Performance Data for the Mooney M20S Eagle

Safety Editor Richard N. Aarons — bcasafety@gmail.com International Operations/ Features Editor David Esler — david.esler@comcast.net Art Direction Lisa Caputo — lcaputo@aviationweek.com Art Department Scott Marshall — scott.marshall@aviationweek.com Colin Throm — colin.throm@aviationweek.com Associate Producer Bridget Horan — bridget.horan@aviationweek.com Contributors James Albright— james@code7700.com Mike Gamauf — mgamauf@yahoo.com Mal Gormley — malgormley@gmail.com Kent S. Jackson — kjackson@jetlaw.com Ross Detwiler — jetfac67@charter.net Patrick Veillette, Ph .D. — jumprsaway@aol.com Jim Cannon — jim_cannon@bellsouth.com Ringston Media — info@ringstonmedia.com Editorial Offices 520 Folly Rd., Ste. 238, Charleston, S.C.



r

 Managing Director, Frank Craven — frank.craven@penton.com Business Aviation Group Phone: (913) 967-1729 Director of Sales, Elizabeth Zlitni — elizabeth.zlitni@penton.com Business Aviation Group Phone: (913) 967-1348 Advertising Production Kara Walby — kara.walby@penton.com Coordinator Penton Media, 9800 Metcalf Ave., Overland Park, KS 66212



r
'BY

 Advertising Operations Michael Penelton — michael.penelton@penton.cm Manager (913) 967-7449 Senior Director, Tyler Motsinger — ftyler.motsigner@aviationweek.com User Marketing (913) 967-1623 Subscription Information (800) 525-5003; (847) 763-4931 (outside U.S.) FaY


PS

 Online Change of Address: http://aviationweek.com/bca-change-address Reprints Wright's Media Nick Iademarco — niademarco@wrightsmedia.com 

r
'BY

 President, Aviation Week Network Gregory Hamilton— hamilton@aviationweek.com Managing Director—Civil Aviation Iain Blackhall — iain.blackhall@aviationweek.com Administrative Offices 1166 Avenue of Americas, New York, N.Y. 10036 (212) 204-4200 Penton is an Informa business BCA - Business & Commercial Aviation (ISSN 0191-4642) is published monthly by Penton Media Inc., 9800 Metcalf Ave., Overland Park, KS 66212-2216. Also the publisher of Aviation Daily, Aviation Week & Space Technology, The Weekly of Business Aviation and World Aerospace Database. Single copy: Current and back issues, $10.00 Domestic/Canada/Mexico. $15.00 International. Subscriptions (1 year, 12 issues): United States and Canada, $59.00; all other countries, $79.00. For single copies/back copies call Customer Service at (800) 525-5003 in the United States and (847) 763-9147 for all other coun- tries. Periodicals postage paid at Kansas City, MO and additional mailing offices. Registered for GST as GST #R126431964. Canada Post Publication Mail Agreement Number 40026880. Editorial contributions should be addressed to BCA, 520 Folly Rd., Ste. 238, Charleston, S.C. 29412, editorial address and must be accompanied by return postage. Publisher assumes no responsibility for safety of artwork, photographs or manuscripts. USPS 503-450. Printed in the U.S.A. Permissions: Material in this publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the publisher. Postmaster: Send address corrections to BCA - Business & Commercial Aviation, P.O. Box 1174 Skokie, IL 60076-8174. (Present subscribers include label) ©Copyright 2017 by Penton Media. All rights reserved. 50 Trusted News and Intelligence on the Business of Business Aviation for 50 Years Stay ahead with business intelligence you can’t find anywhere else, delivered to you. Visit www.aviationweek.com/wba for your sample issue. ADDS MORE INDICATIONS TO YOUR HORIZONTAL SITUATION. ©2017 Garmin Ltd. or its subsidiaries 4 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com ADVERTISING SALES Director of Sales Elizabeth Zlitni — elizabeth.zlitni@penton.com (913) 967-1348 NORTH AMERICA ADVERTISING SALES United States Chris Salem — christopher.salem@penton.com (203) 791-8564 California Leah Vickers — leah.vickers@aviationweek.com (949) 481-4519 Canada David Seaberg — david.seaberg@vicbrownmedia.com (416) 787-0914 Strategic Account Managers Tom Davis — tom.davis@aviationweek.com (469) 854-6717 Matt Holdreith — matt.holdreith@penton.com (646) 719-0767 Tim Reed — tim_r_reed@aviationweek.com (949) 650-5383 FBO ADVERTISING Jodi Espinoza — jespinoza@acukwik.com (913) 967-1651 Sara Hellon – sara.hellon@penton.com (913) 967-1833 WORLDWIDE ADVERTISING SALES Strategic Account Manager Ann Haigh — ann.haigh@penton.com +44 (0) 1628 526324 Europe David McMullen — david.mcmullen@aviationweek.co.uk +44 (0) 1925 596176 Israel Tamir Eshel — invision@netvision.net.il +972 (9) 891-1792 Japan Yoshinori Ikeda — pbi2010@gol.com +81 (3) 3661-6138 $879,000 Base Price t 5 seats + baggage compartment t Garmin G500H & HeliSAS options t Optional auxiliary fuel tank AEROSPACE EVO WELCOME TO OUR WORLD INNOVATION TO PERFORM ƵŶŝƋƵĞĂŶĚŝŶŶŽǀĂƟǀĞĚĞƐŝŐŶ捥ŽƵƌĚŝƐƟŶŐƵŝƐŚŝŶŐŵĂƌŬ捦 dŚĞůĂƚĞƐƚŐĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶŽĨĂůĞŐĞŶĚĂƌLJĂŝƌĐƌĂŌ捦 dŚĞǀĂŶƟsKƌĞǁƌŝƚĞƐƚŚĞƌƵůĞƐŽĨĞĸĐŝĞŶĐLJĂŶĚĞůĞŐĂŶĐĞ捦 ŶƵŶŵĂƚĐŚĂďůĞĐŽŵďŝŶĂƟŽŶŽĨƐƚLJůĞ捥 ƌĞƐƉĞĐƚĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŚŝŐŚƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJ捦 www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 7 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ANY GROUP, BE IT AN ARMY PLATOON, Sunday choir or a surgical team in an operating room very much depends upon agreement among its members. They must all work to achieve the communal outcome. The short- stop can’t head for the beach because his team is up by three runs in the sixth. The tanker captain can’t change destina- tions on a whim. Like it or not, Washington continues to provide excellent examples of both outcomes. The country’s highest court now has a full lineup of “supremes” with the installation of Neil Gorsuch to the top bench, thanks to the Republicans in the Senate holding firm. Similarly, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare,” continues as the law of the land thanks to the Democrats holding firm, and the Republicans not. Similarly, those groups petitioning government must be clear in their intent and then stay true to the plan, lest fall short of the goal. Of course, compromises will likely be neces- sary since that’s a reality of governing and life, after all, but all eyes must remain fixed on the real prize. Considering the foregoing, the ongoing fight over the priva- tization of the U.S. air traffic control system, an idea Cessna Chairman Emeritus Russ Meyer last year characterized as “a disaster for general aviation,” has produced some curious, possibly concerning, signs within the opposition. One group wrote to members of the House and Senate com- mittees debating the proposal to say it stood against the idea to “put this vital infrastructure under the control of a private entity dominated by the commercial airlines.” Such a transfer of power, it warned, could result in new fees and taxes, block low-cost competitors, impede access and reduce service to small communities. The letter concluded, “Please say no to a privatized air traffic control system.” Another group wrote citing its concerns and requested “ample opportunity for all stakeholders and citizens to care- fully review, analyze and debate any proposed legislation.” Now, which of those groups spoke for business and general aviation, the one unequivocally asking Congress to “just say no” or the second requesting further analysis and debate? Surprising to me, the former comprised 10 organizations including the USA Rice Federation and National Grange, essentially representing the agricultural industry. Mean- while, those requesting more review and debate included the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), National Air Transport Association (NATA), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), and 11 other business and general avia- tion organizations. Since Ed Bolen, the NBAA’s CEO, has been strident, persistent and quite public about business aviation’s absolute rejection of the privatization concept — as has the leadership of most of the other organizations — one is left to speculate about the reason behind such insipid demands now. I’m told the group delivered a similar request when privatization was proposed last year, but that doesn’t explain the why. Could compromises among the members be a factor? One of the many concerns about privatization is the intro- duction of fees for service. After all, someone’s got to pay for all those controllers, maintainers and administrators and to keep the lights on. In last year’s failed proposal, business and general aviation operators were specifically excluded from any potential ATC fees, but not FAR Part 135 operators, a fact that did not sit well with the NATA. There’s a good chance such exclusions will be repeated, a divide and conquer tactic. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) President Mark Baker says his organization will “strongly oppose user fees on any segment of GA,” but is less clear on related mat- ters. Then again, AOPA’s most recent legislative focus was on Third-Class Medical reform, which it won. Now, it’s on a lobbying crusade to have the government curtail FBO ramp fees and fuel pricing and guarantee unencumbered access between the ramp and parking lot — moves to which fellow petitioner NATA strongly objects. That there are divisions and different priorities among the several aviation organizations is a given. It’s always been so. However, those differences can be exploited by outsiders, including legislators and business interests, to their benefit. Transferring control of ATC to a semiprivate entity is a flawed “solution” to a nonexistent problem and one that poses a real threat to the well-being of non-airline operators. How- ever, its opposition must stand united and resolute, or this ever-recurring proposition could ultimately prevail. BCA Band of Brothers Being unified and resolute are keys to success Viewpoint William Garvey Editor-in-Chief william.garvey@penton.com. ISTOCK 8 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com Readers’ Feedback When in Doubt, Don’t I read “Less is More: Merit in Cockpit Minimalism” (March 2017, page 38) with great interest. Having played a small part in this revolution, I can comment on some issues that presented themselves early on. Collins Avionics attracted some brilliant engineers and their efforts changed how we fly airplanes today. Inventions such as the horizontal situation indicator (HSI) and flight director (FD), as well as the now commonplace command V-bars, are just a sample of their breakthroughs. When EFIS first appeared, there was heartburn as to its benefit. Mal Harned, then senior vice president of engineering at Cessna, best summed this up saying, “This looks like a very eloquent solution to a non-problem.” Of course, OEMs didn’t have the advantage of knowing that follow-on technology in navigation and systems would require the additional display capability. Collins engineers, among others, recognized early on that just because it was possible, displaying more information might not be wise. As a result, Collins went to great lengths to understand the difference between enhanced safety, efficiency and crew awareness and displaying massive amounts of infor- mation “because you could.” My first exposure to an early, route-based FMS was in a then-experimental turboprop. During one flight, I asked the engineers how I could rapidly navigate to the nearest airport. Simple, they said: Go to the database (with layered key strokes), pull up and define a route, enter it, modify it with the new alternate airport and then follow the FD to the new destination. While eloquent, it was too much data in a format not readily usable in a busy cockpit. Other issues that came up involved basic performance air data. During development of early cockpit displays it was noticed that when experienced crews flew using vertical air data instruments alone, they lacked trend data, which in a round-dial cockpit was quickly discernable. The breakthrough came with the addition of trend vectors, which derived from a previously unavailable technology, acceleration-based attitude sensors. With it, pilots could quickly see what the aircraft is “going to do.” Concerned that it was possible to present so much data it could lead to a decrease in safety, pilot focus groups were formed and asked to evaluate ideas popular among the designers. The results came down to two broad desires — simplicity and reliability. In ranking items, for example, attitude was more important than heading, heading more than course displacement, comm frequency selection less important than nav issues, etc. These results drove design direction. It led to the de-clut- tering of basic flight control displays during unusual attitudes and to more data on the MFD rather than on the ADI and HSI, for example. It also led to the FMS “direct to” nav basis rather and to displaying only data needed for a particular flight regime. After all, does a crew need to know the weather in DEN while shooting an approach to minimums at LAX, or display terrain during VMC? The list goes on and on. I suggest that when making display decisions designers and installers adhere to the axiom: “When in doubt, don’t.” Mike Zonnefeld Vice President Omni International Jet Trading Tucson, Arizona CAPITOL CONVENIENCE ManassasRegionalAirport.aero M A N A S S A S R E G I O N A L A I R P O R T EASY WAY. 捥 No Waiting Behind Commercial Flights 捥 Fly On Your Own Schedule 30 Miles From Capitol Steps Direct Ramp Access No Landing Fees and U.S. CUSTOMS AVAILABLE Lear did for the business [aviation] community what the 747 did for Boeing. A gamble that paid off. — spoilers ⁳ υ The Leajet was the world’s first Corvette for the skies. Looks as fresh as the day it was introduced. — Robert Bradley See, Not Believing, March, page 30 ⁳ υ A corrective action not mentioned is a rev iew of a rchaic equipment requirements. Australia is a country that still mandates a radar altimeter, left over from those old days. Modern, multiple redundant GPS/AHRS/ADC systems can supplant those earlier ‘must haves’ but the regulations need to keep up with the technology and allow the performance and safety assessments to do their job. The root cause was a failure of the RADALT and poor integrity monitoring by the inte- grating processors before allowing an erroneous display to the pilot, rather than just annunciating the failure and ignoring it. So I wouldn’t call this a “Synthetic Vision” failure, it’s a systems integration failure. Things could have turned out very different if the crew had been less experienced. — DLF1 ⁳ υ The idea that such a prominent and compelling display that is difficult or impossible to ignore is also not to be used or be trusted for primary attitude and navigation is poor human factors engineering. We seem to be in a difficult point in our transition to integrated “glass” display technologies. Perhaps the systems themselves need to trouble shoot the incoming data to determine if something is awry. Considering the size, cost and power for solid state IMUs, GPS, magnetometers, and air data sensors that a software algorithm could crosscheck and isolate offending inputs, including backup power, allowing for a graceful degra- dation of performance while keeping the crew informed and in the decision loop. — Jared Smith ADS-B Issues Abound I appreciate your candid assessment of GAMA sales numbers in “Chilling Numbers” (Viewpoint, April 2017, page 9). I think a lot of folks in our industry have had their heads in the sand about this trend for some time. We saw it coming when I worked in marketing for Garrett AiResearch back in the 1980s. Regarding the issue’s Fast Five (Page 22) with Aaron Hilkemann (CEO of Duncan Aviation), I own and operate a Bonanza for business travel and one of my FAA ratings is A&P mechanic. Having lots of avionics experience, I plan on doing my own ADS-B instal- lation, which I’ll have certified by an FAA-licensed avionics shop. Depending on how far I want to take things, it could cost me anywhere from $4,000 to $40,000. My avionics g u y t o l d m e t h at fo r a t u r b i n e - powered aircraft, ADS-B might run from $40,000 to $400,000, and the cost to upgrade a transport category aircraft could be in the millions. Is it any wonder operators are dragging their feet? The reason for this wide instal- lation cost range is that most avionics systems are highly integrated and you can’t really change out just one or two boxes. The larger and more complex the aircraft, the more complex the hardware and software integration. M y a v i o n i c s g u y i s h a v i n g nightmares trying to solve ADS-B hardware and software interface issues and says he’s generally getting poor support from the manufacturers. This adds countless hours to each installation. He advised me to wait at least another year before I do anything. In summary, I think the general aviation industry can be its own worst enemy. Steven D. Zeller President Southbrook Technologies Inc. Alpharetta, Georgia From Around the Web Learjet 70/75 Operators Survey, April, page 46 ⁳ υ Lets hope the Learjet 75 is NOT the last model in this iconic plane. Bill www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 9 WE HELP AVIATION SALES PROFESSIONALS GENERATE DEALS Information that moves you forward US 1 877 426 7828 I Int ’l +1 732 530 6400 I www.amst atcorp.com In a suite of comprehensive services to meet every business need AMSTAT PROVIDES INDUSTRY LEADING CORPORATE AIRCRAFT MARKET & FLEET DATA  Jets  Turboprops  Turbine Helicopters The only company solely committed to conducting aircraft searches representing the buyer and only the buyer. Boston JetSearch™ hasn’t made a friend in this business in over 30 years. We share in no “sweet deals.” We have no “understandings.” We have no “special arrangements.” We have no affiliations. No obligations. No allegiances. Not with any manufacturer, broker, maintenance or management company, or any seller of any aircraft whatsoever. From the day we opened our door, our sole business has been to represent the purchaser and only the purchaser in the process of acquiring a new or pre-owned business jet. Boston JetSearch offers clients unequaled research, analysis, aircraft evaluation, and negotiating capabilities that are completely unprejudiced—except in our clients’ favor. “Thank you for a job extraordinarily well done!!” writes a corporate CEO. “What a special pleasure it was to have such competency and intellect on our side.” A corporate chief pilot points out the advantage of a totally unbiased search. “It is a great comfort to be certain that we have examined the entire market.” And this from the chairman of a software solutions company. “I bought both my Hawker and my Challenger through Drew and am convinced working with him is the best decision I ever made. It saved me hundreds of thousands of dollars and incredible aggravation.” This is a business in which referral is most important and satisfied clients are vital. In our case, because of the unique way Boston JetSearch does business, satisfied clients are also the norm. If you are considering an aircraft acquisition, we invite you to speak to our clients. And, of course, to us. Call Drew Callen, President, at 781-274-0074. The Boston JetSearch Team has no allegiance to any seller, broker, maintenance or management company— and receives no compensation from anyone other than its clients. BOSTON JETSEARCH, INC. Civil Air Terminal, Hanscom Field, Bedford, MA 01730. Telephone: 781-274-0074. Fax: 781-274-0028. www. bostonjetsearch.com The Untouchables. Consultants in executive aircraft search and acquisition. υ A STARTUP WITH BACKING FROM BOEING and JetBlue Airways is designing a hybrid- electric regional aircraft that could enter service in the early 2020s. Zunum Aero aims to revital- ize regional air transport by offering dramatically lower operating costs in an aircraft that can compete with highway travel and high-speed rail to provide fast, low-cost door-to-door service. The Kirkland, Washington-based company is planning a family of 10-50-seat aircraft, beginning early in the next decade. The initial design will seat up to 19 pas- sengers and be optimized for a 700-nm range, increas- ing to beyond 1,000 nm by 2030 as electric propulsion technology advances. Zunum is one of two early-stage in- vestments made by the ventures arm of Boeing HorizonX, the new “innovation cell” within the aerospace giant. Meanwhile, Zunum’s other announced backer is JetBlue Technology Ventures, an arm of the airline that invests in startups that can improve the travel experience, and fa- cilitate future operations and maintenance, revenue management and customer engagement. The startup has been working since 2013 and has emerged from stealth mode because it is ready to accelerate development efforts. It plans to fly a prototype in two-three years —”closer to two if all goes well,” CEO Ashish Kumar says. Zunum’s initial aircraft is to be certified under the FAA’s revamped Part 23 rules. A complete set of standards for electric aircraft is expected to be in place by 2018, with the first certification likely by 2020, when Zunum plans to begin production. Zunum is targeting 40-80% lower operating costs than current regional aircraft, mainly by using power-grid electricity rather than aviation fuel. For shorter ranges, the aircraft will fly on batteries alone, with battery swap-out or supercharger stations at airports to enable rapid turnarounds. υ DAHER HAS ANOTHER UPGRADED VERSION of its PT6-powered TBM 900 series. The new TBM 910 features a Garmin G1000 NXi flight deck, new cabin seat shapes and ad- ditional fittings. Deliveries will begin after certification, which is expected shortly. The standard aircraft is priced at $3.68 million, but its “elite” package raises that to $3.92 million. “Three words can describe the TBM 910: speed, readability and connectivity,” said Nicolas Chab- bert, senior vice president of the Daher Airplane Busi- ness Unit. “The TBM 910 is just as fast as its predecessor in flight, while offering pilots quicker access to cockpit information, along with safety-enhancing guidance and improved readability.” The French manufacturer reports having taken more than 200 orders for TBM 900-series aircraft, which now includes TBM 900, 910 and TBM 930, since its launch. In all, 826 TBMs have been delivered. υ QUEST AIRCRAFT’S KODIAK 100 HAS RECEIVED CERTIFICATION from the Euro- pean Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). The award raises the total number of countries in which the utility single-engine turboprop is certified in to more than 50. The award “will allow Euro- pean operators with large payloads to access many more airstrips and locations that would previously have proven difficult,” said Quest CEO Rob Wells. “We an- ticipate that Europe will play an important role in the continued growth of our company, even more so now with the recent and very welcome regulation changes in regards to single-engine turboprop commercial op- erations.” The Kodiak will be sold and supported throughout Europe by Rheinland Air Service GmbH (RAS), headquartered at Mönchengladbach Airport near Düsseldorf, Germany. NEWS / ANALYSIS / TRENDS / ISSUES INTELLIGENCE For the latest news and information, go to aviationweek.com/bcadigital.com www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 11 EDITED BY WILLIAM GARVEY, JESSICA A. SALERNO AND MOLLY M C MILLIN william.garvey@penton.com jessica.salerno@penton.com molly.mcmillin@penton.com Jet-A and Avgas Per Gallon Fuel Prices April 2017 Jet-A Region High Low Average Eastern $8.00 $4.05 $5.71 New England $7.15 $3.41 $4.74 Great Lakes $7.81 $3.25 $5.10 Central $7.48 $2.42 $4.28 Southern $7.53 $3.42 $5.51 Southwest $7.98 $2.75 $4.72 NW Mountain $7.20 $3.10 $4.78 Western Pacific $7.60 $3.57 $5.28 Nationwide $7.50 $3.26 $5.02 Avgas Region High Low Average Eastern $8.31 $4.70 $6.42 New England $7.45 $4.55 $5.61 Great Lakes $8.59 $4.29 $5.85 Central $7.85 $3.99 $5.29 Southern $7.99 $3.75 $5.85 Southwest $6.99 $3.60 $5.30 NW Mountain $8.46 $4.17 $5.72 Western Pacific $8.50 $4.30 $6.23 Nationwide $8.02 $4.17 $5.78 The tables above show results of a fuel price survey of U.S. fuel suppliers performed in April 2017. This survey was conducted by Aviation Research Group/U.S. and reflects prices reported from over 200 FBOs located within the 48 contiguous United States. Prices are full retail and include all taxes and fees. For additional information, contact Aviation Research/U.S. Inc. at (513) 852-5110 or on the Internet at www.aviationresearch.com The Pilatus PC-12 NG has been ap- proved by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for commercial operations in Europe. The decision means the single-engine turboprop can be operated commercially at night and under instrument flight rules across all 32 EASA member states. Nearly 1,500 PC-12s are in operation in the world. The PC-12 has long been in commercial use for busi- ness, medical transports and cargo flights in other parts of the world. Continental Motors has delivered its 5,000th CD-100 Series engine. The company, which is based in Mobile, Alabama, has produced the engine for 15 years and the series Jet A- fueled piston engines have surpassed 5.25 million flight hours. PC-12 NG Gets EASA Commercial Approval Continental Delivers No. 5,000 υ IN A SURPRISE EARLY APRIL ANNOUNCEMENT Textron Aviation reported that Purdue Aviation, LLC had committed to adding the heretofore unannounced diesel-powered Cessna 172 to its training fleet. FAA and EASA certifications of the Turbo Skyhawk JT-A are expected later this year. The manufacturer said the new Purdue aircraft, which is powered by a Continental CD-155 engine and equipped with the next-generation Garmin G1000 NXi integrated cockpit, will be the first to be delivered. “We are thrilled to integrate Jet-A powerplant technology into the world’s leading flight trainer,” said Doug May, Textron vice president, Piston Aircraft. “The Turbo Skyhawk JT-A is an example of our commitment to modernize the piston product line and bring innovative technologies to market, allowing operators around the world to meet changing environmental regulations, while benefiting from faster climbs, increased range and fuel sav- ings.” According to Textron, the new model has a maximum range is 885 nm, a 38% increase over the standard Skyhawk, a maximum speed increased to 134 knots, and up to 25% lower fuel burn per hour. It also offers improved takeoff performance, especially in high and hot conditions. The Wichita planemaker had also been developing a diesel-powered Cessna 182, but placed that project on hold two years ago. Based at Purdue University Airport, West Lafayette, Indiana, υ GE AVIATION HAS SUBMITTED A TYPE CERTIFICATION REQUESt to the Eu- ropean Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for its new H Series Aerobatic engine. The powerplant features a single lever to control both the engine and propeller, which the manufacturer says “will significantly reduce pilot workload and pro- vide automatic limiting functions.” The engine, which GE says is targeted for the aircraft in the 550-850 shp range, is expected to be awarded certification in 2018. The GE H Series engine with the single lever system received type certification from EASA last December, followed by FAA approval in March. The engine has been selected for four air- craft applications serving a multitude of uses including agricultural, business turboprops, commuter and utility aircraft. υ TECNAM HAS LAUNCHED A SLOT DEPOSIT PROGRAM FOR ITS P2012 Traveler. The high-wing, 11-seat piston twin lists for $2.35 million. A deposit of $107,000 allows customers to take delivery positions in 2019 and freezes the pricing. Powered by two 375-hp Lycoming TEO-540-C1A engines, the Italian air- craft made its first flight last July and is on track for Eu- ropean Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and FAA certification in 2018 with deliveries beginning the following year. Initial flight tests have allowed the design team to improve the maximum takeoff weight to 7,937 lb. Outfitted Garmin G1000 NXi avionics, the aircraft will first see service with Cape Air in early 2019. The Massachusetts-based airline is a major Cessna 402 operator, serving destinations in New England, the Caribbean and Micronesia. The Tecnam twin is intended to replace the aging Cessnas; the carrier could take delivery of as many as 100 aircraft. υ THE AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION (AOPA) is asking the Na- tional Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to conduct an internal review, saying the safety board has approved “speculative probable cause reports related to general aviation accidents” despite little evidence. The association said that several recent accident findings by the board have raised its concerns about the erosion of data-driven facts, including findings of medical inca- pacitation “contrary to other compelling evidence.” INTELLIGENCE 12 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com The Phenom 300 — the most-delivered business jet in the world — is a clean-sheet-design light aircraft that delivers best-in-class speed, climb and field performance, next-generation avionics, a spacious cabin and a largest-in-class baggage compartment. Its comfortable, highly intuitive cockpit, with large displays and state-of-the-art avionics, enhances situational awareness. Delivering superior comfort and style, the OvalLite™ cabin provides ample leg and head room and the largest galley and windows in its class, for abundant natural light. Up to 11 occupants also enjoy the best cabin altitude in the category. Contributing to its enviable presence on the ramp, the signature air stair leads to the largest entrance door in its class. The Phenom 300’s superior overall performance, combined with class- leading fuel efficiency, reinforce its breakthrough status and strong acceptance in the marketplace. - Wayne Gorsek, Founder & CEO, DrVita.com Watch Wayne’s story and request more information at EmbraerExecutiveJets.com/Wayne “What inspired my purchase was a combination of the passion and love of aviation and to pilot a jet like the Phenom 300. But also for business purposes, I can fly around the world and meet with vendors who supply us raw materials. I can meet with retailers, so it’s very exciting to fly very quickly to them and avoid the delays and cancellations of commercial air travel. Plus, you can fly into smaller airports that are closer to your destination. And what got me so excited about Embraer was its DNA building airliners, the ERJs. I always tell people Embraer forgot it’s building executive jets. They still believe they’re building airliners for endurance, safety, redundancy. Embraer treats me as well or better than its airline customers. The company goes out of its way to keep the plane upgraded with service bulletins, improving the systems of the plane, improving every aspect of the airplane. I like the fact that Embraer is just constantly improving the Phenom 300, and they do a phenomenal job of keeping parts in stock. The plane is very stable. Passengers like the combination of the safety of the airplane, the advanced avionics, combined with the comfort of the plane. The lavatory being externally serviceable is awesome for both the owners/ operators and passengers. I wanted the latest, greatest, best, safest technology, and Embraer had it all, from the avionics to the engines to the systems.” PHENOM 300: SAFETY, ADVANCED AVIONICS, COMFORT Embraer has delivered its 400th Phe- nom 300. The March 31 handover took place at the manufacturer’s as- sembly facility in Melbourne, Florida. The aircraft was delivered to Daniel Randolph, CEO of EliteJets.com, a startup charter company based in Na- ples, Florida, whose fleet includes four Phenom 300s and one Legacy 500. According to its website, EliteJets.com was to begin operations on May 1. The Unmanned Safety Institute (USI) has launched a career and technical education workforce development ini- tiative with high schools and colleges in the U.S. The program provides teacher credentialing and course materials. According to the company, students successfully completing the program are eligible to take an exam leading to Small UAS Safety Certifica- tion, which demonstrates expertise as a professional remote pilot, mak- ing them qualified for careers in the fast-growing drone industry. By 2020, the FAA estimates there could be as many as 2.3 million licensed UAS pilots. USI reports it has a network of nearly 100 certified instructors. The curriculum includes four courses with more than 150 hr. of instruction. Embraer Delivers 400th Phenom 300 USI Launches Workforce Initiative υ THE FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION (FSF) HAS IDENTIFIED the “psychological drivers of noncompliance” behind pilots’ “extremely poor” adherence to go-around poli- cies. The finding has spurred a revamping of the safety advocate’s long-held stable approach criteria and guidance for when a go-around is prudent. The work is part of the FSF’s Go-Around Decision-Making and Execution Project. This research effort by two internal committees and the Presage Group seeks to answer the question of why the industry has been “so poor at comply- ing with established go-around procedures.” A final report on the project was published March 27. “Compliance” refers to both pilots following standard operating procedures for performing missed approaches, and management in ensuring that procedures are being followed. The link between accidents and failure to go around is well established by forensics. A previous FSF study of runway excursions over a 16-yr. period determined that 83% could have been avoided with a go-around. The new study included web-based surveys of pilots and airline managers to understand the psychology of go-arounds. It looked at 64 go-around events from 2000-2012 to understand potential problems with aborting a landing. The decision to abort is theoreti- cally driven by whether certain stable approach criteria — defined by altitude, speed and path thresholds along an approach — are met. Based on existing guidance, pilots on an instrument approach must have the aircraft in landing configuration and on path and speed at 1,000 ft. above ground to continue. For a visual approach, the same is supposed to be true at 500 ft. Beyond the initial gates, if the vertical descent rate is more than 1,000 ft. per minute, the pi- lots should perform a go-around. Despite the criteria, approximately only 3% of unstable approaches resulted in a go-around, according to the FSF. Approaches defined as stable during the approach were often problematic in the landing phase. More than half of the ex- cursions involved aircraft that became unstable during the landing. The FSF noted that the go-around itself is not without, risk given how rarely pilots perform the maneuver — about once or twice a year for a short-haul pilot, and about once every 2-3 yr. for a long-haul pilot. “It is evident that the state of noncompliance has been steady for many years and will remain steady unless changes are made,” the FSF report said. It added that the industry must improve its awareness of the problem, and change its focus and cultural norms. “The problem of go-around policy noncompliance is real, and is arguably the greatest threat to flight safety today,” the FSF said. It added that the “potential impact of improvement in com- pliance is significant.” Part of the solution could be a reformulation of the stable approach criteria and instructions for when to abort — guidelines many pilots see as unrealistic. The FSF is proposing a two-phase criteria. This consists of a stable approach zone from 1,000 ft. to 300 ft., where pilots will ensure an aircraft is fully stabilized. It would also include the primary go-around zone from 300 ft. down to thrust-reverser deployment, where the focus shifts from stabilizing the aircraft to performing a go-around. υ A YEARS-LONG EFFORT TO REWRITE EUROPEAN AIRCRAFT certification stan- dards for many types of light aircraft is done and the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) new CS-23 takes effect Aug. 15. In general, the new rules are in harmony with the FAA’s new Part 23 regulations, which were published in December. Both regulations shift from design- specific requirements to consensus-based standards in helping determine compliance and airworthiness. “The former approach was widely considered to be overly prescriptive for simple designs while requiring special conditions for complex designs,” ASTM International said. “This led to confusion, delays, cost increases and other negative impacts.” The new rules include performance-based requirements that rely on “acceptable means of compliance,” it said. They include standards from ASTM International’s committee on general aviation aircraft. “This new approach will help foster innovation and new safety-enhancing technologies at the same time,” said Greg Bowles, F44 chairman and vice president of Global Innovation and Policy for the General Aviation Manufacturers Association. “It’s a win-win for the aviation community on a truly global scale. INTELLIGENCE 14 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com Together, BAE Systems and Gulfstream are innovating to provide enhanced situational awareness for pilots by introducing electronically coupled active control sidesticks on the G500 and G600 business jets. The Gulfstream G500 will be the first fly-by-wire aircraft with active control sidesticks in service when it attains certification later this year. Learn more at www.baesystems.com/flightcontrols. We are honored to receive the Aviation Week 2017 Technology Laureate. Award-winning technology Buyers of the Textron Aviation TTx single-engine aircraft may now cus- tomize their order through an online virtual-aircraft generator that allows TTx buyers to choose from one-dozen exterior paint colors and striping, along with interior and avionics op- tions. Those include a traffic advisory system; Garmin XM weather and radio datalink; Jeppesen Chartview; automatic direction finder; distance measuring equipment; and other features. other extras. The aircraft’s base price is $715,000. Wearable technology — including head-up displays, embedded sen- sors, advanced textiles, embed- ded computing, energy harvesters, exoskeletons and communications — is being integrated into a variety of civil and military systems and components in ways not previ- ously possible. Over the next decade, the wearable tech- nologies market is expected to grow at a cumulative compound an- nual growth rate of nearly 40% and produce a cumulative global market of nearly $8 billion, according to Global Wearables Technologies Mar- ket Forecast to 2025. Cessna Launches TTx Online Ordering Tool Wearable Technology Industry Is Growing υ RUAG AVIATION in Munich has completed a customer interior refurbishment of a new Bombardier Global 5000 registered in India to an unnamed customer. The client chose Bombardier’s Authorized Service Center to install a custom configuration and RUAG to add upgrades to its inflight entertainment system and restyle ad- ditional interior elements, RUAG said. The refurbishment was completed on schedule, the company said. υ UNITED AIRLINES ISN’T THE ONLY AVIATION COMPANY TO BE confronted with public outrage recently. Angry protestors gathered outside Bombardier’s Montreal head- quarters recently to express their ire over the company’s plan to raise the compensation of its senior executives by $32 million. As a result on March 31, Pierre Beaudoin,the company’s executive chairman, opted to forgo his extra pay — but his announcement was quickly followed by a combative statement from Bombardier’s head of human resources, Jean Monty. Monty argued that the pay increases were in line with what other companies of a similar size of- fered, and that most of the remuneration was not guaranteed, but linked to long- and short-term performance targets. “If the company does not perform; if it does not increase its share price and create value for our shareholders, this money will never be paid,” he said. On April 2, Bombardier CEO Alain Bellemare went further and ordered that half of executive compensation decided for 2016 be deferred until 2020. Bombardier hopes this will be enough to calm public indignation about the pay bumps for 2016, a year in which it received $1 billion in taxpayer investment from the province of Quebec while proposing 14,000 job cuts. This year, the Canadian government is set to pump an extra $282 million into the plane- and train-maker. “By any objective measure, the Bombardier leadership team had an exceptional year in 2016,” Monty said in defense of the remuneration policy. While that was certainly true with regard to Bombardier’s share price, which climbed almost 300%, but in aircraft pricing and taxpayer support, its record was exceptional for all the wrong reasons. υ CHINA’S DEER JET PLANS TO BUILD UP AN INTERNATIONAL NETWORK of FBOs, possibly by buying established facilities as a first step. The initial focus is on the U.S., with Europe not far behind, according to Zhu Yinan, general manager of Deer Jet’s FBO management division, who says the first deal could be done this year. Creating such a ser- vice network is part of the wider strategy of the HNA Group, Deer Jet’s parent company, for expanding its business internationally and building a global brand. Deer Jet’s main activ- ity is managing and operating business air- craft for clients. But it also has eight FBOs in China, while Hawker Pacific, an Australian business in which HNA has a majority interest, has such facilities in four Australian cities and at Singapore and Shanghai. Now the company wants its brand on FBOs outside of China. It sees four ways doing that, says Zhu: cooperating with an established foreign busi- ness; buying one; building an FBO in partnership with a foreign company; or building one independently. That last option, Zhu says, will have to wait until Deer Jet has set up a team of experienced FBO people outside of China through one of the other methods. Simply buy- ing a facility would be a classic HNA approach. According to Zhu, targets for cooperation or acquisition in the FBO field must have strong businesses. Deer Jet will have to seek approval for any such move from HNA Tourism, the group division to which it belongs. INTELLIGENCE 16 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com Adding the PC-12 NG to your roster boosts your odds of saying “yes” to more trips, more often. Its short-field performance, speed, payload and range make it an unmatched, all-mission player. Its large cabin seats nine, and the huge cargo door handles the bulkiest luggage. And all at a far lower cost than twins and jets. “No” might just become a thing of the past. Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd • +1 303 465 9099 • www.pilatus-aircraft.com YOU’LL BE THE CHIEF PILOT WHO CAN’T SAY NO. Pentastar Aviation has received FAA certification of compatibility of wire- less data technologies on Gulfstream Aerospace GIV-X (G350/G450) series aircraft, the company said. The Supplemental Type Certificate allows operators to approve the use of Transmitting Portable Electronic Devices onboard aircraft with wire- less networks or Wi-Fi hot spots for passengers, who may email, talk, text and video conference without inter- fering with safety critical systems on the aircraft. The STC complements similar approvals for Gulfstream’s G-IV, GV and GV-SP (G500/G550) and Hawker 800XP and 850XP aircraft. Jet Aviation’s maintenance center in Vienna has gained FAA repair station approval and is registered to provide line and base maintenance services to all N-registered aircraft it is ap- proved to support. The Vienna facil- ity provides maintenance support to owners and operators in Eastern Europe, where about 10% of all N- registered aircraft in EMEA and Asia are based or operating. Pentastar E STC For Gulfstream GIV-X Data Technologies Jet Aviation Vienna Gains FAA Repair Station Approval υ THE FAA HAS ISSUED ITS FIRST AIRSPACE RESTRICTIONS that specifically apply only to unmanned aerial vehicles, aka UAVs or drones, banning flights under 400 ft. AGL within the boundaries of 133 military facilities. The special security restrictions took effect April 14. The agency warns that violations could result in criminal charges, civil penalties and the revocation of certificates and authoriza- tions to operate UAVs. More restrictions may be coming. The FAA says it is considering additional requests from security and intelligence agencies. In addition, it is also evaluating options with the Transportation Department for accepting petitions to prohibit or restrict UAV operations over critical infrastructure and other facilities. The latest airspace restrictions apply to public aircraft operating under FAA certificates of authoriza- tion (COA), commercial operations under COAs or the FAA’s Part 107 small UAV rule, and model aircraft. The agency said the restrictions are being imposed in response to requests from the Defense Department and U.S. federal security and intelligence agencies. υ ACCORDING TO THE CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISOR TO President Donald Trump, air traffic control (ATC) reform — including privatizing ATC — could be a major element of the new administration’s infrastructure buildup, but general aviation operators should not fear paying more for it. “We’re probably not even going to tax general aviation,” said Gary Cohn, director of the National Economic Council. “There’s enough money in the aviation tax right now.” Cohn made that comment during a so-called White House town hall on the U.S. business climate on April 4. Weeks earlier the president’s 2018 budget outline said the White House would initiate a multiyear reauthorization pro- posal to shift the ATC function of the FAA to an independent, non-governmental organization. “Air traffic control, to me, is probably the single most exciting thing we can do for a lot of reasons,” Cohn said. “It’s kind of insulting that we are the last to do air traffic control [reform] and not the first to do air traffic control. A country that has Silicon Valley and all of the technology entrepreneurs that we have and we’re playing catch-up; that’s embarrassing for us.”Still, Cohn acknowledged opposition to the privatization concept general aviation interests and lawmakers, specifically appropriators, reluctant to surrender their power of the purse. “They like that $40 billion, $50 billion a year flowing through their hands,” he said, referring to aviation federal fuel taxes. “If we privatize air traffic control, they won’t be able to touch that money.” Cohn asked House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who was in the town hall, to help persuade lawmakers. But that will be a hard task as some in McCarthy’s own political party have been the most vocal against privatiza- tion efforts since last year, when House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Bill Shuster (R-Pa.) pushed a similar move. υ OIL AND GAS HELICOPTER OPERATOR CHC REPORTS emerging as an “economi- cally robust and agile competitor,” 10 months after filing for bankruptcy protection. The Canadian operator, which has its headquarters in Texas, says the court confirmed its financial restructuring on March 24. The new CHC is lighter to the tune of 80 helicopters, $1 billion of debt, and another $1.4 billion in lease obligations. Some $300 million is being ploughed into a recapitalization of the company, while an additional $150 million will be provided by Milestone Aviation Group, which will be used for aircraft financing. “This is a pivotal moment in CHC’s history,” said Karl Fessenden, the company’s president and CEO. “This process has allowed us to help secure CHC’s long-term health and create a streamlined, highly competitive cost structure while establishing a fleet of aircraft better aligned with our customers’ businesses.” INTELLIGENCE 18 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com Stream, chat, text, call, video conference. Just as you do on the ground. SmartSky enables a true, fully connected aircraft. One compatible with both the real-time, right-now demands of business today and the got-to-have-it world of tomorrow. Our 4G LTE network answers the urgent need for Internet that delivers land-like speed, reliability, security and value. Both for operations and passengers. Get ready for the ultimate, transformative airborne Internet experience. 800.660.9982 • info@smartskynetworks.com • smartskynetworks.com SMARTSKY 4G LTE TURN YOUR DOWNTIME INTO PRIMETIMEStream, chat, text, call, video conference. Just as you do on the ground. SmartSky enables a true, fully connected aircraft. One compatible with both the real-time, right-now demands of business today and the got-to-have-it world of tomorrow. Our 4G LTE network answers the urgent need for Internet that delivers land-like speed, reliability, security and value. Both for operations and passengers. Get ready for the ultimate, transformative airborne Internet experience. Bombardier has opened a business jet service center in Tianjin, China, in a joint venture with the Tianjin Airport Economic Area. The Tianjin Service Center, located near Beijing, includes 95,766 sq. ft. of hangar space and back shop areas for maintenance, re- pair, overhaul and other activities. Bombardier forecasts demand for 1,100 business jets in Greater China, South Asia and the Asia-Pacific re- gion over the next 10 years. Frasca International has delivered a Cessna 510 Citation Mustang busi- ness jet simulator to its new training center in Paris, the company said. The dual-qualified simulator meets French requirements for Mustang initial and recurrent training. The simulation center was established by Oyonnair, a French business aviation charter company to train its Mustang pilots and pilots flying in other re- gions that hold a European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) license. Bombardier Opens Service Center In Tianjin, China Frasca Delivers Mustang Sim to Paris Training Center υ TEXTRON AVIATION HAS BEGUN ASSEMBLY of its Citation Longitude super-mid- size jet. The first four production aircraft are in progress inside the company’s Plant IV manufac- turing plant in East Wichita, Textron Aviation reports. The Longitude is the first Cessna product to be manufactured inside a former Beechcraft facility. In addition, the third Cessna Citation Longitude test aircraft has completed its first flight and has joined the flight test program. During the recent 1 hr., 40 min. flight, test pilots Corey Eckhart and UJ Pesonen and flight test engineer Mike Bradfield tested the aircraft’s various systems. The aircraft will be used for avionics, systems development and the collection of flight simulator data. Certification of the $23.9 million Longitude is expected by year-end. “The speed at which our team is achieving these milestones is an important indication to our customers of the maturity of the aircraft’s systems and the proficiency of our processes,” said Brad Thress, Textron Aviation’s senior vice president of engineering. The first test Longitude flew in October 2016. The first two aircraft have completed 125 flights and have logged 250 hr. The Longitude is a clean-sheet design and will have seating for up to 12 passengers. υ HARLOW AEROSTRUCTURES, A COMPONENT SUPPLIER to the aviation indus- try, has developed its first autothrottle for new general aviation aircraft. The company, based in Wichita, is seeking a launch customer for the equipment. It expects to receive certification for the new HAT-05 auto throttle by the end of April. The objective is to get auto- throttles onto more business aircraft, company Presi- dent Jim Barnes said. “There shouldn’t be any reason for not having these.” The next evolution of the product is to reconfigure it for single-engine turboprops, Barnes said. It would take only 60 to 90 days to reconfigure the device for turboprop use, according to Barnes. Harlow builds throttles for Textron Aviation’s Scorpion and T-6 aircraft and Daher’s TBM 900 and 930. Its Brazilian customer, Novaer, will also receive its first shipment of Harlow-designed throttles for its new clean-sheet aircraft shortly. The design effort at Harlow, which began last July, culminated with the first shipment to Brazil at the end of March. Harlow has also built throttles for the Citation X, XLS+, Sovereign, among other aircraft. υ CIT GROUP MARKED THE END OF AN ERA APRIL 4 as the financial holding com- pany exited the aircraft leasing market and closed the sale of its commercial aircraft leasing business to Avolon Holdings for a final purchase price of $10.4 billion. Avolon is an international aircraft leasing company and wholly-owned subsidiary of Bohai Capital Holding Co. Ltd. The deal was first announced in October, and CIT Commercial Air was rumored to be for sale long before then, including at Istat Americas 2016 in February. υ CHARLES “CHUCK” MCKINNON, FOUNDER AND MANAGER OF IBM’S flight department, died March 30 in Trussville, Alabama, at the age of 101. During World War II he flew for United Airlines, which had won an Army Air Corps contract to transport supplies and troops. In 1954 he flew IBM’s first business aircraft, a twin-piston Aero Commander used to fly company engineers to sites around the country. He led the flight department until his retirement in 1977. In the early 1970s, McKinnon worked to save Paris-Le Bourget Airport, which was threatened with closure due to the development of Charles de Gaulle Airport. Photo: Chuck McKinnon (center) receiving the John P. “Jack” Doswell Award from NBAA INTELLIGENCE 20 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com » If one provider covered your diverse fleet » If your maintenance program transferred across models » If your costs were stabilized and predictable At JSSI, we never stop working to make things better for you. We want our name to be synonymous with lower maintenance costs, higher residual value and superior service around the globe. We provide Tip-to-Tail® coverage for virtually any make or model of turbine-powered helicopter, as well as business or commercial jets and turboprops. JSSI. A better approach. Call or email us at +1.312.644.8810 or info@jetsupport.com jetsupport.com wouldn’t it BE BETTER? Questions for Brandon Mitchener FAST FIVE INTERVIEW BY WILLIAM GARVEY 1 3 4 5 2 Being a European correspondent for The Wall Street Journal is an enviable as- signment. Why did you leave? Mitchener: I’d been with the paper for nine years and wanted to do something dif- ferent. However, the job was so interesting, nothing else available in journalism at the time held as much appeal. My family was in Brussels and didn’t want to move and several firms there were courting me. Some in journalism might have viewed my decision to enter into public relations and lobbying as going to ‘the dark side,’ but I don’t think of it that way at all. What of your experience and talents did the EBAA board members value most? Mitchener: I believe they saw three things as my strengths. First is my ability to influence and work with policymakers. I understand Brussels. I’ve been here 20 years as a lobbyist and journalist and I know how the EU operates. Secondly, I’m a decent communicator and we need to explain business aviation to the general public. The association hasn’t spent lots of time doing that, and the board wants that to change. I consider myself a storyteller and finding and presenting good stories is a part of my job. And the third? Mitchener: The industry workforce is aging. It’s not attracting younger people. We need to appeal to the next generation directly, to encourage them where they are. We have a Twitter account, but we could do more with it. We’re going to focus on social media to tap into the online community that’s passionate about business aviation. How is business aviation perceived in Europe? Mitchener: The EBAA conducted an audit on the subject and it revealed that poli- cymakers know business aviation exists as a necessary and useful tool — everyone can see the airplanes taking off and landing at the airport — but don’t really know its economic contribution. My father was a pilot and manager in the chemical in- dustry. He had a Piper Cherokee that he used to visit production facilities and to take us to see family in Michigan, saving countless hours of road travel. Having access to that kind of mobility is something everyone would want. But they need to know that it’s available to them. What about business aviation has surprised you since being approached by EBAA? Mitchener: How important it is, its utility and necessity. It’s an essential part of the aerospace community. It serves hospitals, disaster victims, and transports medi- cal personnel. So, in addition to serving business, it saves lives. Business aviation represents seven percent of European aviation and has an economic impact of 100 million euros per year, but it’s underappreciated. That has to change. Brandon Mitchener, CEO, European Business Aviation Association, Brussels, Belgium A native of northwestern Indiana, Mitchener majored in German literature and international relations at Wabash College, and also studied in Austria and Switzerland. That cultural exposure had a lasting effect. After earning a master’s degree at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, he was hired by AP-Dow Jones Newswires, which sent him back to Europe to cover events surrounding the reunifi- cation of Germany. He spent 15 years primarily on the Continent, reporting for AP-Dow Jones, The International Herald Tribune and The Wall Street Journal, before entering the business world as a communicator for several companies and organizations, including Monsanto, First Solar and APCO Worldwide. Now 52, he has lived and worked in Europe for 29 years and is fluent in Italian, French and German, a facility that has so influenced his native tongue that he’s often asked where he learned to speak English so well. He began work at EBAA on April 3rd. TAP HERE in the digital edition of BCA to hear more from this Interview or go to aviationweek.com/fastfive 22 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com T H E U L T I M A T E COCKPIT TECHNOLOGY Daher’s TBM 910 combines the most cost-efficient high-speed turboprop aircraft with the ultimate in cockpit technology. The modern processing power of Garmin’s G1000 NXi integrated flight deck instantly brings all the information a pilot needs to large-format displays, and is further enhanced by wireless connectivity to the electronic flight bag. Together with a stylish cabin design and the optional “Elite Privacy” enclosed toilet compartment, the fast new TBM 910 has it all. - Speak to a TBM expert: (Americas) +1(954) 993-8477 (International) +33 5 62 41 77 88 www.tbm.aero It was a chilly and rainy morning on Dec. 8, 2014, when Dr. Michael Rosen- berg strapped into the left seat of his Embraer Phenom 100 at Horace Wil- liams Airport (KIGX) in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, bound for Montgomery County Airpark (KGAI) in the Wash- ington, D.C., suburb of Gaithersburg, Maryland. A well-respected physician, entrepreneur and adjunct professor of epidemiology and maternal and child health at the University of North Caro- lina, Rosenberg was meeting that day with staffers at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Also on board for the 1-hr., single-pi- lot flight were Rosenberg’s associates, David Hartmann, 52, and Chijioke Og- buka, 31. Departing KIGX at about 0945, the aircraft climbed to FL 230 and cruised normally en route to Gaithersburg for 12 min. before starting the descent into the Washington terminal area. Approach- ing the destination, the pilot requested the RNAV (GPS) RWY 14 approach. The weather at the airport was clear below scattered clouds at 2,100 ft. AGL with 10 mi. visibility. The OAT was -1C and the dew point was -8C. But weather conditions were ripe for icing as there was a ceiling at 3,200 ft. AGL, with tops at 4,300 ft. to 5,500 ft. MSL. A regional turboprop pilot, for instance, reported moderate icing in clouds in the vicinity between 4,000 ft. and 5,000 ft. During the descent and initial approach into Gaithersburg, the Phenom flew in con- ditions favorable to icing for at least 10 min. during the approach, according to NTSB. Runway 14/32 at Gaithersburg is 4,202 ft. long, and thus plenty suffi- cient for a Phenom 100 at its 9,877-lb. max landing weight, assuming no ic- ing, according to Embraer’s OPERA (Optimized PERformance Analyzer) software. The aircraft had both a 2-hr. cockpit voice recorder and a multichan- nel flight data recorder that calculated landing weight to be 8,671 lb., according to the NTSB. Assuming use of full flaps, the VAC (approach climb) and VREF speeds were 100 KIAS and 95 KIAS, respectively. The dry surface, no wind, unfactored landing distance was 2,298 ft., providing 1,400+ ft. of cushion for rollout. Even so, Rosenberg bugged VREF and VAC at 92 KIAS and 99 KIAS, respec- tively, during the descent, according to the NTSB’s analysis of the FDR, speeds that were too slow for the estimated landing weight. Further, if wing and stabilizer de- ice systems had been in use, landing weight would have been restricted to Reaching the Unreachables Making risk management matter BY FRED GEORGE fred.george@penton.com Safety 24 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com Pilot Population CALLOUS DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY DON’T KNOW CONSCIENTIOUS Risk Mitigation Bell Curve & Devalue & Discredit & Deny RISK & Unaware & Under Estimate & Unprepared RISK & Identify & Assess & Mitigate RISK Source: NBAA NTSB The Phenom and its occupants clearly were doomed at about 800 ft. above the ground — too low to recover. www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 25 was followed by a CJ4 impacting Lake Erie near Cleveland-Burke Lakefront Airport last December. In recalling the Gaithersburg crash, Dave Ryan, a flight department man- ager, former head of Bombardier’s flight operations and chairman of the NBAA’s Safety Committee, says, “There’s a nat- ural struggle between being a successful entrepreneur and being a safe aviator. An entrepreneur has to get the job done no matter what. They operate in two di- mensional space — accept risk or lose money.” Achieve the goal or fail. John King of King Schools adds that both entrepreneurs and aviators are goal oriented. “Risk gets in their way.” The goal is to reach a successful out- come, whether achieving the business objective against the odds or landing safely on time at the des- tination airport. Goal fixation, though, can prove fatal when pilots fail to iden- tify, assess and mitigate risks. “Goal orientation pressure can come from pilots themselves, passengers, the company for which they work,” says King Schools’ co-owner Martha King. That pressure is especially dangerous on flights conducted by owner/opera- tors, as those pilots feel acutely respon- sible for making business appointments and in the doing can become blind to risks that jeopardize their lives, as well as those of their passengers and people on the ground. “Pilots and entrepreneurs are hard- wired to complete whatever they set out to do,” John King observes. “They may think they’re invincible.” But they’re not. “The mission completion mindset is self-imposed,” says Ryan. Assessing and mitigating risks may cause flights to be delayed and then rescheduled. An- ticipating risks also may require chang- ing route itineraries and destination airports to compensate for traffic or weather conditions, necessitating ear- lier departures to keep business travel- ers on schedule for appointments. Sometimes safety of flight requires a mission to be scrubbed completely. As the Kings tell their passengers aboard their Falcon 10, “Bring your tooth- brush.” Robert Wright, former manager of the FAA Flight Standards Service’s General Aviation and Commercial Di- vision and now a Seattle-based con- sultant, says that his former agency is largely to blame since historically it has off, requiring Rosenberg to hand-fly the aircraft. Thrust was increased to TOGA, but it’s uncertain how he otherwise re- sponded to repeated aural stall warn- ings with control inputs. The nose of the aircraft pitched up and then down, roll- ing as much as 59-deg. left wing down and then starting a series of roll oscil- lations. Finally, it rolled 100 deg. to the right and then 154.5 deg. right in just over 2 sec. The aircraft and its occupants clearly were doomed at about 800 ft. above the ground — too low to recover. Less than 1 sec. later, it snap-rolled left to 111 deg. and crashed into three houses on Drop Forge Lane, about 4,000 ft. from the runway threshold. In one of the three houses, Marie Gemmell, a 36-year-old mother, was home with her 3-year-old son, Cole, and 7-week-old infant, Devin. The crash caused the Gemmell house to erupt into an inferno fueled by Jet-A. Gemmell and her two young sons died as a result, as did Rosenberg and his two colleagues. Goal Fixation vs. Risk Management The NBAA has long strived to increase safety awareness among its members. But the Gaithersburg crash riveted pub- lic attention on a recent series of fatal business aircraft accidents, including the Gulfstream GIV runway excursion at Bedford, Massachusetts, earlier in 2014 and a Learjet 35A that hit a con- struction crane while landing at Grand Bahamas International Airport in Free- port that same year. Subsequently, a Cessna Citation CJ1 crashed near Cedar Fort, Utah, in January 2016, and that 8,033 lb. to meet the one-engine-inop- erative (OEI) approach climb gradient requirement if using full (36 deg.) flaps for landing. Reducing flaps to position 3 (26 deg.) improves OEI approach climb performance, allowing the aircraft to land at 9,091 lb., but would boost both V speeds to 121 KIAS and increase landing distance to 3,719 ft. Doing so would have left less than 500 ft. of margin for rollout at Gaithersburg, as- suming a landing technique of test pilot precision. With airframe deice sys- tems in operation on a Phe- nom 100, the VAPP and VREF speeds are increased to com- pensate for stall occurring at lower angle of attack (AOA) should ice accrete on the wing and stabilizer leading edges. For instance, if the airframe ice protection system is se- lected off, the aural stall warning and stall barrier stick pusher respectively are triggered at 21.0 deg. and 28.4 deg. AOA for a full-flaps landing; at flaps 3 and with airframe ice protection sys- tems selected on, they’re triggered at 9.5 deg. and 15.5 deg. AOA, respectively. During the approach, the CVR re- corded one of the passengers remarking to Rosenberg that it was snowing out- side about 2.8 mi. from the airport. Yet, the pilot did not use wing and horizontal stabilizer ice protection systems during final approach. Perhaps the omission was not inten- tional. The NTSB notes that Rosen- berg’s first Phenom 100 instructor said he “had a tendency to freeze up and fix- ate on a subtask at the expense of other critical subtasks.” It’s possible that he just forgot to turn on the systems in the high, single-pilot workload environment of the instrument approach procedure, the Safety Board surmised. The pilot elected to fly a coupled ap- proach with the autopilot following the RNAV glidepath to the runway. With gear and flaps extended, aircraft speed slowly decreased to 92 KIAS and AOA reached 16 deg., exceeding both the au- ral stall warning and stick pusher AOA trigger thresholds. The aircraft continued to decelerate and shortly thereafter started to roll right, then roll left with the autopilot still engaged as it entered the aerodynamic stall. Stall warning was triggered at 88 KIAS as AOA reached 21 deg., the pro- grammed aural stall-warning trigger point with airframe ice protection sys- tems turned off. The autopilot snapped Imagine the pilots of that ill-fated GIV departing from Bedford in May 2014, explaining to their loved ones why they hadn’t performed flight control checks to assure the gust lock was disengaged. NTSB emphasized skills training and testing rather than managing risks. This is re- flected in the FAA’s practical test stan- dards for airmen certification, flight instructor qualifications and FAR Part 142 simulator-based training curricula. Wright maintains that until mid- 2016, the FAA’s risk identification, as- sessment and mitigation guidance, standards and doctrine were “woefully deficient.” “It was all about instructors spoon-feeding their students during flight training to pass the skills test,” he says. “They didn’t require students to use their heads to evaluate risk.” As a result, he believes a lot of general aviation pilots just “don’t know what they don’t know” about risk manage- ment. “A study of accidents between 2006 and 2009 indicated that 71% of single-pilot accidents involve poor risk management. Forty of those accidents resulted in fatalities, including the one at Gaithersburg.” The same study indicated that the pilots could have known, should have known or even did know the risks they were taking but failed to identify, assess and mitigate them. Recognizing this problem long ago, the Kings, among other business avia- tion leaders, worked with the FAA to introduce new certification standards for the private pilot license and instru- ment rating tests that incorporate task-specific knowledge and risk man- agement elements. Using a three-prong approach, the FAA now requires appli- cants to demonstrate a specific level of aeronautical knowledge, risk manage- ment and airmanship skills to pass the new private and instrument tests. In parallel, the FAA also issued new guidance by revising the Airplane Fly- ing Handbook, Pilot’s Handbook of Aero- nautical Knowledge, Risk Management Handbook, Aviation Weather guide and Aviation Weather Services handbook. What the FAA did not do, however, is tackle its Part 142 simulator training facility standards to reflect the same approach at a more advanced level for turboprop and jet operators. So, at some sim training facilities, the familiar “if it’s Tuesday, it must be engine failures” rote remains in place. Training scenarios that require risk identification, assessment and mitiga- tion are scarce at best. Few centers re- quire crews to use a formalized Flight Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT) that evaluates pilots, aircraft, environment and external pressures to determine when, how, or even if, it’s safe to launch on a trip. Both Wright and Ryan say that part of the pushback at Part 142 sim training centers comes from both single-pilot and multi-crew operators. Customers don’t want to spend the extra time and money to use a FRAT template before they launch; their crews just want to check the required blocks and get back into their cockpits. Dynamic risk assess- ment takes a back seat to honing skills proficiency during recurrent training. In addition to risk awareness, SOP compliance is another major challenge in the business aircraft community. At the urging of the NTSB and in the wake of the fatal GIV crash at Bedford involv- ing partially locked flight controls, the NBAA worked with business aviation f light operations quality assurance groups to determine the extent of ig- nored or noncompliant pre-takeoff flight control checks. The results were eye-opening. Exam- ining flight operations quality assurance (FOQA) data for 30 types of business aircraft that conducted almost 144,000 flights from 2013 to 2015, the evidence showed that on more than one out of six of those flights, the crews failed to perform a pre-takeoff full flight-control check. The NBAA said the data was “very disturbing . . . [and] it is troubling to find that nearly 18 of every 100 busi- ness aircraft flights included in the data were not in compliance with manufac- turer-required routine flight-control checks before takeoff, and that two of those 100 flights conducted no flight- control check before takeoff at all.” Part 121 air carriers regularly use FOQA data as feedback to train crews, change behaviors and improve safety margins. The crews must comply as a condition of employment. Relatively few Part 135 or Part 91 operators have such formalized FOQA feedback systems. Many business aircraft operators do not even debrief and critique missions to dis- cuss how to improve pilot performance. Ryan says the key to getting pilots to use FRAT, adhere to SOPs and become risk conscious is to become fully aware of the consequences of their actions on themselves, their passengers and in- nocent bystanders on the ground. They need to imagine the emotional impact on family and loved ones resulting from death, dismemberment and serious inju- ries suffered by people directly involved in aircraft accidents they might cause. Wright says it’s nearly impossible to eliminate all risk-related business avia- tion accidents. He suggests looking at a bell curve of the pilot population (Figure 1). On one side, there is a small group of conscientious pilots who are a model of best business aviation practices. They study their flight manuals, weather data, maintenance logs and accident reports. They invest in meticulous main- tenance for their aircraft. They work with Part 142 training centers to develop challenging scenarios for sim sessions Safety 26 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com IMPROBABLE REMOTE OCCASIONAL PROBABLE Risk Assesment Guide CATASTROPHIC CRITICAL MARGINAL NEGLIGIBLE Likelihood Severity HIGH HIGH HIGH SERIOUS SERIOUS SERIOUS MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW LOW Source: NBAA receptive to risk management educa- tion. “They flaunt risk; it turns them on. Defying it shows how skilled they are as pilots,” says John King. Such renegade pilots may even view risk management as a sign of emotional weakness, a lack of courage, a character flaw. A prime example is a recent web video showing a Citation M2, regis- tered in Poland as SP-KOW, flying a high-speed pass over a field at 10 to 20 ft. above the turf. This impromptu air show performed for the benefit of an acquaintance capturing the event with cellphone video illustrates blatant defi- ance of risk. “These are the ‘Sky Gods,’” says Wright. “The odds of reaching them are very low.” Cellphone video provided to airmen certification authorities may have the same chilling effect on such pilots as have videos of rogue law enforcement officers acting badly. But there may be an even more effective way of changing rogue pilot behavior. Berlin’s Survivor Scenario The 2-hr. presentation by the late Je- rome I. Berlin, Ph.D., the well-known aviation psychologist and bawdy humor- ist, was the highlight of the Bombardier Safety Stand-Down for several years. One of his most poignant training sce- narios involved bringing a group of pi- lots up to the stage. He had them sit in chairs facing the audience. He told them they had just died in air- plane crashes as a result of rash deci- sion-making, failure to mitigate risks, poor mission planning or execution, or inadequate preflight inspection. The late Capt. Eugene Cernan, the last man to walk on the moon, was a notable par- ticipant one year. Dr. Berlin then brought a second group of people up to the stage who stood behind the seated “dead” pilots and played the roles of wives, husbands, children, loved ones and other succes- sors. They questioned the “dead” pilots about their understanding of the emo- tional impact their untimely deaths had on their loved ones. One in the second group played the role of Cernan’s daughter, Tracy, whose initials he had written on a moon rock during his Apollo 17 mission in 1972. “Dad, how could you have done this to me?” she asked. “What were you think- ing? You went to the moon and back with such meticulous planning. And now you died in a business jet because of carelessness? Why did you take such risks? This wasn’t just about you. What did you think it would do to me? How will I get along without you?” Even though this was a training sce- nario, it obviously moved Cernan. His voice broke, a tear appeared in his eye and he tried to explain but couldn’t. He was dead, gone from her life forever. Similarly, imagine the pilots of that ill-fated GIV departing from Bedford in May 2014, explaining to their loved ones why they hadn’t performed flight control checks to assure the gust lock was disengaged. This wasn’t a one-time lapse. They’d failed to perform a com- plete flight control check on 98% of the previous 175 missions, according to the NTSB. Now imagine Dr. Rosenberg being asked similar questions by his two chil- dren, along with Hartmann’s and Og- buka’s family members. How would he respond to such questions from Ken Gemmell about the deaths of his wife and sons? Dr. Berlin taught pilots not just to think about the consequences of their actions but also to fully appreciate their responsibilities in the cockpit. He knew he could have a greater impact on pilots by getting into their hearts, and not just into their heads. Ryan, Wright and the Kings, among others, believe that reaching pilots emo- tionally is one of the most effective ways to get them to embrace risk manage- ment and adhere to SOPs. The emo- tional connection has great potential for moving the bell curve of pilots forward into the conscientious group of aviators. Making the emotional connection might even alter some rogue pilots’ be- havior, causing them to consider the im- pact of their actions on others. An increasing number of business air- craft have integrated avionics systems that feed multiple channels of data to FDRs. Many general aviation aircraft manufacturers have access to FOQA data downloaded from aircraft. They can detect trends, including deviations from SOPs, such as the comprehensive data analyzed by the NTSB from the FDR in the Phenom 100 accident at Gaithersburg and the GIV crash at Bedford. Now, it’s up to the business aviation community to use that data to impact the mindset of its pilots. Even more importantly, it’s up to all to help those aviators truly grasp the impact of their aeronautical decision-making on the people at home who care for them most. BCA www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 27 that require careful risk management. They use a FRAT card to identify, as- sess and mitigate risks for every flight. They carefully abide by SOPs and exer- cise cockpit discipline. Most pilots fit into the middle. They don’t know what they don’t know. “Most pilots are not exposed to risk manage- ment. They have no formal risk man- agement training. Seventy-five percent of general aviation accidents involved pilots not getting adequate data,” to as- sess risk, says Wright. To help move the middle of the bell curve toward the conscientious best practices group, Wright began a se- ries of single-pilot safety stand-down seminars at the NBAA Convention. The meetings use the NBAA’s Risk Manage- ment Guide for Single-Pilot Light Busi- ness Aircraft, authored by Wright, as a basis for how to identify, assess and mitigate risks. There is special empha- sis on physiological, external stress and emotional pressures on pilots. Ryan notes that duty days for owner/ operator pilots must include all the time involved with non-flying business activi- ties, not just the portion of the day asso- ciated with business flying. Using the FRAT matrix for risk man- agement is not a one-time exercise dur- ing preflight planning, according to Wright. The process may be started several days ahead of the flight to adapt mission planning for winds, weather, payload and crew duty time limits. The Kings, for instance, seldom fly home on the same day they complete compre- hensive simulator recurrent training. They find those sessions so tiring that flying immediately thereafter makes for too long a crew duty day. Rather, they typically remain overnight to rest before proceeding home. Wright believes the business aviation community can promote risk aware- ness, SOP compliance and other best practices by conducting seminars for user groups, similar to the NBAA’s ses- sions, including model-specific owner/ operator associations and local pilot organizations. He and others also are pressing the FAA to create an advanced “Pro-WINGS” proficiency program that will emphasize risk management, among other elements, for business aviation owner/operators. Further, he urges Part 142 simulator training cen- ters, Part 141 flight schools and CFIs to embrace risk management training. Even so, there remain the outlier pi- lots on the far side of the bell curve from the conscientious sector who are not A good maintenance manager sets the standard on work per- formance and conduct for all team members to follow. Those expectations then must be clearly com- municated and disseminated. In addition, the company should have a clear policy about things like sever- ance, final paycheck and continuation of health benefits. These, too, should be shared with all employees either in a handbook or through a readily acces- sible online system. After that, it’s the manager’s respon- sibility to monitor the team’s function- ing as a unit. This so-called “team dynamic” is the beating heart of the organization and good managers haves their fingers on its pulse at all times. That’s because, as with all living things, teams evolve. Sometimes not for the better. Personalities and life situations change, and this constant churn will affect how the team performs. As manager, you are responsible not only for setting performance expecta- tions for each team member but also for ensuring they are met. Having a published standard and conducting pe- riodic performance reviews can help to keep people on task. While grossly inappropriate behavior, to include in- subordination, threats, assault, crimi- nal activity and the like, makes for easy evaluation — and ready response — matters of performance and adherence to expected norms can be difficult. For maintainers, technical perfor- mance is expected to improve steadily. As they become more experienced, task times should decline. Yet some techni- cians grow complacent over time and engage in risky behavior. Lapses in judgment and mistakes happen, but how many can be tolerated? Each case is unique and as a manager, it can be difficult to decide whether to terminate on the spot or take the time to modify the behavior. In the end, it comes down to your judgment on how this person affects the team. Many technicians have per- sonality quirks, and some are difficult to get along with, but poor performance should not be tolerated. You can work to improve it, but if the person is not willing to put in the effort to achieve the desired result, you shouldn’t have to, either. “What I discovered is that a set of strict operational rules and perfor- mance metrics must be known and enforced. Violation of those rules and performance standards is grounds for termination,” one veteran maintenance manager told BCA. “Sounds so basic and simple on paper, but it’s not so easy to have those rules in real life.” To illustrate the quandary, he asked, “Once someone makes the same ‘mis- take’ three times, is it grounds for ter- mination? What if the employee makes only one mistake [but] in each cate- gory? One airworthy issue, one signifi- cant behavioral interaction with the boss, one incident of insubordination? In the end, I hate to admit, it’s a judg- ment call.” Despite all that, he admits to being “less tolerant of certain issues today. Poor performance is an immediate deal breaker.” If any team member fails to main- tain workload, or even more serious, Letting GoKnowing when and how to fire an employee BY MIKE GAMAUF mgamauf@yahooo.com DOM Notebook 28 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com SHUTTERSTOCK ©2017 Textron Aviation Inc. All rights reserved. Investment never sleeps. The ultimate business tool requires ongoing investment. In the last five years, Textron Aviation has invigorated the market with the newest aircraft designs and the most service offerings. You ask; we consistently make it happen. Faster than ever. As we have for over 85 years. Learn more at txtav.com. loses the trust of other team members for whatever reason, the manager needs to step in immediately. If a technician is not performing to standard, the en- tire organization feels the pain and discontent begins to build. Emotions become heated quickly when unfair- ness, or favoritism, is suspected and real trouble can ensue. To preclude this, the manager’s best move may be to remove the source of the problem. A s a ny ma nager who has been through it knows, firing an employee is one of the most unpleasant of all mana- gerial tasks. It is emotionally draining and there is an additional administra- tive burden involved to ensure that laws and company policies are followed in the process, adding further difficulty to the move. Obviously, the experience for the person being terminated is even more emotionally stressful, even devastating. Accordingly, the manager must pro- ceed with compassion, respecting the person’s dignity, and try to help the in- dividual move on and perhaps improve their situation going forward. Legal Matters Before taking any steps to terminate, a manager needs to understand how that person was hired and under what type of arrangement. Most employees are hired “at will”, which essentially means that they can be fired for no reason. However, if your hangar crew is part of a union or works under a contract, the manager must know the terms of the agreement and what specific processes need to be followed. Since as a practi- cal matter each contract is different, the focus here will be on the “at will” employee. While such a worker can be termi- nated without reason, there is a catch. No employee can be fired for reasons of discrimination, for their role as a whis- tle-blower, or for exercising their legal rights such as taking leave for military service or jury duty. Even though as a manager you do not need to provide a reason for firing an “at will” worker, it is best to have a carefully documented company policy in place along with a process to ensure that the termination does not violate any law. This is where having a company legal and human resources team comes in handy. If you as a manager do not have access to such staff, consider getting advice from outside specialists to ensure that your actions are compliant. The best way to defend against legal action by the person being terminated is to have carefully documented your motivation for the firing. “Make certain you have a paper trail that documents the reasons for ter- minating the individual, particularly if you are terminating them for cause,” advised Bill Quinn, president and CEO of Portsmouth, New Hampshire-based Aviation Management Systems Inc., an aviation consulting firm with extensive experience in providing assistance in the aircraft acquisition process, as well as a wide variety of aircraft manage- ment solutions. These should include notes in the employee file with dates and times of your discussions, warning 30 Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 www.bcadigital.com DOM Notebook Good decisions start with better data. GE Aviation’s C-FOQA CenterlineTM provides airline-grade Flight Operations Quality Assurance service for corporate operators, with thousands of aircraft hosted and more than 120 million flight hours analyzed. • End-to-end service, from data collection to reporting • Checks for more than 130 significant events on every flight • Used by hundreds of corporate operators • Aggregated reports with benchmarking • Automated analysis of flight data +1-512-270-2733 AviationDigital@ge.com www.geaviation.com/flight-risk-management notices of poor performance, absentee notices and probationary notices. “If you do not have a paper trail,” Quinn continued, “I would highly rec- ommend building one before you termi- nate the employee. While this may take some time, it will help to avoid a wrong- ful termination suit.” Know that the actual termination discussion will be hard for everyone. The person being fired may lash out verbally or even physically; there could be tears, anger and threats, but you, the manager, must remain cool, resolute and professional but understanding and sympathetic. And “When the actual day comes,” Quinn advised, “you want to have a wit- ness with you. Do not do this alone.” If you have HR and legal staff, they should be present, if possible. And once you’ve delivered the hard news, be sure to collect the fired employee’s badges, keys, company tools or computer gear and can- cel any network and email access. Time to Go While firing someone is extremely dif- ficult, postponing the decision can hurt both your team and your career. Your managers and your subordinates are watching and taking measure. If a team member’s performance is affecting the organization in a negative way, rest as- sured everyone notices it. Other tech- nicians will resent having to pick up the slack, and scuttlebutt in the break room travels faster than light. The lon- ger you, as a manager, delay, the more your leadership will be questioned. “A lot of managers procrastinate, hoping that the person will change, but they are taking a big chance that the whole organization will be harmed,” said Bob Hobbi, founder, president and CEO of ServiceElements Inter- national Inc. Located in Scottsdale, Arizona, the company specializes in www.bcadigital.com Business & Commercial Aviation | May 2017 31 Government Guidance on Termination Terminating an employee is stressful on both sides, but for the person b e i n g l e t g o , t h e r e a r e m a n y questions that will need answers. The Department of Labor has a helpful website at https://www.dol.gov/dol/ topic/termination/index.htm organizational development, helping customers achieve higher results, bet- ter leadership and professionalism in bringing more value through better service delivery. As a leader, your team needs to trust your judgment and ability to fix a bro- ken situation. You don’t want people to lose confidence in you. “If you have one person who is caus- ing problems, the people who they affect are going to question your lead- ership ability,” said Hobbi. “Be very cognizant of how people see you do this because we all know, when this kind of thing happens, everybody’s watch- ing — your managers above you, and the folks that are reporting to you. So it is critical that you have a high level of confidence, and speed.” Once the decision to terminate is made, act quickly but discretely. You may have to coordinate with other de- partments or resources, and there is a chance that the word will get out to the person affected through the wrong channels. “People may know that you may be thinking about taking an action and terminating them,” Hobbi noted, add- ing, “Once they find out, they may cre- ate more challenges.” Finally, after the terminating event has concluded, it is important that you clearly communicate with your team what just took place. “A good leader, after terminating an employee or team member, imme- diately needs to engage the rest of the team, explain what just went on, be- cause you can easily quell any kind of rumors, any kind of innuendos and any kind of drama,” Hobbi advised. “There is no need to explain every detail of the situation, and you have to be cog- nizant of legal restrictions. But don’t miss the leadership opportunity to re- ally put a message out there that we are not going to tolerate people who are not positively contributing to our organization.” Firing someone is tough, especially if you regarded that person as a colleague and friend. Regardless, it’s a burden you need to bear because your first ob- ligation as a manager is to the team and its well-being. To help avoid that burden, make sure your employees know what is ex- pected of them and communicate this frequently. But have a plan in place so if the time comes to let someone go, you can execute it with professionalism and compassion. BCA Arguably, among the most chal- lenging and potentially hazard- ous flights a pilot undertakes are post-maintenance test flights. The NTSB database contains dozens of incidents in which post-maintenance flights ended up tragically, often be- cause the preflight chores were rushed or carelessly executed. This month, we’ll look at an incident that took the lives of two pilots, one of them an experienced U.S. Air Force-trained test pilot. Piper PA 46-350P, N962DA, crashed into the Spokane River on May 7, 2015, at 1604 PDT following an attempted landing at Felts Field Airport in Spo- kane, Washington. The commercial pi- lot and pilot-rated passenger were killed and the airplane was destroyed during the impact sequence. The local flight departed Felts Field at 1553 in VMC. Both the pilot and passenger were em- ployees of Rocket Engineering, where company personnel had just completed several maintenance tasks