曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
turn. There is a reason the popular air show performer turns
right. The aircraft suddenly broke into a left-hand flat spin. I
pulled the power, put in full right rudder and released the
stick…The rudder had no effectiveness. I pushed the stick all
the way forward which only resulted in a cross-over spin to
inverted. By this time, I was getting very low. It finally came
out of the spin at about a 45 degree inverted nose-down angle.
Due to my lack of altitude, I continued a delicate, buffeting 45
degree push to level inverted. I only had 100-200 feet before I
became a statistic.
I figure that I lost 1,500 feet in only 4 rotations. Some botched
maneuvers require more than the 1,500 feet minimum
mandated by the FAA. That altitude is the bottom, and I
need at least double that for any new maneuvers. I am sure
my lack of sleep affected my judgment, and I feel that I am
lucky to have survived…
We’re also glad that our reporter survived his ordeal and was
willing to share this experience with others.
Incidents Involving
Expectant Pilots
The Pilot/Controller Glossary defines an “Expect” altitude
as one to be used in the event of radio communications
failure, and as information to assist a pilot in planning.
But some pilots take the information past the planning
stage, as a General Aviation reporter did:
n Our IFR clearance was, “As filed, maintain 3,000 feet,
expect 5,000 feet within 10 minutes.” Sometime after our
frequency change to Departure Control, we were cleared to
climb to 5,000 feet. As we approached 5,000 feet, I asked
the pilot-not-flying to request 7,000 feet. At that point,
ATC said he had cleared us to 4,000 feet—not 5,000 feet. I
had understood 5,000 feet, had written it down, and had
set the altitude alerter to 5,000 feet. The Controller told us
to “just stay at 5,000 feet and I’ll work on a higher
[altitude].” Perhaps the fact that I had been expecting
5,000 feet within 10 minutes, per the clearance received
prior to takeoff, lured me into the error.
This report highlights the importance of pilot readbacks
in maintaining good pilot/controller communication. It
also points out how easily an “expect” instruction can be
interpreted as an actual instruction in the mind of an
expectant listener.
Another reporter, an air carrier Captain, provided the
necessary readback, but did not wait for acknowledgment
from the busy controller.
n At FL330, I decided to ask for FL370 for fuel economy
purposes and requested such from Center. A clearance
was received and read back, “Turn left 15
degrees…maintain FL370.” By then the Center Controller
was talking to another aircraft and did not acknowledge
my readback. Passing FL337, a TCAS II Traffic Advisory
occurred. I reported this to Center. The reply was, “You
are supposed to be at FL330.” A descent to FL330 was
done.
I called the Center [later] and listened to the tapes. The
clearance issued by the Controller was, “Turn left 15
degrees…maintain FL330, expect FL370 when clear of
traffic.” Both pilots misheard this, and my readback was
made for a climb.
A pilot’s best defense against this sort of altitude
deviation is to verify instructions before taking any action.
In this case, there was no obvious rush to start the
enroute climb.
PEDs: A Continuing Saga
The new rules governing Passenger Electronic Devices
(PEDs) seem to have lessened the frequency of PED-related
reports to ASRS. But we still occasionally hear about PEDs,
including this unusual incident experienced by an air
carrier Captain:
n While at cruise, we experienced multiple spontaneous
disconnects of the left, center, and right autopilots over
several hours of flight. After due consideration of the
sequence of disengagements, starting immediately after I
had authorized the use of PEDs…I made an
announcement asking that all PEDs be secured. All
passengers complied. The anomaly continued. I asked the
lead Flight Attendant [FA] to make a more rigorous check
of the cabin. She reported that there was a passenger who
had a significant hearing impairment requiring that he
use a hearing aid with headphones. The microprocessor
was carried in his shirt pocket. Without it, he could not
hear at all. Recalling…that PED interference is normally
very site-specific, I asked the FA to move the passenger
forward…six rows. No further interference occurred for
the balance of the trip.
The only reason I did not have the passenger turn off his
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
CALL BACK 1(119)
