EAA HOMEBUILDERS WEEK JAN 27-31, 2025

NOTE:  TIMES LISTED ARE CENTRAL TIME ZONE

Click on Date to Register

Join us online to learn about our latest generation of avionics, portable navigation solutions, services and more. 

Presented by Garmin aviation experts, webinars are great opportunities for aircraft owners and pilots to research Garmin aviation products and services — and discover best practices for their use. Webinars are accessible from anywhere at the scheduled time. 

Garmin aviation webinars are typically conducted via GoToWebinar. For more information about joining a webinar, get help here. 

G3X TOUCH™, GI 275 AND TXi™: WHICH DISPLAY IS BEST FOR YOUR AIRCRAFT?

Gain insight on the similarities and differences between our G3X Touch, GI 275 and TXi flight displays — and learn which is better suited for your missions. 

10 a.m. CT Thursday, Jan. 9

GARMIN PILOT™ APP: A GUIDE TO GETTING STARTED

Explore how the Garmin Pilot app works and how using your iPhone® or iPad® mobile device in the cockpit can make your flying easier. 

4 p.m. CT Tuesday, Jan. 14

PLANNING AN AVIONICS UPGRADE: SMART TIPS FOR SUCCESS

Thinking about an avionics upgrade but not sure where to start? Join us to learn what questions to ask and how to plan your dream panel. 

10 a.m. CT Thursday, Jan. 16

FLTPLAN® SMS: SMART, COST-EFFECTIVE, COMPLIANT SAFETY MANAGEMENT

Learn how a FltPlan SMS program can help meet the safety compliance and risk management needs of your flight operation. Explore SMS basics, and get a demo of easy-to-implement FltPlan tools and reports. 

4 p.m. CT Thursday, Jan. 23

\

VINTAGE PLANE, MODERN PANEL — KEY REASONS TO UPGRADE TO GI 275

Discover the wide range of upgrade options provided by the GI 275 digital flight instrument to replace the existing 3-1/8” mechanical gauges in your panel with reliable multifunction electronics. 

10 a.m. CT Tuesday, Jan. 28

GARMIN AUTOPILOTS EXPLAINED: A GAME-CHANGER FOR YOUR AIRCRAFT

Get the scoop on our GFC™ 500 and GFC 600 retrofit autopilots and the advanced capabilities they provide — including Garmin ESP™ (Electronic Stability and Protection) corrective technology, coupled approaches and more. 

4 p.m. CT Thursday, Jan. 30

The FAA has released a policy memo that reverses a troubling change in Phase I operating limitations that was originally set to be included with the latest update of Order 8130.2, which became effective in December. The change would have limited aircraft in Phase I to operating out of a single airport, or two with “valid justification of a specific flight test or safety requirement.”

The policy memo restores the previous version of this limitation, which simply requires the designated airworthiness representative (DAR) to evaluate the proposed list of airports for Phase I and enumerate them in the description of the flight test area.

“EAA appreciates the FAA’s action in responding to our feedback and reversing this change,” said Tom Charpentier, EAA government relations director. “Needlessly limiting airports during flight testing is detrimental to safety and the flight testing process itself.”

Homebuilders facing any difficulty obtaining the corrected operating limitation should tell their DAR and/or FSDO to review memo AIR-600-GM17, or contact EAA for further assistance.

Article reprinted from AvWeb

Embry-Riddle graduates can now move directly to FAA facility training through the fast-track program.

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University is the newest institution to join the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Enhanced Air Traffic – Collegiate Training Initiative program.

The FAA announced the partnership on Wednesday noting that the Daytona Beach, Florida University joins Tulsa Community College and the University of Oklahoma as the first schools to participate in the initiative, which aims to provide a more direct and efficient pathway for the next generation of air traffic controllers.

Embry-Riddle’s Air Traffic Management program, which currently enrolls 242 students, is already preparing future controllers with a solid academic foundation. With this new partnership, graduates are offered a direct path to FAA facility training, contingent on passing the Air Traffic Skills Assessment test and meeting medical and security clearances.

“The FAA is working to strengthen our controller workforce and create a continuous pipeline of talent,” said Tim Arel, Chief Operating Officer of the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization. “The safety of the National Airspace System and the traveling public is always our number one priority. Working with schools like Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University will continue that mission.”

The move comes as the FAA actively works to address the ongoing controller shortage, having already hired 1,800 controllers in 2024. The agency’s goal is to bring an additional 2,000 controllers on board in 2025.

Investors are reportedly interested in the chart provider at an asking price of $6 billion or more.

Bloomberg reported that Jeppesen could top Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg's list of non-core assets being sold to shore up the planemaker's balance sheet. Bloomberg, quoting unnamed sources, said the company is looking for $6 billion for the world's largest provider of aviation charts and air navigation materials to help whittle down its $58 billion in debt. It paid $1.5 billion for the company in 2000 and it's been a reliable cash cow ever since. Boeing also owns digital chart provider ForeFlight, which serves Jeppesen data, but there was no mention of ForeFlight in the Bloomberg report.

ForeFlight fits the profile of business units Ortberg is looking to hive off. He announced early in his tenure that he'll look at getting rid of anything that doesn't directly contribute to the core airliner and defense businesses. There are reportedly a number of businesses, including hedge funds, lining up for a crack at Jeppesen and that's prompted speculation that the historic chart business, which dates to the 1930s, may go for more than the asking price.

Topic: Learn How to Recognize and Avoid Helicopter Wake Turbulence

On Wednesday, November 13, 2024 at 19:00 Central Standard Time (17:00 PST; 18:00 MST; 20:00 EST; 15:00 HST; 16:00 AKST; 18:00 Arizona; Thursday, November 14, 2024 01:00 GMT)

Select Number:
GL15133298

Description:

“Caution! Helicopter wake turbulence!” No doubt that’s a warning you’ve never heard, or at most, very seldom. Several recent accidents have demonstrated how vortices generated by helicopters can put fixed-wing aircraft at risk. This session will examine the impact that wake turbulence from different sizes of helicopters can have on fixed-wing aircraft, and pass along some tips to keep you out of harm's way. Some of the world's most experienced fixed- and rotary-wing pilots will help viewers better understand the wonky science behind this hazardous phenomenon. Using actual accident case studies, the panel will share proven recognition and avoidance techniques to help ensure that these surprisingly powerful forces remain clear from your aircraft. A brief question-and-answer period will follow the discussion.

To view further details and registration information for this webinar, click here.

Meg Godlewski

AUTHOR-Flying Magazine

When a pilot gets behind the airplane in the pattern, it is never a good thing. 

Rushing the checklist—or worse, forgetting the checklist items—leads to a late configured or nonconfigured airplane or being too fast or too high on final. All these things result in an unstabilized approach.

Unless there is an emergency on board, the best course of action is usually going around, flying the pattern again, and focusing on staying ahead of the aircraft.

There's a lot that goes into a stable approach to landing.

The aircraft has to be at the correct speed and correctly configured for landing, such as landing gear down (that’s the big one), flaps at the proper setting, proper speed, etc. This includes trimming the aircraft so that it stays on speed and can land on the first third of the runway, preferably on the numbers, and stops within 100 feet of that mark with minimal braking.

Configuration of the aircraft should not be done aggressively. Slamming down the landing gear and dumping in the flaps all the way in at the same time results in unstable pitch moments. This can be demonstrated at a safe altitude in the practice area. The addition of flaps on one fell swoop followed by their rapid retraction is definitely a teachable moment, as the pitch change is often surprising, dramatic and swift, and not something you'd want to experience a few hundred feet over the ground.

Learning to land and the stabilized approach should begin with a ground session.

I have found the use of a whiteboard with a drawing of the runway, anointed with the aircraft configuration, checklist use, appropriate airspeeds, and altitudes for each leg and distance from the runway to be an excellent tool. I ask my flight students to copy the drawing with their own drawing (and not take a photo), and in future lessons are asked to re-create it from scratch to show learning has taken place.

This diagram should also include notations of when the checklist is used.

One of the best techniques to teach pattern procedures is something I call "faux pattern," which is done in the practice area several thousand feet in the air to facilitate recovery at 1,500 feet agl.

The cardinal compass points are the "legs" of the pattern. After clearing turns, the learner configures the airplane to enter a 45-degree angle to downwind and performs as if they are in the pattern. This includes managing airspeed and aircraft configuration.

When the aircraft is on "final," the CFI calls for a go-around, or gives the learner a scenario like "Uh-oh! There's a disabled aircraft on the runway! What do you do?"

After a couple of run-throughs, a learner's pattern work usually improves substantially.

Instructors need to be very careful about what they allow the learner to do, as in mistakes they are allowed to make, because the pattern can be very unforgiving. I have seen a few techniques that gave me pause.

I was doing a stage check for a learner who kept revving the engine on downwind. When I asked why he did that, he said, "because it's fun!" Another pulled the mixture to idle on downwind to "check it," claiming that is what the previous CFI taught him to do. This was incorrect information. The previous CFI informed me that he couldn't break the learner of the habit, so he fired him.

It is not just primary learners who develop strange habits in the pattern.

A "return to flying" commercial pilot and a former CFI announced his technique for landing a Cessna 172 in gusty winds was to come in with no flaps then dump all the flaps in on short final and put the aircraft into an aggressive slip to landing. He revealed this during the preflight briefing as we discussed aircraft performance. I was staring at him, waiting for the punch line—hoping there was one—but before I could reply, the owner of the flight school, who was sitting a few feet away in the lobby, loudly announced, "Not in one of my airplanes, you don't!"

For the unfamiliar: there is a placard in the C-172 that reads "Avoid slips with flaps extended." 

Does your pre-landing checklist include verbalization of the phrase "go around is always an option"?

A senior instructor I flew with told me he added it because he was trying to reduce the startle factor when he told his learners to go around. He also made it a rule that if the aircraft wasn't perfectly on speed, configured, and on glide path to touch down by the second center stripe on the 3,400-foot runway, the learner would go around.

Occasionally, some students pushed back when it appeared they would land long, as the Cessna and Pipers they flew didn't need the entire 3,400 feet to come to a full stop. The instructor replied, "Someday you won't have that much runway." He was right, of course.

If you are flying at a towered airport and the controller tells you to go-around, it's not up for debate—go around. It is possible that you don't have the bigger picture. There could be something larger, faster, and turbine coming up behind you. Know what to do, and the order in which to do it.

When the go-around goes bad, it is often because the pilot does not use enough right rudder and the aircraft has too much nose-up trim resulting in a stall. Anticipate the need for right rudder and be ready to push the nose down to counteract the left turning tendency and pitch up with the adding of full power.

Another bad habit particular to aircraft with retractable gear is taking the flaps out abruptly while simultaneously bringing the gear up. This creates a lot of drag, and it is not uncommon that the aircraft will settle back on to the runway with the landing gear—or part of it—retracted. This is expensive and embarrassing.

Make the practice of go-arounds something you do on a regular basis as part of your personal proficiency and currency program. You never know when you will need those skills.

Does it matter which direction I turn the prop?

From 'Pilot Workshops'

You can turn the prop either direction, but the best way is to turn it in the reverse direction of normal rotation, for one main reason. If one or both mags have an impulse coupling for starting, you will not engage the impulse coupling in the reverse direction. And in the rare case where there is a hot mag and fuel in the engine, you will avoid having the engine fire as you rotate the prop.

If this procedure saves a life or prevents an injury once in a while, it’s well worth it. And even if your airplane does not have an impulse coupling, it’s still a good practice, because someday you might turn someone else’s prop, and it’s good to be in the habit of turning the prop backwards.

Some people say you can break a vacuum pump vane by turning the prop backwards, but I’ve never actually seen that in 25 years of maintenance. I’d much rather break a vacuum pump vane than to endanger a human life by having the engine fire unexpectedly.

Turning the prop backwards is a normal procedure during compression testing and during mag timing. It also makes sense to turn the prop backwards to put the tow bar on. Adopting this practice just might save a life one day.

Disclaimer: This does not apply to Rotax engines. It does apply to the typical direct-drive Lycomings and Continentals we see on many piston-powered airplanes.”

To see information about removing a cowling and inspecting the engine compartment, check out this sample from Airplane Engines: A Pilot-Friendly Manual.

With three diverse GA aircraft of his own, AOPA’s next leader has a solid background in business and aviation.

An 8,000-hour general aviation pilot with a diverse “fleet” of personal aircraft will be the next (and sixth, ever) president and CEO of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), as of on Jan. 1, 2025. Darren Pleasance also has a strong background in business, most recently as leader of Cisco Systems’ Acceleration Center, whose corporate mission was “to accelerate the success of mission-critical aspects of Cisco's business transformation.”

But early in his career, Pleasance served as a corporate pilot, including a stint flying professionally for John Travolta’s flight operation and charter bush flying in Alaska. From there, he went on to lead global customer acquisitions for Google and was a partner at consulting firm McKinsey & Company's high-tech sector and marketing and sales practice before moving to Cisco. Pleasance holds a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering degree from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an MBA from the UCLA Anderson School of Management.

Maintaining a current certified flight instructor (CFI) rating, Pleasance owns a Piper Meridian, a Vans RV-6 and a Progressive Aerodyne SeaRay amphibian. He has also served on the board of the Experimental Aircraft Association for many years, according to AOPA.

Mark Baker, whom Pleasance will replace after 11 years as AOPA’s top executive, called AOPA's new leader “a pilot’s pilot with a genuine passion for flying. He combines that excitement about aviation with leadership experience at some of this country’s top consulting and tech firms, giving him the right balance of business skills and kinship with our members.”

Pleasance said, “I'm grateful for the privilege I'm being given to lead this incredible organization that has had such a positive impact on my life and the lives of all of us who love aviation.”

There are two components to BasicMed: the physical examination and the online course. The physical examination can be completed by any state-licensed physician—it does not have to be an FAA-designated aviation medical examiner. You will want to bring the FAA form 8700-2 comprehensive medical exam checklist (CMEC) with you to the physical exam. The CMEC has a section for you to fill out as well as the physical exam checklist and doctor’s information for the physician to complete. The CMEC can be downloaded from aopa.org/basicmed. 

The other component of BasicMed is the online course, which can be accessed by going to the same BasicMed link where you found the CMEC. The online course is titled “Medical Self-Assessment, A Pilot’s Guide to Flying Healthy” and is composed of seven chapters and a 20-question quiz at the end. All the quiz questions are based on the material in the course, and a score of 80 percent is required to pass. There is no limit on how many times you can take the quiz. You will be able to print a completion certificate from the online course, and it is recommended that you keep it and the CMEC with your logbook safe at home—you do not need to bring them with you when you fly.

Finally, the online course needs to be retaken every 24 calendar months and the physical exam every four years to the day (48 calendar months for the exam beginning November 12, 2024).

from: PilotWorkshops.com

Electronic logbooks are fully acceptable to the FAA, including for endorsements when the right conditions are met. Pretty much any major app or software logbook meets those conditions. That means you don’t need a paper logbook for tracking purposes, demonstrating currency, pursuit of higher ratings, reporting to insurance, etc.

What you do need is a backup of your logbook. That could be a digital backup. Just don’t count on a cloud version of your same app for this. It’s unlikely, but if the company is hacked, you could lose your data across all of their systems. Download a copy of your logbook using an export function, or running a report, and saving it. (Tip: sometimes the web interface for a digital logbook is better for this than the one on your phone or tablet.) Store that copy in another cloud location (like Google Drive), or on a local computer or thumb drive. Or even print it out.

Just doing this backup once a year limits the amount of data you could lose. Also, consider filling out a form FAA 8710 with IACRA, and therefore the FAA, when you get a flight review and list all your flight hours. That’s a documented record of at least flight totals.

Your logbook backup could also be … a paper logbook. There’s nothing wrong with keeping your own handwritten copy. Paper logbooks feel great in your hands and tell a story of your flying history in a way digital logbooks never will. Your great-grandkids won’t treasure the family heirloom of your digitized flight hours. But your physical logbook? That’s a different story.”

Question: I am a freshly minted CFI. What happens if I make a mistake in my logbook? I hear stories about CFIs who are worried about getting a call from the FAA in the event they accidentally mess up an entry in a logbook. Does the FAA really go after pilots and CFIs for improper logbook entries?

Answer: The short answer is no. But unfortunately there's a lot of "tribal knowledge" surrounding logbooks and what can happen. FLYING contacted the FAA for the correct information.

The CFI should be familiar with Advisory Circular 61-65 (H), which contains the endorsements an instructor is allowed to give. The language is copied verbatim. If you are a learner pilot, the first endorsement you will get is the TSA citizenship verification endorsement in accordance with 49 CFR 1552.3(h).

FAR 61.51 covers pilot logbooks and details how to log "training time and aeronautical experience." It states that each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the administrator:

(1) Training and  aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.

(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent flight experience requirements of this part.

Part B covers logbook entries, stating that "for the purposes of meeting the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, each person must enter the following information for each flight or lesson logged:

(1) General—

(i) Date.

(ii) Total flight time or lesson time.

(iii) Location where the aircraft departed and arrived, or for lessons in a full flight simulator or flight training device, the location where the lesson occurred.

(iv) Type and identification of aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device, as appropriate.”

The savvy CFI logs all instruction given, including ground time and the topics covered. If the learner takes the time to be there, they should get credit for the experience.

As far as "messing up an entry in a logbook," FLYING posed a series of questions gleaned from scenarios encountered in more than 30 years of flight training on both sides of the CFI certificate.

I start with this because when I was working on my CFII certificate, I logged time in my own logbook with blue ink and the CFII who I was training with positively clutched her pearls over that one.

According to the FAA, they do not require a specific ink color for a paper logbook.

The logging of time spent using an advanced aviation training device (AATD) can be controversial as there are some CFIs who refuse to do it, saying it will "ruin" a logbook.

According to the FAA: "Simply logging time (in any capacity) does not ruin a logbook, but the pilot must ensure they are properly categorizing the flight time logged. For example, if a pilot decided to record their time spent using an AATD in their logbook, that is acceptable. However, the AATD time could not be counted toward cross-country time for pilot certification."

As most logbooks have a few blank columns, it's a good idea to designate them to suit your needs. For example, you might have one for ground training received or given, AATD, solo flight, etc. You can have an entire section set aside for ground instruction, dual instruction given, etc.

There are many logbooks with preprinted endorsements, but you may run out of room. The FAA does not require endorsements to be on a specific page or in a specific location in the logbook. 

"Endorsements can be made in a pilot’s logbook or other documents acceptable to the administrator if the learner uses an electronic logbook rather than paper, in order to show they meet the aeronautical experience requirements for the certificate or rating that may be in paper form or electronic," FAA said. "Keep in mind that many endorsements require a CFI’s signature which may not work with an electronic logbook." 

For check rides most learners print out spreadsheets of their experience and have the CFI sign those.

Mistakes do happen. Usually they are math errors.

Filling out a logbook takes a fair amount of concentration, as does totaling up the columns and double checking the math before you sign the page. Take care when you do this, and please be extra careful when it comes to totaling up required experience for a check ride. You do not want a learner to go for a check ride and be turned away because they are missing 0.2 of something, or a takeoff and night landing or two. 

If you make a mistake, correct it. Please note that the FAA does not have specific guidance on correcting logbook errors. According to the source at the FAA, "choosing a particular correction style (white-out, crossing out the error and correcting, crossing out the line and making a new entry, etc.) is up to the pilot."

Credit to Megodeswki- DLying Magazine

Brought to us by AvWeb

Consistent learning is what makes a good pilot a great pilot. And Lightspeed is friends with lots of great pilots. We lean on these experts to help us bring the general aviation community a wealth of knowledge in our series of free downloadable eBooks from our Lightspeed Library.

Expand your understanding on topics like what to do after you make an emergency landing as you wait for help to arrive, how to safely land in a strong crosswind situation (equipped with cool diagrams!) or how to keep yourself and your passengers safe from carbon monoxide in the cockpit.

Our Library also has some stories of inspiration, for lighter reading. Enjoy these pilot profiles of how they became a leader in their field, or what inspires them to give back to their communities. There’s something in the Lightspeed Library for everyone. 
Hit the button below to gain access to a world of knowledge. (No library card needed).

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” - H.L. Mencken. 

That’s exactly where I found myself when pondering the question, “Do I need to put a compass in the Titan T-51D Mustang that I’m building?”

After all, putting a mechanical compass in a modern aircraft seems akin to putting a wind-up clock in a Tesla. Searching for guidance, I spoke with fellow builders, flight instructors, and avionics experts. The simple answer I received every time was “Yes.”  Then I made one last call to my good friend and consummate federal aviation regulations expert, Ric Peri at the Aircraft Electronics Association. Peri’s answer: “Well, let’s go through the FARs and figure it out.” And down the rabbit hole we went…

It started simply enough. FAR 91.205 specifies various instruments required for flight under VFR, starting with these three:

1. Airspeed indicator.
2. Altimeter.
3. Magnetic direction indicator.

Most people interpret “magnetic direction indicator” to mean a compass. But does it? And we also need to consider that Part 91 covers general operating and flight rules, not the certification of the aircraft. So, we need to dive into Part 23, which covers airworthiness standards for the airplanes most of us fly.

Part 23.1303 stipulates the minimum required flight and navigational instruments, and it matches up exactly with FAR 91.205. Part 23.1327 covers the accuracy and installation of the magnetic direction indicator, but it doesn’t define what exactly that is. Can it be an electronic instrument, driven by a magnetometer, or does it have to be a mechanical compass? If we look at the amendments to Part 23 and the associated commentary, we can see that the FAA has gone back and forth on the topic over the years.

In 1993, Amendment 43 to Part 23 addressed the issue directly, and the commentary on the revision explained that a magnetic direction indicator has to be a non-stabilized magnetic compass based on the following explanation: “The non-stabilized magnetic direction indicator, which does not require power from the airplane's electrical systems, provides directional information to the pilot when all other directional navigation systems have failed due to loss of power.” The FAR language was changed to read, “A direction indicator non-stabilized magnetic compass.” No powered instruments need apply. End of story.

This wording was maintained through other amendments, until Amendment 62 in 2012, where the wording for minimum required flight and navigational instruments mysteriously changed back to “A magnetic direction indicator,” language that remains to this day. So, what happened? Does an electronic instrument now count? Sorting through volumes of commentary that went into the rationale for many of the changes in Amendment 62, they all point to “Yes.” Beginning in 2012, there was an industry push to accept that electronic instruments could deliver levels of accuracy and reliability that mechanical instruments simply could not. And so, the requirement for a “compass” has finally been relegated to the history books. A “magnetic direction indicator” is the current requirement for VFR flight, alongside the airspeed indicator and altimeter. (IFR flight requires additional instruments including artificial horizon, directional gyro, slip-skid, rate of turn, and others.)

Given the numerous electronic flight instruments available for the general aviation pilot, will this soon make the classic wet compass a thing of the past? The answer is…maybe. Some primary flight displays and electronic flight instrument systems on the market still list a “compass” as required equipment under their supplemental type certificates. It would certainly have been better if their STC language matched the FAA’s “magnetic direction indicator.” But the pieces are certainly in place to support a retrofit, all-electronic panel that meets the FAA requirements for certification, redundancy, and emergency power backup.

In 2015, the FAA released a policy statement (PS-ACE-23-08) acknowledging the superiority of electronically driven attitude indicators, making it possible for thousands of aircraft to easily upgrade to electronic attitude indicators and dump their old vacuum pumps. These days, many new flight instruments on the market utilize modern magnetometers, delivering reliable and highly accurate magnetic direction indication. I suspect it won’t be long before the old wet compass and all of its issues are a thing of the past. The FAA removed the “compass” specific requirement from the private pilot certification standards back in 2013. Now it’s time for the retrofit avionics industry to step up and complete the process, relegating those compass correction cards to the museums. Until next time, I hope you and your families remain safe and healthy, and I wish you blue skies.

Jeff Simon is an A&P mechanic, IA, pilot, and aircraft owner. He has spent the last 22 years promoting owner-assisted aircraft maintenance and created the first inspection tool for geared alternator couplings available at ApproachAviation.com. Jeff is also the creator of SocialFlight, the free mobile app and website that maps more than 20,000 aviation events, hundred-dollar hamburger destinations, and also offers educational aviation videos. Free apps are available for iOS and Android devices, and users can also visit www.SocialFlight.com.

We’ve all heard pilots discussing their weekend plans or just shooting the bull on 123.45 while the rest of us try to report our positions in Alert Areas (training areas). This annoying interruption can be downright dangerous.

The FAA actually has a frequency for BS’ing between aircraft believe it or not. The frequency 122.75 is dedicated for general air-to-air communications between private fixed-wing aircraft.

Please use 123.45 if you intend to communicate with another aircraft during a maintenance flight, or for reporting your position in an Alert Area, and by all means please keep your transmissions short and concise.

Want to discuss dinner plans, talk about your airline interview last week, meow, or chat about anything unofficial? Then 122.75 is the frequency for you. Everyone will greatly appreciate it!

Pilots are often nervous about flying into or around airports with skydiving operations. There’s really no need to be, as Paul Bertorelli explains in this AVweb video. Just avoid the airport by three or four miles on the downwind side when transitioning and don’t overfly a dropzone airport if you’re landing there. Just fly a normal (not too tight) pattern.  Watch the video by Paul Bertorelli published 5/29 with full credit to AvWeb