For many years I’ve been interested in participating in a ferry flight to the mainland, but on the few occasions when something has turned up, I wasn’t comfortable enough with the plans to go along. Recently, however, I was asked to be one of the pilots ferrying a transport category turboprop airplane to San Antonio, Texas, by way of Camarillo, California. While I realize that this type of operation is different from what most of us think about in terms of aircraft size, capability, and systems, a lot of the planning was the same, and I thought might be of interest to many pilots.

One of our first planning considerations was flight time, fuel burn, and general performance issues. While we had information from other ferry operations of the same aircraft type, we decided to prepare our own data, just to be sure. As a further safeguard that our planning data would be accurate, each of the two pilots prepared time and fuel numbers from different aircraft performance material. I worked with the "raw" performance information, pretty much as one would deal with a problem on the ATP written examination--climb, cruise, and descent performance. From that I arrived at a zero wind projected time for the flight of just under 10 hours (cruising at a true airspeed of 230K) and a fuel burn of about 9500 pounds. (For this aircraft, fuel is measured in terms of pounds. There are about 6 pounds of fuel in a gallon.) The other pilot used aircraft ferry flight (long range cruise) data that averages in climb and descent values figuring that cruise makes up most of the flight. It’s a simpler, but slightly less accurate approach. He came out with virtually identical answers and both of our answers compared well with what we knew of previous ferry flights, so we felt that we had a good handle on our needs for the flight. We used Part 121 flag reserve fuel computations plus a bit extra when considering fuel requirements for the flight even though that was much more conservative than what was required for this Part 91 flight. Next we turned our attention to single engine performance. Suppose that just at the half-way point we lost an engine, what would our situation be? The easiest way to evaluate this circumstance is from specific fuel burn numbers. These tables provide the number of pounds of fuel consumed per mile of flight under various circumstances. A quick look at two engine specific fuel consumption at projected cruise altitude versus single engine specific fuel consumption at single engine long range cruise altitude showed that should we lose an engine, the trip could still be completed, although a longer time would be required. In fact the computation of this material is a bit complex since there are a variety of failure types to consider. After accounting for two engine performance and fuel requirement, one arrives at a two-engine turn point in the flight. This is the point where less fuel will be consumed in an all engines running situation if the flight is continued to destination as opposed to returning. The next turn point considers single engine performance and establishes when an engine failure would be best managed by returning rather than continuing to destination. Finally since the fuel ferry system in this aircraft relies on differential pressure (the pressure maintained in the cabin) to move fuel from the ferry tanks into the fuel lines, a pressurization turn around point is considered and establishes a point where pressurization failure would require a return rather than proceeding to the destination. For our particular flight all of these values turned out to be essentially the equal time point of the flight--the point in the flight where time to return and time to continue would be equal. Since the flight was conducted on a forecast zero wind day, this was also the half way point in distance.

After the safety planning outlined above was complete, I made a spread sheet to use for a flight plan. I again referred to aircraft performance values to obtain time, distance, and fuel burn to climb, maximum altitudes for a number of weights, and time, distance, and fuel burn for descent. With these values and cruise fuel burn information, I built the spread sheet showing way point names, distances between way points, air speed, ground speed, time between way points, and total time and total fuel at each way point. The flight plan called for climb as soon as weight was reduced enough to make the climb possible and economical in terms of fuel consumption. Some columns were included to provide room to note actual times and actual fuel burns so that as we proceeded we would be able to see if we needed to adjust estimated times en route, and especially to keep track of fuel consumption to know whether we were consuming more or less fuel than anticipated.

Weather is an important factor for any flight, and weather considerations are very important for a ferry flight. We knew, of course, that for all but a very few days a year point of origin weather would most likely be VMC or marginal VMC. Destination weather, however, has a lot of seasonal variation and at some times of year ground fog is a serious consideration. We, therefore, planned the flight to arrive at a time of day when ground fog would be least likely (mid-afternoon), and we kept track of overnight fog for several days before the flight. We also had what we considered a solid gold alternate that is close, but on the other side of the coastal range and therefore not subject to ground fog on a regular basis. En route weather is best monitored from satellite imagery, and since these images are available on the Internet, I used that source to keep track of major weather systems in the several days just before the flight. Winds aloft data present a different problem. Since most flights between Hawaii and the mainland are conducted in turbojet aircraft which fly about 10,000 feet higher than we were planning for this flight, their pilot reported wind data might not provide a truly accurate picture of winds at our proposed altitudes. We considered, however, that if there were no weather systems other than the usual high north of the islands, then the forecast winds would most likely be accurate. In fact the winds were forecast to be slight (20-30 knots) tail winds for the flight, and we made the flight plan based on no wind for fuel requirements.

With that planning complete, we next turned our attention to survival gear. We rented a commercial survival pack which included a covered raft, ELT, and survival supplies. I also carried a survival pack that I had often used for over water search flying. This is in a "fanny pack" that I can wear, and which will, therefore, come out of the aircraft with me. It contains a survival strobe, mirror, hand held marine band radio, 6000 calories of compact food, Swiss Army knife, and a few odds and ends. The waist band of the pack has room for some climbing quick disconnect links to which I could attach both the line from the raft/survival pack and a line from a rucksack in which I had an extra water supply and food wrapped in many heavy duty zip lock bags. This system lets me attach these items so that they will come out with me, but also provides a quick and simple means of shedding these items should anything get tangled during an egress. We discussed placement of the survival equipment for the flight, and we had everything distributed where it would be handy assuming exit by what we considered the most likely exit hatch, and easy re-location should another exit be warranted. We also conducted an extensive ditching briefing which included a discussion of wind and sea conditions in general and how a ditching would be conducted with respect to the sea. We also discussed who would take which items of survival and personal equipment, what duties would be with respect to navigation and communication during the few minutes immediately before ditching, and plans for meeting, inflating the raft, and constructing the canopy. This briefing was methodical, included discussion of many points, and contained various options which we planned to refine should a ditching become necessary. For example, there would be differences in terms of descent course depending on whether we were close to a land mass, close to a surface vessel, or mid-ocean.

After the ferry kit was installed, we conducted a flight test. The kit included the ferry fuel system, a high frequency single side band radio, and a GPS navigation system. For the flight test, we determined that we could obtain fuel from each of the three extra tanks, we verified valve positions, and made sure that we understood the operation of the fuel system. We made a "radio check" contact using the HF radio and listened to a number of known mainland transmitters to assess their signal strength and thereby determine if we felt that the radio antenna and ground requirements had been met. We also "played" with the GPS interface to be sure that we could enter way point data, use the data for navigation, and that course and position information made sense and appeared accurate.

After all of the planning and preparation was complete, we filed the international flight plan for the flight (center and flight service personnel were very helpful in answering a multitude of questions so that when we actually got to the stage of filing, we knew what we needed to do). When we filed, we had the printed flight plan from our spread sheet so that we could easily obtain proposed times for egress from center to enroute air space, and similarly our proposed arrival into center airspace at the destination. We also obtained help from the national weather service which provided faxed surface and appropriate high altitude weather charts for us on the morning of the flight. These are supplemented by some satellite imagery which I obtained on the Internet.

Planning the flight and flying the plan worked well. We had a gorgeous day for the flight with no weather at all for the Pacific crossing. Our GPS worked flawlessly, and our electronically projected times were typically just one or two minutes different from those on the spread sheet. The wind turned out to range from zero to about ten knots of tail wind. We got a block altitude clearance which gave us the option of making a steep climb as we burned fuel. We emptied our ferry tanks just before the equal time point of the flight, so at that point we had half the flight to go, and enough fuel for the entire flight, a very comfortable feeling. At that point, we elected to go to a max speed profile rather than our max range profile, and we were able to complete the trip about an hour faster than planned, and we landed with just about three hours of fuel remaining in the tanks, a bit more than we had planned.

Flying 2500 miles across the world’s largest ocean presents some element of risk in an aircraft which is not normally equipped or certified for such a flight. However, with careful planning, a conservative approach to go/no-go decisions, and fine weather, the trip can be accomplished with a considerable margin of safety.

 
Aviation Safety Seminar - Kona
Safety Tips presented by Phil Auldridge and Owner Responsibilities for Maintenance Log Book Entries by Jim Hein
Date: March 10, 6:30-8:00 p.m.
Location: Sporty’s Academy
Contact: Phil Auldridge, DPE, (808)969-2000 and Jim Hein, SPM, (808)837-8335

Aviation Safety Seminar - Honolulu
Owner Responsibilities for Maintenance Log Book Entries by Jim Hein
Date: March 26, 7-9 p.m.
Location: Honolulu FSDO, 135 Nakolo Place
Contact: Jim Hein, SPM, (808)837-8335

Hawaiian Flyers Toastmasters Meeting
Hawaiian Flyers Toastmasters invites anyone interested in improving their listening and speaking skills to come to a fun-filled meeting. It is the first and third Thursday of every month, 5:30-6:30 p.m. at the Honolulu FSDO office. For more information, call Tweet Coleman (808)837-8307, Jim Hein (808)837-8335, or Mark Stefanov (808)522-3039.

NTSB Public Hearing
Topic: Korean Air Flight 801 Investigation
Date: March 24-26, 1998 (check the local newspaper for the scheduled time)
Location: Honolulu Convention Center
 

Pilot/Owner Maintenance Record Responsibilities - two quick questions:

When you received your pilot’s license, how many hours of training had you received about the requirements of aircraft maintenance log books? I’d bet next to none. Do you know what your responsibilities are? Not knowing your responsibilities does not dismiss you from them. Can you answer the following two questions?

Q1. When a log book entry is made in the aircraft maintenance log books, who is primarily responsible to be sure that the entry is complete and correct? If the information is not complete and correct, who is responsible to be sure that the entry is corrected?

Q2. When a maintenance technician makes a log book entry after completing a repair on an airplane, what is the minimum information required? What additional information is necessary when making a log book entry for compliance with an airworthiness directive?

A1. According to FAR 91.403(a) and FAR 91.407(2), "the owner of operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition" and that no person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive, maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless the maintenance record entry required by FAR 43.9 or FAR 43.11, as applicable, has been made." Therefore, it is the owner/operator’s duty to check the work of the maintenance technician; not only to be sure that all of the screws are replaced and tools put away after maintenance, but also to be sure that the maintenance log book entries are correct and complete. If the records are not correct and complete, the owner/operator is tasked to follow up with the mechanic and get any omissions and/or corrections made to the aircraft maintenance log books.

If the aircraft is leased to an operator, that operator may be held as responsible. And yes, the maintenance technician is also responsible for correct log book entries. However, the registered owner of the aircraft is usually considered to be the first/primary person of responsibility for these records. As a pilot, you may want to review the maintenance records of the aircraft you regularly fly; you may be flying an aircraft that is technically not airworthy.

A2. After completing maintenance on an aircraft, the maintenance technician or the person performing the maintenance is required to make a maintenance log book entry in accordance with FAR 43.9. There are six parts to a maintenance record entry: 1) a description of the work performed or reference to maintenance data acceptable to the Administrator, 2) the date of the completion of the work performed, 3) the name of the person who performed the work, 4) the type of certificate held by the person who is approving the work performed, 5) the certificate number of the person who is approving the work performed, and 6) the signature of the person who is approving the work performed. Although it is not required specifically by FAR 43.9, it is considered good practice to include the aircraft tach reading, the aircraft, engine, or appliance total time in service, and the aircraft, engine, or appliance time since overhaul. Also, since signatures are often difficult to read, it is recommended (but not required) that the person signing also print his or her name beside the signature.

A maintenance logbook entry concerning an Airworthiness Directive (AD) is a regular "maintenance entry" in accordance with FAR 43.9; however, there are additional information requirements. FAR 91.417(a)(2)(v) indicates that the owner/operator must maintain the current status of applicable AD’s including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD number, the AD revision date, and when the next compliance action is required. Therefore the owner/operator should check the log book entries made by the maintenance technician to be sure that the minimum information is included when AD compliance entries are made. If all of the required information for FAR 43.9 and FAR 91.417(a)(2)(v) is not included, the owner/operator should return the log books to the maintenance technician and have the entry corrected.

If you’re an aircraft owner/operator, and you would like to have your maintenance records reviewed (risk free) for proper log book entries, the FAA Safety Program has an ongoing program called "Pilot and Aircraft Courtesy Evaluation" (PACE). If you would like more information about how this invaluable program works, please call Jim Hein (808) 837-8335 or Tweet Coleman (808) 837-8307.
 

Pacific Island Flyer, Home