our operations around, beside, and on top of the restraints that the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) place upon us. Not only must we comply with the regulations, they are interwoven into our very lives. We would literally be lost without the regs.

• Less than 1,000 and three? Then, it's IFR or, at least Special VFR.
• More than 90 days without three landings and takeoffs? No passengers.
• Number two VOR intermittent? Check the minimum equipment list.
• Don't exceed 680 degrees internal turbine temperature in the climb, 280 knots in the descent, or go below blue line on the approach.

All of these items are ingrained in our operational minds. But note: These are just the basics. They say nothing about the actual dynamics of operating an aircraft.

For example, increasing following distance when the road is wet, slowing down when the visibility is poor, and stopping when a toddler on a tricycle rolls toward the road are safety-related self-imposed driving restrictions. We have been performing them for so long that they have become second nature to us; they have become a part of our personal regulatory code.

Consider the following:

• A Piper Cheyenne drags a wing tip on landing during a strong gusty crosswind.
• The pilot of a Bell JetRanger runs out of fuel trying to make it back to the airport late in the day.
• A Cessna Citation pilot runs off the end of a wet runway following a high and fast approach resulting from a low break-out on a VOR approach.
• A landing gear collapses after a Beech King Air departs the runway during a very low-visibility takeoff.

What regulation did these pilots break (other than the FAR Part 91.13 "careless and reckless" catchall)? Even the JetRanger pilot thought he had enough fuel to make it back. While we would certainly question these pilots' judgment, they were within the purview of the FARs, operating limits contained in the airplane/rotorcraft flight manual, and personal limits imposed by FAR Part 61. Not to belabor the point, but it wasn't flouting a regulation that brought these aviators to grief: it was their lack of judgment under the circumstances.

The airlines, military, charter operators, and large corporate flight departments discovered long ago that they needed to go beyond the regulations to ensure the safety of their aircraft, flight crew members, passengers, cargo, and reputations. They impose standards, limitations, and restrictions that go beyond the FARs, in recognition that the regulations contain only minimum standards. Given the diversity of operations, skill levels of flight crew members, and vagaries of the environment, these aircraft operators supplement and bolster the basic provisions of the regulations.

These limits and standard operating procedures are often in addition to quite specific operating specifications imposed on air carriers by the FAA. The specifications speak to aircraft types and equipment, allowable airports and areas of the world in which one can fly, maintenance programs, training and qualifications, and recordkeeping requirements that go beyond the FARs. The standards, limitations, and standard operating procedures (SOP) that go beyond the regulations and specifications may be contained in a shelfful of manuals.

Is all this additional written guidance necessary for a lone pilot operating a single King Air? Well, it depends on your perspective. Consider our Cheyenne pilot who was trying to land in a 15-knot-gusting-to-20 crosswind — what were his limits? The aircraft flight manual says that at least 20 knots has been demonstrated, but what of the pilot's personal limit and good judgment? What about the Citation pilot executing a decidedly unstabilized approach to a slick runway? Yes, the book said that he could get it into a damp 4,000-foot strip with room to spare, but what about the unstabilized environment, approach obstacles, and wet runway surface? He may have been legal, but that is scant consolation after the airplane is bent.

Do we really need additional limits and well-defined procedures for an airplane we fly regularly and know quite well? Don't 3,000 hours in type count for something? Sure they do, but how many times in those 3,000 hours did you encounter a maximum crosswind situation combined with poor visibility and nighttime conditions? Or, how many times did you have to "go for it" off a nonprecision approach to a short, wet runway?

The addition of limits and standards helps to prepare us for combinations of bad circumstances. While they will never prove to be absolute talismans to protect us and our passengers from embarrassment and injury, they will certainly go a long way toward that end.

OK, so additional limits and procedures are desirable. How does one go about finding out what needs to be committed to a procedure? Look at the critical elements when considering limits:

• Personal. How much rest do you need to be safe and effective in the cockpit?
• Aircraft. Is it really airworthy and equipped for the flight at hand?
• Takeoff. Are you aware of specific runway, environment, and aircraft performance limits?
• Weather. In what conditions don't you want to find yourself? Be critical of your abilities and those of the equipment you are flying.
• Approach. Do you feel comfortable with all types of approaches to listed minimums? If not, add some height and distance to the published numbers.
• Landing. What environments are bad for you and your aircraft?

Sit down and do a bit of personal role-playing to determine the answers to these issues. As you mentally step through all the contingencies you may encounter, take notes. Take your time; over the period of a few days you will discover that your list of limitations and restrictions will grow as you think your way through the possibilities. After you finish, review your notes and commit your limits and restrictions to paper — the shorter the better.

Once you have determined your limits, next consider how you will go about implementing them. This means that you should develop procedures to accommodate both normal and abnormal situations that you may encounter. Again, some pilots object to adhering to standard procedures because it overly restricts their freedom to fly the aircraft. However, they may be confusing standard operating procedures with technique; standard procedures normally state when specific actions are to be performed, not how they are to be performed — the difference between procedure and technique.

Doing things in the cockpit the same way every time provides us with needed habit patterns, patterns that will save us when work load and distractions threaten to derail our normal thought processes — not that the patterns should replace the checklist or normal operating procedures specified for the aircraft. Again, standard procedures merely tell us when something should be done, if it's needed.

An important part of standard procedures is standardized call-outs. From "power is set" on takeoff to "runway in sight" at the other end, verbalizing critical checkpoints of the flight is an important means for ensuring that all is proceeding well. Particularly important are altitude and airspeed call-outs during takeoff, approach, and landing. These words serve as markers for the progress of your endeavor. Even if you are operating single-pilot, call-outs should be used. Besides, your familiar voice keeps you company when things are a bit dicey.

To be really effective, all of this should be set to writing. The resulting document can be just a few sheets of paper to remind you of the contract you have made with yourself to accept limitations and procedures beyond the regulations. The real value in this exercise lies in the act of thinking your way through your operations, noting possible modifications to your procedures, and committing to them.

The resulting set of procedures and limits will soon become a common part of your well-ordered regulatory thought processes. And, since you developed them yourself, you can execute them with great pride of authorship.

Standards, limitations, and the discipline to apply them have proved to be the keys to safe, error-free aviation operations. While not a panacea, your own wise restrictions, beyond the book, will make you a better, more professional pilot.

Sample limitations

Personal preparation

• Spend at least eight hours away from the office/hangar before beginning a working/flying day.
• Fourteen hours of work and/or flying is enough for one day.
• Be aware of the airworthiness of your aircraft. Ensure that it is ready for the upcoming flight.
• Either radar or a lightning detector must be operational when thunderstorms are forecast for the route of flight.

Takeoff

• No aborts beyond V1 unless catastrophic failure or loss of directional control occurs.
• Prevailing visibility on the runway should be at least one-quarter mile and there should be confirmation that the runway is clear.

En route

• Avoid thunderstorms by at least 20 miles.
• Check destination weather hourly when less than VFR.

Approach

• There should be no night circling approaches to unfamiliar airports.
• Approaches must be stabilized (descent rate less than 1,000 feet per minute, airspeed VREF minus 0, plus 15 kt) when within 500 feet of the ground.

Landing

• Actual distance available for landing and takeoff should exceed aircraft flight manual performance numbers by 50 percent.
• Minimum width for any runway is 60 feet.

Postflight

• A flight crew member will always observe the fueling of the aircraft.
• All aircraft discrepancies will be recorded on the proper form.

John Sheehan is president of Professional Aviation, Incorporated, a consulting firm specializing in management, safety, and technical support for corporate flight departments and air taxi operators. An airline transport pilot and active flight instructor, he has 35 years of experience in aviation. He is also secretary general of IAOPA.