Readback

Regarding the ATC column Say More For Less in your March issue, I really enjoy reading articles like this. I take ATC very seriously and Im always interested to know exactly what they are expecting from me. I strive to be as professional as possible in the air, even though I fly just for fun. However, Im not perfect, and I can certainly be accused of wasting a lot of airtime over the years with something I cant seem to stop saying to each controller, Thanks.

On page 14 of the February issue (Glass Panel Scans), you state that a case can be made for flying track instead of a heading assigned by ATC. This I have to hear. When a controller assigns me a heading, that is what he wants me to do, and doing something else would seem to constitute failure to follow an ATC instruction. Your thoughts?

I see a lot of confusion between the terms VFR and VMC (as well as IFR and IMC). VMC and VFR are often used interchangeably, in fact.To me, VFR and VMC are in fact not the same because VFR refers to a set of rules that govern flight (visual flight rules), which includes airspace and so on. There are certain weather minimums to operate VFR. However, VMC can be interpreted as conditions that allow you to keep the plane upright by looking outside. You can be VMC but in VFR weather by simply being 1500 feet away from a cloud.However, while I could find VFR and IFR defined in FAR/AIM, I couldnt find anything for VMC. Are you aware of any FAA guidance on this?

Have any other nitpickers written about the illustration on page 15 of your November 2014 issue accompanying the Simulators Are Not Airplanes sidebar? The author of the very good article writes about how we developed our own VOR approach to a carrier in San Francisco Bay. And the illustration shows a small plane at 200 feet and 75 knots airspeed, headed straight for a carrier deck, apparently on final approach.

In response to your article What is Minimum Fuel? (Feb 2010 IFR):I believe that the single most important thing to do at your first thought that you may be running tight on fuel is to slow down to your max range power setting-which is about 40-percent power in most small planes-and lean to 50-degrees lean of peak EGT. This will allow you to fly the longest distance with the remaining fuel before you drop from the sky. The distance is what is important, not the time.

I read with interest and obvious necessity for possible future application, your article on hypoxia, Get Your Mask On, in December, 2014.I fly a Malibu Mirage PA 46. Ive had several decompressions in the low 20s that were attributed to squat switch/pressure switch failures. Ive now added another immediate action to pressurization problems:

The last question on Octobers Killer Quiz asks at what altitude you must leave the MPV VOR. Youve departed on the ODP, which says to cross MPV at or above 3500 feet before proceeding on course. But, the scenario is that youre entering an ILS 17 feeder route from MPV, and that altitude is 5900 to the IAF at TJAYS. You said its required to cross MPV at 5900 (answer c). I disagree.

I have a question that people have been asking me and I dont know the answer.The G1000 has two GPS receivers: GPS 1 is the default choice and automatically switches to GPS 2 if there is a problem. Or you can manually select GPS 2.My question is: Why can only one be used at a time? For example, one GPS could be the primary navigator with the flight plan and the other could indicate final destination or a waypoint on the side of the track or even an alternate.

I understand there are the regulations and then there are the realities of commercial aviation and the pressures GA pilots face when the weather is not cooperating. Like Mr. Smith, I am a professional and I would never tell anyone to be below minimums, in IMC conditions, relying on a VFR chart to avoid obstacles, all while trying to fly a single-engine profile. Encouraging pilots to accept this risk is irresponsible. The chance youll go single-engine at the moment you rotate into IFR conditions is indeed slim, but I can think of few other times when the consequences of poor decision making could be so dire.

Any dummy can figure that one needs a Direct entry when approaching the holding fix on the hemisphere containing the racetrack. The head scratcher is whether, from the other hemisphere, to do a teardrop or a parallel entry to the hold.

My iPad was shipped the first day the devices were sent to the general public. Why did I buy one? Availability of charts, cockpit management and cost.

During a flight originating in Allegheny County, ATC amended our flight plan on a VOR/DME-equipped (no GPS, at least not in the equipment suffix) aircraft: KAGC AGC073 HOMEE JST300 JST SEG...The change is easy to execute-depart, intercept AGC073 which leads to HOMEE, then fly JST300 to JST-but came a bit as a surprise, because the system would not accept a flight plan that includes intercepting radials (the AGC073 and JST300 components) instead of radial and DME fixes. In talking to FSS their and our assumption was that the AGC073 component was a local ATC operational addition to route us out of busy airspace more precisely.We were wondering if there is a way (or trick) to include such intercept element when filing a flight plan.