Help me clear up my brain fart

[Ekim]

"Never cross control!!!"
"Keep that ball centered!"
"Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
"Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
landing."

These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
is really twisted up in my head.

Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
"low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?

In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
Right?

Thanks,
Ekim

[mike regish]

I'll bet you had a young, relatively low time instructor.

Slips for landing are common and safe. I use them all the time. Well, not
all the time, but I like to come in high and slip away excess altitude. That
way, I always have the field made no matter what the engine decides to do.

Keep the ball centered in cruise and in turns, unless you're slipping in a
turn. A lot of times I throw in a little top rudder in the base to final
turn to bleed off excess altitude. You don't want to skid in a turn, but
when slipping the tendency when you get slow is for the high wing to drop,
thus bringing you automatically into a wings level attitude. If you're
skidding, the bottom wing can drop out and you can end up upside down in a
hurry. Not fun at 1000' agl. Just watch your speed, don't get too slow and
you'll be fine. And of course the ball will be out of the box when you're
slipping.

And unless you're flying a B52 or an Ercoupe, you'll have to slip with the
ball out of the center to land in a crosswind unless you feel like folding
up your landing gear. Remember, a good laning is any one you can walk away
from. A great landing means you get to use the plane again.

20 degrees of bank is pretty conservative. You'd have to use airliner
patterns with that shallow a turn, which will put you way out of gliding
range to the runway. Not safe at all. As long as you keep your turns
coordinated, maostly being careful not to skid (ball towards the high wing)
30 degrees is common. I often go 45 degrees in the pattern, but I fly the
same plane all the time (mine) and it's more forgiving in the stall than
most.

JMHO, and worth what ou paid for it.

mike regish


"Ekim" > wrote in message
om...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."
>
> These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
> during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
> you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
> is really twisted up in my head.
>
> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?
>
> Thanks,
> Ekim

[Roger Long]

I used to keep my pattern turns to 15 degrees and could fly tight, make the
airfield if the engine quits, patterns with no problem. Not all planes will
do this but a 172 and a 152 will. Now that I have more experience, I go up
to 25 but keep to 20 most of the time.

Everything else you wrote, I agree with.

A good rule for the original poster to drill in his head:

If you overshoot the turn to final, take your eyes off the runway, look at
the instruments, nail the 20 degree bank angle, keep the ball centered, and
stabilize the airspeed at the proper number for the plane. Just hold that
until you are almost on the extension line and then turn on to final.
You'll be amazed in most cases how much room there is left to the threshold.
Focusing on the aircraft attitude instead of being late in the turn will
help avoid getting slow and when you overshoot.

If you did make your turn too close, getting back on centerline will get you
set up for a proper go around.

--
Roger Long

mike regish > wrote in message >
> 20 degrees of bank is pretty conservative. You'd have to use airliner
> patterns with that shallow a turn, which will put you way out of gliding
> range to the runway. Not safe at all.

[Roger Tracy]

Whoa. I do all that stuff. It's worked for me for a long time. Use the
controls to make the airplane do what you want it to do. Maybe go
out with an "experienced" CFI and explore some of those things in
more depth so you understand them.


"Ekim" > wrote in message
om...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."
>
> These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
> during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
> you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
> is really twisted up in my head.
>
> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?
>
> Thanks,
> Ekim

[Robert Little]

One thing is for sure with that kind of training experience, you will never,
ever be able to fly a conventional gear aircraft. It's getting more
unfortunate that CFIs do not have to have a tailwheel check out before
applying the trade. Their lack of experience is robbing the aviation world
of half the fun. Just try a crab landing with the CG behind the main gears
and see what happens. R Little

--


----------------------------------------------------
This mailbox protected from junk email by Matador
from MailFrontier, Inc. http://info.mailfrontier.com

"Ekim" > wrote in message
om...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."
>
> These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
> during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
> you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
> is really twisted up in my head.
>
> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?
>
> Thanks,
> Ekim

[Ron Natalie]

"Ekim" > wrote in message om...

> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled?

Yes, by an ignorant flight instructor. While keeping in coordinated flight
will certainly alleviate the chances of spinning, a slip doesn't mean you
necessarily will. Avoiding stalling is really important. You can't spin without
stalling and even stalls without spins on approach aren't a good idea.

> It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?

You have to slip at some point in a crosswind unless you're going to
touch down in a crab which is bad for most aircraft.

> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?

Well slips are ok. Steeper banks are still a problem. Remember your
accellerated stall drills.

[Corky Scott]

On 11 Nov 2003 04:25:56 -0800, (Ekim) wrote:

>"Never cross control!!!"
>"Keep that ball centered!"
>"Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
>"Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
>landing."
>
>These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
>during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
>you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
>is really twisted up in my head.
>
>Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
>spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
>contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
>"low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
>In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
>the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
>steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
>Right?
>
>Thanks,
>Ekim

Ekim, my opinion (being a freshly minted pilot) is that the
information you were given may depend on the size and width of the
runway you train from as well as the attitude of the CFI's.

Where I trained, the runways are long and wide. The instructor was
constanty telling me to keep my speed up on final. All approaches
were made with 1500 rpm on the tachometer. This made for wide
patterns and necessitated the use of flaps on final. Why did he teach
this? Many reasons, but mostly for safety's sake. It's really hard
to stall/spin in the pattern if you keep your speed up. The other
reason involves a bit of conjecture on my part. The FBO is located at
the opposite end of both runnway's that are in most common use. If
you land short, and the C172 can land impressively short, you have a
long taxi back to the ramp. If you land hot and long, the taxi is
that much shorter.

At an airfield that has a short grass runway, the approach might
necessitate a steeper descent using some slipping.

Keeping some power on may be considered a method for preventing shock
cooling the engine, I don't know. But there are many methods for
landing including cutting the throttle completely and turning in
sooner to take advantage of the more rapid rate of descent.

Mike wrote:
>Keep the ball centered in cruise and in turns, unless you're slipping in a
>turn. A lot of times I throw in a little top rudder in the base to final
>turn to bleed off excess altitude.

I used this technique just this weekend. I was on base and realised
that I'd turned in a bit early and was high. So as I turned on final,
I added a lot of top rudder and held the turn and kept the speed up
and spilled off most of the excess altitude in a cross controlled
turn.

I fly a lot with a friend who owns a Waco UPF-7 biplane. Like most
biplanes, it doesn't have flaps, so the approach is controlled by
slipping. Being a biplane and having all that drag, the Waco drops
like a rock once the approach speed is reached and the throttle is
chopped. Without slipping, the rate of descent reaches 2,000 fpm. We
always end up high on final, to make sure the runway can be reached,
whereupon the left wing goes way down and a LOT of right rudder is
applied and we come down like a broken elevator.

I once watched a video of a C-130 approaching to land at an airstrip
under hostile fire in Vietnam. It stayed high until I assumed it
wasn't going to land, then it lifted up a wing and kicked in opposite
rudder and dropped like it had been shot down. If I hadn't been
watching, I would have said it wasn't possible to handle that size an
airplane like that. But it worked.

Corky Scott

[Dale]

In article >,
"Roger Long" m>
wrote:

> A good rule for the original poster to drill in his head:
>
> If you overshoot the turn to final, take your eyes off the runway, look at
> the instruments, nail the 20 degree bank angle, keep the ball centered, and
> stabilize the airspeed at the proper number for the plane. Just hold that
> until you are almost on the extension line and then turn on to final.
> You'll be amazed in most cases how much room there is left to the threshold.
> Focusing on the aircraft attitude instead of being late in the turn will
> help avoid getting slow and when you overshoot.

While I agree with your intent that you shouldn't tighten the turn
trying to lineup, you should be able to fly a safe, coordinated turn
without "take your eyes off the runway, look at the instruments". On
the base to final turn is not the time to have your head in the cockpit.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Roger Long]

> On
> the base to final turn is not the time to have your head in the cockpit.

Sure it is, if you are a low time student pilot trying to salvage an
overshot turn before you have developed a good feel for the plane. Use the
instruments to get your configuration and attitude right, then get your eyes
back outside. You should always be dividing your attention between inside
and outside.

What happens to low hours, and even high hours pilots when they are
stressed, is fixating on the view outside the plane and pushing the plane
into a stall spin trying to turn too tightly back to the runway centerline.
A short period of using the instruments to be sure airspeed, ball, and bank
are not out of safe limits isn't going to significantly increase the chances
of a midair. The final approach should have been cleared before the turn.
By the time an overshoot becomes an issue, the most probable midair will be
someone hitting you from behind and nobody is looking back there anyway.

Pilots, especially students, should be checking airspeed, etc. all through
the pattern. What I'm really saying is that just after you realize that
you've overshot is an important time to do this again. Don't depart from
the airspeed / bank parameters you've established for the pattern in order
to salvage a botched turn. Just stick with the program and you'll probably
find there is still plenty of time to make the runway. If not, a go around
is always a good thing to practice.

--
Roger Long

[Robert Perkins]

On 11 Nov 2003 04:25:56 -0800, (Ekim) wrote:

>"Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
>landing."

!!!

Use all the tools in your box, in all the appropriate places, say I.

Rob

--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card

[Peter Duniho]

"Ekim" > wrote in message
om...
> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?

Right.

In fact, the admonition to never go beyond some arbitrarily low bank angle
while in the pattern is thought to be one of the common ways that
low-altitude stall/spin accidents happen. Pilot thinks steep bank angles
are bad, is overshooting final, tries to compensate without a steep bank
angle by using rudder to get the nose around, then stalls in the skidding
turn.

It's obviously much better if you can always fly a nice, easy pattern. But
when things don't go perfectly, the right thing to do is *fly the airplane*,
doing what's necessary to acheive your goals safely. Coordinated flight is
safe. Slips are safe. If the turn needs to be steeper in order to keep the
plane coordinated, so be it. If you need to slip to correct for extra
altitude on final, go right ahead.

There may well be situations in which the more prudent decision is to go
around and try again. You are expected to identify those situations and
take appropriate action when necessary. But there's nothing inherently
wrong with a steep turn or a slip that automatically requires such an
action.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message ...
> [...] You should always be dividing your attention between inside
> and outside.

IMHO, not even close. Not for VFR flight.

The airplane is perfectly flyable without ANY reference to the instruments,
or anything inside the airplane. Turning base to final is no time to be
wasting ANY effort looking at instruments, and is certainly no time to be
attempting to use the instruments as feedback for control inputs.

A pilot who cannot judge bank angle and coordination without consulting the
turn coordinator and attitude indicator is one who needs to get back to the
basics.

> What happens to low hours, and even high hours pilots when they are
> stressed, is fixating on the view outside the plane and pushing the plane
> into a stall spin trying to turn too tightly back to the runway
centerline.

They only do that if they fail to keep the airplane coordinated. One does
not need to consult the instrument panel in order to keep the airplane
coordinated.

> [...] Pilots, especially students, should be checking airspeed, etc. all
through
> the pattern.

Again, not necessary at all. It's all well and good to keep an eye on
things, of course. But any pilot should be able to go extended periods of
time in the pattern without looking at the ASI or any other instrument.
Airspeed in particular should be second-nature. Pitch and power will result
in the desired airspeed, and a pilot familiar with the airplane knows what
pitch and power to set in the pattern. Additionally, aircraft noise and
control feel gives you reasonably good information about airspeed (within
five knots or so).

I check my airspeed indicator maybe a couple of times before turning final,
and then maybe two or three more times while flying final, assuming
everything else is going fine. It's certainly not a significant part of my
visual scan. The vast majority of my visual scan is devoted to looking
outside the airplane.

Pete

[Malcolm Teas]

(Ekim) wrote in message >...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."

At my school we were told "not more than 30 degrees of bank in the
pattern". I personally heard from my instructors to keep the ball
centered unless you were slipping. We did practice slipping, it was
regarded as something you needed to know and show you could do it, but
not normal procedure.

I also heard a lot of "more right rudder", but that was just me... :)

-Malcolm

[Roger Long]

You've been flying a long, long time and I'm sure you've forgotten a lot
about being low hours:)

I think we're talking about learning here, getting TO the basics; not
getting back to them. How do you learn to fly using only the windshield and
the seat of your pants except by looking at the instruments? How can you
learn the proper feel of 75 knots unless you know it is 75 knots?

Sure, a better way of teaching flying would be to cover up the instruments
and have the CFI go, "A little faster, you're skidding a bit, less
bank....". But, they don't do that. They teach you a little bit and then
send you up there on your own.

Like most pilots, I look at the instruments less and less in the pattern as
I gain experience. I look at airspeed and RPM a lot in pattern work to be
sure I'm remaining consistent. A lot means a quick glance at midfield,
base, and final. If you don't check, what feels like 75 knots could easily
drift up or down. Like you, I hardly look below the glareshield on most
regular landings unless I haven't flown in a while.

It's different when too when you fly a lot. Many pilots can only fly 2 - 3
times a month. It's easy to argue that they should leave the air to pros
like yourself but GA wouldn't exist as we know it if they did. There is
also the issue of flying different aircraft. One 172 will feel and sound
very different at a certain speed than another. The low time pilot who
forgets to adjust his seat may not allow for a different sight picture.
Flying a 152 one day and a 172 a few days later as often happens in some
training situations can get the student who ignores the panel in trouble.

Telling students and low frequency fliers that they should not include the
instruments in their scan is actually dangerous advice.

--
Roger Long

>
> The airplane is perfectly flyable without ANY reference to the
instruments,
> or anything inside the airplane. Turning base to final is no time to be
> wasting ANY effort looking at instruments, and is certainly no time to be
> attempting to use the instruments as feedback for control inputs.
>
> A pilot who cannot judge bank angle and coordination without consulting
the
> turn coordinator and attitude indicator is one who needs to get back to
the
> basics.

[Ken Hornstein]

In article >,
Peter Duniho > wrote:
>A pilot who cannot judge bank angle and coordination without consulting the
>turn coordinator and attitude indicator is one who needs to get back to the
>basics.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?

--Ken

[Ron Natalie]

"Malcolm Teas" > wrote in message om...

> At my school we were told "not more than 30 degrees of bank in the
> pattern". I personally heard from my instructors to keep the ball
> centered unless you were slipping.

All good advice.

> We did practice slipping, it was
> regarded as something you needed to know and show you could do it, but
> not normal procedure.

It's essential to crosswind landings.

> I also heard a lot of "more right rudder", but that was just me... :)

Standard flight instructor mantra.

[David B. Cole]

Mike made a good point about the difference in stall characteristics
between a slip and a skid. Based on my reading and from really
thinking about the aerodynamics of both, a slip is more spin
'resistant' than a skid for several reasons. Notice I said resistant
and not proof. Probably the most important reason is that in a slip
the roll and yaw component have been decoupled. In other words the
direction of roll and yaw are opposite. This is one reason why the
wings return to level first in a stall from a slip. If you think
about what each control input is doing to the AOA on each wing in a
slip it should become clear that the high wing stall first. In a
skid, the opposite is true and both roll and yaw are in the same
direction, which is a bad thing. In a skid the lower wing stalls
first and as Mike said, you'll probably find yourself inverted
quickly.

Another benefit of a slip is that a large area of the elevator is
blanked by the vertical stabilizer because the relative wind is
coming more from the side. Therefore, because airflow is blocked over
a portion of the elevator, there may not be enough elevator authority
to stall the plane. The third point is that with the relative wind
coming from the side, the fuselage is also acting as a lifting
surface, just not an effective one. A few good books to read on the
subject would be Emergency Maneuver Training by Stowell, Stalls,
Spins, and Safety by Sammy Mason, and Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
to name a few.

Dave
(Ekim) wrote in message >...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."
>
> These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
> during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
> you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
> is really twisted up in my head.
>
> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?
>
> Thanks,
> Ekim

[Robert Moore]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote

> "Roger Long" wrote in
>> [...] You should always be dividing your attention between
>> inside and outside.
>
> IMHO, not even close. Not for VFR flight.

I'll second that!!! Not even close.

Bob Moore

[Robert Moore]

"Roger Long" wrote

> How do you learn to fly using only the windshield and the seat
> of your pants......

Real easy, it's called attitude flying.

> Sure, a better way of teaching flying would be to cover up the
> instruments and have the CFI go, "A little faster,

No...I said "lower the nose a little...now fix that picture in
your mind".


> They teach you a little bit and then send you up there on your
> own.

No student of mine solo'ed without one whole period in the pattern
with the entire instrument panel covered.
It's called "flying the airplane", not "video gamming".

Bob Moore
ATP CFI

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:12:37 +0000 (UTC), (Ken
Hornstein) wrote:

>In article >,
>Peter Duniho > wrote:
>>A pilot who cannot judge bank angle and coordination without consulting the
>>turn coordinator and attitude indicator is one who needs to get back to the
>>basics.
>
>I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
>coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
>I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
>My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
>but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?
>
>--Ken
If you look straight ahead when you initiate your turn, you can use
your sight over the nose as your "turn and bank" indicator.

Assume you are turning to the right. Here are the three possible
looks you'll see if you 1. don't apply enough rudder. 2. Apply too
much. 3. Apply the right amount.

1. With not enough rudder to counteract differential yaw, you'll see
the nose skid to the left as you bank to the right.

2. With too much rudder, you'll see the nose slip to the right as or
before you bank.

3. With the correct amount of rudder, the nose stays planted straight
ahead as you bank. Once you achieve the sought after bank angle, the
airplane begins turning.

That's right out of the King ground school video and verifiable in
flight. It does work.

Corky Scott

[Peter Duniho]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message ...
> You've been flying a long, long time and I'm sure you've forgotten a lot
> about being low hours:)
> [...]
> Telling students and low frequency fliers that they should not include the
> instruments in their scan is actually dangerous advice.

When I was a student, with relatively few hours, during my night training,
we flew approaches without any interior lights at all, to simulate an
electrical failure. Even at that point, I was able to fly the airplane
without reference to the ASI, turn coordinator, and attitude indicator.

I don't feel that I was an unusually talented student. I had all the same
hurdles to cross as any student, with all the usual learning plateaus.
IMHO, if a private pilot cannot fly the airplane without reference to the
instruments, it is not because they are inherently not able to. It's
because no instructor ever bothered to give them appropriate training.

Pete

[Big John]

Roger

EKM listed what he was told as a student. Those figures are of course
very conservative but used to get an individual up and flying in a
safe manner. As one get more time in the air and more experience, he
can adjust them quite a bit and still survive.

All in all I agree with what you said so put me on the plus side :O)

Tail wind on base.
Overshooting final.
Slow in final turn or on final are things to be avoided or you under
stand how to handle them.

Slip, airspeed and G's are all interrelated to safe flying especially
in the pattern.

Big John


On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:43:27 GMT, "Roger Long"
m> wrote:

>I used to keep my pattern turns to 15 degrees and could fly tight, make the
>airfield if the engine quits, patterns with no problem. Not all planes will
>do this but a 172 and a 152 will. Now that I have more experience, I go up
>to 25 but keep to 20 most of the time.
>
>Everything else you wrote, I agree with.
>
>A good rule for the original poster to drill in his head:
>
>If you overshoot the turn to final, take your eyes off the runway, look at
>the instruments, nail the 20 degree bank angle, keep the ball centered, and
>stabilize the airspeed at the proper number for the plane. Just hold that
>until you are almost on the extension line and then turn on to final.
>You'll be amazed in most cases how much room there is left to the threshold.
>Focusing on the aircraft attitude instead of being late in the turn will
>help avoid getting slow and when you overshoot.
>
>If you did make your turn too close, getting back on centerline will get you
>set up for a proper go around.

[Roger Long]

Guilty as charged of poor word choice. The key point is that an overshot
turn, in most cases, doesn't have to even be salvaged. Just hold normal
pattern turn attitude and you'll come back to centerline in time to get down
on most runways used by anything larger than trainers. Holding attitude
instead of trying to increase the turn with bank and or rudder is the core
message. Even if you are going around, you want to get back to the
centerline in case someone is flying a real tight downwind. Holding that 20
degree bank until you get there will make it easier to look for them.

I got us off on instrument use which is really a separate discussion that
applies to all pattern flying; not just an overshot turn. If I were a CFI
and my student got into that position, I would sure want to think he would
take a quick check at the gauges to be sure he hadn't strayed too far out of
the envelope instead of thinking he wasn't supposed to do that and trying to
feel his way out.

Learning to rely less on the instruments, attitude flying, and all that is
an important part of training and an objective for proficiency. However,
"Don't look at the panel!", is not a dogma that should be handed out to
blindly apply to all landing situations. Learning to fly without reference
to the instruments is something the student should be initially doing with a
CFI in the right seat. Most students will be overshooting a number of final
turns before they are ready to judge RPM, airspeed, and coordination
without instruments.

Being able to get a plane landed with out looking at the instruments is one
thing. Flying a precise pattern, landing in the minimum distance, at the
lowest touchdown speed is another. Most pilots are not going to be able to
maintain the level of proficiency where they can do those things safely
without a glance at the panel at certain points in the pattern. Flying like
it was flight simulator is a different issue which should be addressed.

Pilots should practice patterns without looking at gauges. They should also
do patterns with gauge checks to be sure that they really are flying the
flight profile they are practicing.

A sad but true thing is that the kind of training most students are going to
get will require that they use the instruments as checks while they teach
themselves how to fly the pattern properly. Having CFI's who teach attitude
flying properly telling them in a forum like this that looking at the panel
is a bad thing is, in my view, a bad thing.

--
Roger Long

A Lieberman > wrote in message
...
> Roger Long wrote:
>
> > Sure it is, if you are a low time student pilot trying to salvage an
> > overshot turn before you have developed a good feel for the plane.
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> Just "my opinion". but salvage and student in the same sentence is a bad
> choice of words.
>
> If the low time student overshot the turn to the point where the word
> salvage comes into play, I would suggest just going around and trying
> again.....
>
> Allen
> (who is not a CFI).

[Peter Duniho]

"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
> coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
> I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
> My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
> but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?

I will bet that you can at least judge coordination well enough to avoid
serious problems.

Keeping the ball smack in the middle is a lot harder than making sure the
airplane isn't skidding dangerously. In fact, I suspect most people who
claim that they need the turn coordinator are simply underestimating the
sensitivity of that instrument. You can keep your flying pretty good and
still have the ball slip out of center a little bit.

Pete

[Michael]

(Ekim) wrote
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."
>
> These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
> during pattern training as a student pilot.

Too bad. They're mostly poor procedure.

Don't cross control in climb and cruise - it's inefficient. Keep the
ball centered. Same while practicing stalls and slow flight - you're
pretty likely to drop a wing, or even spin, if you stall
uncoordinated. You can't slip without cross controlling, and you
can't make decent crosswind landings without slipping.

20 degrees of bank is ridiculous. ANY amount of bank is OK, as long
as you keep some things in mind. Stall speed goes up in a banked turn
- so make sure you maintain enough airspeed for a safe margin. At 45
degrees of bank, stall speed goes up about 20%, so 1.2 Vso isn't
really safe anymore. Keep the speed up at 1.4 Vso, and banking 45
degrees in the pattern is no problem. You can always slow to 1.2 Vso
on final.

Slipping on final is a normal way to control glideslope in a light
single engine airplane. Some airplanes, lacking flaps, allow no other
way unless you want to bet it all on the engine.

> Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
> spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
> contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
> "low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?

Actually, all that preaching was to reduce your CFI's level of
discomfort. I bet the CFI's who told you this stuff were all airline
pilot wannabes, building hours until they could get hired by the
commuters. These guys are often taught flight procedures that are
appropriate for heavy, multiengine airplanes from day one, because
that's what they're going to be flying. The problem is that it's all
they know AND they are inexperienced, so anything else scares them.
Thus they teach you to do it the only way they know. It would be OK
if you were also going on to the airlines, but if that's not your goal
they've done you a great disservice. As another poster mentioned,
flying this way means you will never be able to fly a taildragger.
You will also never be able to operate from the really interesting -
meaning short, rough, and obstructed - strips. But as long as you
stick to flying simple non-demanding airplanes from long smooth
runways you will be fine.

> In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
> the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
> steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
> Right?

Yes, absolutely.

However, you may find getting a taildragger endorsement to be a
worthwhile investment in your flying skills. It will give you an
opportunity to unlearn the bad habits you've been taught.

Michael

[Tom S.]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Malcolm Teas" > wrote in message
om...
>
> > At my school we were told "not more than 30 degrees of bank in the
> > pattern". I personally heard from my instructors to keep the ball
> > centered unless you were slipping.
>
> All good advice.
>
> > We did practice slipping, it was
> > regarded as something you needed to know and show you could do it, but
> > not normal procedure.
>
> It's essential to crosswind landings.
>
> > I also heard a lot of "more right rudder", but that was just me... :)
>
> Standard flight instructor mantra.
>
Okay...flame war time!

OWT: Power determines pitch, and pitch determines speed.

[A Lieberman]

Roger Long wrote:

> Sure it is, if you are a low time student pilot trying to salvage an
> overshot turn before you have developed a good feel for the plane.

Hi Roger,

Just "my opinion". but salvage and student in the same sentence is a bad
choice of words.

If the low time student overshot the turn to the point where the word
salvage comes into play, I would suggest just going around and trying
again.....

Allen
(who is not a CFI).

[mike regish]

power plus pitch equals performance

mike regish

"Tom S." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "Malcolm Teas" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > > At my school we were told "not more than 30 degrees of bank in the
> > > pattern". I personally heard from my instructors to keep the ball
> > > centered unless you were slipping.
> >
> > All good advice.
> >
> > > We did practice slipping, it was
> > > regarded as something you needed to know and show you could do it, but
> > > not normal procedure.
> >
> > It's essential to crosswind landings.
> >
> > > I also heard a lot of "more right rudder", but that was just me... :)
> >
> > Standard flight instructor mantra.
> >
> Okay...flame war time!
>
> OWT: Power determines pitch, and pitch determines speed.
>
>

[Roger Long]

But look what you turned into. You are obviously an ubermench.

--
Roger Long

Peter Duniho > wrote in message
...
> "Roger Long" m> wrote
in
> message ...
> > You've been flying a long, long time and I'm sure you've forgotten a lot
> > about being low hours:)
> > [...]
> > Telling students and low frequency fliers that they should not include
the
> > instruments in their scan is actually dangerous advice.
>
> When I was a student, with relatively few hours, during my night training,
> we flew approaches without any interior lights at all, to simulate an
> electrical failure. Even at that point, I was able to fly the airplane
> without reference to the ASI, turn coordinator, and attitude indicator.
>
> I don't feel that I was an unusually talented student. I had all the same
> hurdles to cross as any student, with all the usual learning plateaus.
> IMHO, if a private pilot cannot fly the airplane without reference to the
> instruments, it is not because they are inherently not able to. It's
> because no instructor ever bothered to give them appropriate training.
>
> Pete
>
>

[Ken Hornstein]

In article >,
Peter Duniho > wrote:
>"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
>> I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
>> coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
>> I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
>> My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
>> but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?
>
>I will bet that you can at least judge coordination well enough to avoid
>serious problems.

Well, shoot .... how do I tell? I mean, I have _no_ sense of coordination.
If you were to put me in a skid, I have no idea how that feels. During
climbout, I always have to cross-check with the ball to make sure I'm
coordinated; I can never do that on feel. I'm better with that now, but
that's because I know the right amount of control pressure to use on
the rudder, not because I know what coordinated flight feels like.
During slips, the only thing that tells me I'm in a slip is the ball.

--Ken

[Ken Hornstein]

In article >,
Corky Scott > wrote:
>If you look straight ahead when you initiate your turn, you can use
>your sight over the nose as your "turn and bank" indicator.
>
>Assume you are turning to the right. Here are the three possible
>looks you'll see if you 1. don't apply enough rudder. 2. Apply too
>much. 3. Apply the right amount.
>[...]

Okay, I learned that during the coordination exercises; that I got, but
only because it's got an obvious sight picture. But that only helps
during the roll-in and roll-out of the turn, right? In other flight
regimes (e.g., climb-out), I don't seem to have the kinesthetic sense
indicating coordination. Maybe I do, and I'm just not recognizing it,
but that doesn't help me :-/

--Ken

[mike regish]

You'll feel like you're sliding across the seat one way or the other. Or
like you're going around a curve in a car instead of just being pushed
straight down in the seat.

mike regish

"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Peter Duniho > wrote:
> >"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
> >> coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
> >> I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
> >> My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination
"naturally",
> >> but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?
> >
> >I will bet that you can at least judge coordination well enough to avoid
> >serious problems.
>
> Well, shoot .... how do I tell? I mean, I have _no_ sense of
coordination.
> If you were to put me in a skid, I have no idea how that feels. During
> climbout, I always have to cross-check with the ball to make sure I'm
> coordinated; I can never do that on feel. I'm better with that now, but
> that's because I know the right amount of control pressure to use on
> the rudder, not because I know what coordinated flight feels like.
> During slips, the only thing that tells me I'm in a slip is the ball.
>
> --Ken

[mike regish]

Good article in one of my mags (Plane and pilot maybe?) about seat of the
pants flying. It's called that for a reason. Cause the butt knows.

Listen to your butt, grasshopper.

mike regish

"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Corky Scott > wrote:
> >If you look straight ahead when you initiate your turn, you can use
> >your sight over the nose as your "turn and bank" indicator.
> >
> >Assume you are turning to the right. Here are the three possible
> >looks you'll see if you 1. don't apply enough rudder. 2. Apply too
> >much. 3. Apply the right amount.
> >[...]
>
> Okay, I learned that during the coordination exercises; that I got, but
> only because it's got an obvious sight picture. But that only helps
> during the roll-in and roll-out of the turn, right? In other flight
> regimes (e.g., climb-out), I don't seem to have the kinesthetic sense
> indicating coordination. Maybe I do, and I'm just not recognizing it,
> but that doesn't help me :-/
>
> --Ken

[Dave Stadt]

"Malcolm Teas" > wrote in message
om...
> (Ekim) wrote in message
>...
> > "Never cross control!!!"
> > "Keep that ball centered!"
> > "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> > "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> > landing."
>
> At my school we were told "not more than 30 degrees of bank in the
> pattern". I personally heard from my instructors to keep the ball
> centered unless you were slipping.


We did practice slipping, it was
> regarded as something you needed to know and show you could do it, but
> not normal procedure.

How, pray tell, do you land in a cross wind? I think I am starting to
understand why watching people land in a cross wind is so entertaining but
hell on the airframe. Slips are one of the most usefull tools you can
develop. It's a shame you have missed that important part of your training.

> I also heard a lot of "more right rudder", but that was just me... :)
>
> -Malcolm

[Bruce Bockius]

(Ekim) wrote in message >...
> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."

Never slip unless it is an emergency landing? That's a great time to
be learning how your plane handles in a slip!

I wouldn't want to try to fly into a short strip, or Oshkosh during
the fly-in, or in a plane without flaps following those rules.

They are conservative rules that were designed to keep you out of
trouble, and force you to fly a standard, predictable and coordinated
pattern while learning (a good idea). But your plane is capable of
much more, and with practice you can be too.

-Bruce B

[Peter Duniho]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message ...
> But look what you turned into. You are obviously an ubermench.

I appreciate the compliment, but I don't see what it has to do with the
question at hand.

[Ken Hornstein]

In article <rxdsb.127082$9E1.626279@attbi_s52>,
mike regish > wrote:
>Good article in one of my mags (Plane and pilot maybe?) about seat of the
>pants flying. It's called that for a reason. Cause the butt knows.
>
>Listen to your butt, grasshopper.

I tried ... my butt's stupid, I guess. Unfortunately, I always run into
problems like this ... common explanations are "you should feel it in
your butt/seat of the pants/take your pick". Well, I _don't_. No one
can really explain to me what I'm supposed to feel. I suspect there are
a bunch of cues that contribute to this feeling, and I'm just not
putting them all together. Other than flying a lot, I'm not sure how
I'm supposed to train for this.

--Ken

[BTIZ]

> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."

If you never use a slip until it's an emergency.. you may not do it right
when you need to..

Slip to landing is part of the Glider Practical Test Standard..

BT

[Peter Duniho]

"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
> I tried ... my butt's stupid, I guess. Unfortunately, I always run into
> problems like this ... common explanations are "you should feel it in
> your butt/seat of the pants/take your pick".

IMHO, statements like that are too vague to be really helpful. This is a
common problem with instructors. They only have one way to say something,
and it's often not an informative way. They have a terrible time adjusting
to different students.

> Well, I _don't_. No one
> can really explain to me what I'm supposed to feel. I suspect there are
> a bunch of cues that contribute to this feeling, and I'm just not
> putting them all together. Other than flying a lot, I'm not sure how
> I'm supposed to train for this.

Start with the extreme cases and work back from that. Get an instructor to
help.

Mike's comments have been the most helpful so far, IMHO. In a car, if you
turn a corner quickly, I assume you'd be able to tell with your eyes closed
whether the turn was a right turn or a left, correct? The reason is that
your body is pushed to one side of the car or the other by centrifugal force
(ignore anyone who replies to this telling you or me that there is no such
thing :) ). If your body tries to slide to the right, it's a left turn and
vice a versa. This corresponds to a skid in an airplane.

Likewise, if the car is traveling across a slope (rather than up or down
one), it will be tilted ("banked"). You'd be able to tell which direction
the car is tilted by the direction your body is being pushed. If your body
tries to slide to the right, the car is tilted to the right (it's lower on
the right side) and vice a versa. This corresponds to a slip in an
airplane.

The rudder is used to negate any such "body sliding". If your body is
sliding to the left, you need more left rudder (or less right rudder). If
your body is sliding to the right, you need more right rudder (or less left
rudder).

Now, to demonstrate this in an airplane, fly a level slip. That is, in
level flight bank to one direction or the other and use the rudder to hold
the heading constant. You'll find your body trying to slide toward the
downhill side of the airplane. This is your "butt" telling you that you are
in uncoordinated flight. You might need a pretty decent bank angle for you
to notice this, but any airplane ought to be able to slip with a large
enough angle that you can feel what we're talking about.

You can also do the same exercise with the skid. In level flight, yaw the
aircraft with the rudder while keeping the wings level with the aileron.
Use a lot of rudder input. Again, your body will try to slide, only this
time it will be toward the outside of the yaw or turn. And again, this is
your "butt" telling you that you are in uncoordinated flight.

Especially for the skidding case (but also for the slipping case), you'll
want to make sure you keep your speed up so that you don't stall. Va is
probably a good target. You'll need extra power to keep the speed up as
drag increases during the uncoordinated flight. One reason for bringing an
instructor along is to ensure that you go through the demonstrations safely,
and another reason is to make sure that you actually get a nice, clear
demonstration (by yourself, you might be too hesitant to get enough control
input in for you to really notice what's going on).

I simply don't believe that you are incapable of distinguishing coordinated
and uncoordinated flight without the use of the turn coordinator. For minor
deviations, the difference is subtle, to be sure. But with the proper
demonstration, I think you will be well on your way to easy, coordinated
flight without worrying about the instrument.

I'll also reiterate that even if you don't immediately learn to distinguish
small deviations, you certainly ought to be able to distinguish deviations
large enough to be a safety issue. I suspect you already can, and just
don't know it because no one ever showed you that you can.

Pete

[Bob Fry]

(Ekim) writes:

> "Never cross control!!!"
> "Keep that ball centered!"
> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
> landing."

I understand. It took me a long time to get rid of that kind of stuff
too.

If you can, get some instruction and time in a J-3 Cub. It slips
beautifully and will cure you of worries about cross-controlling, etc.
There's no flying experience like slipping a Cub to landing on a grass
strip on a warm summer evening, the strong Delta breeze offering a
hint of a cool, pleasant night. In the distance, I can easily see the
skyscrapers and Capitol Building of downtown, but as I turn onto final
my only thoughts are to avoid that big, damn oak tree right at the
base of the levee on the Sacramento River. That, and the power lines.
It's a game to see how close I

Oops. Got carried away in my little daydream. The Aircoupe I have
now has rudder pedals but doesn't slip for squat. But seriously, get
some Cub time and get those feet moving. Then get a spin endorsement
and you'll be a happy flyer.

[Bob Fry]

"Peter Duniho" > writes:

> "Roger Long" m> wrote in
> message ...
> > [...] You should always be dividing your attention between inside
> > and outside.
>
> IMHO, not even close. Not for VFR flight.

Have to agree with this.

Look: with an instructor, cover up the airspeed indicator, the gyros,
all that crap. Try flying around the pattern a couple of times. Get
used to it. There, not so bad, eh? You don't really need that stuff.

[Don Tuite]

On 11 Nov 2003 17:50:35 -0800, Bob Fry > wrote:

(Ekim) writes:
>
>> "Never cross control!!!"
>> "Keep that ball centered!"
>> "Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
>> "Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
>> landing."
>
>I understand. It took me a long time to get rid of that kind of stuff
>too.
>
>If you can, get some instruction and time in a J-3 Cub. It slips
>beautifully and will cure you of worries about cross-controlling, etc.
>There's no flying experience like slipping a Cub to landing on a grass
>strip on a warm summer evening, the strong Delta breeze offering a
>hint of a cool, pleasant night. In the distance, I can easily see the
>skyscrapers and Capitol Building of downtown, but as I turn onto final
>my only thoughts are to avoid that big, damn oak tree right at the
>base of the levee on the Sacramento River. That, and the power lines.
>It's a game to see how close I
>
>Oops. Got carried away in my little daydream. The Aircoupe I have
>now has rudder pedals but doesn't slip for squat. But seriously, get
>some Cub time and get those feet moving. Then get a spin endorsement
>and you'll be a happy flyer.

We ought to be mentioning that the danger in crossing controls is
skids, not slips. A stall from a skid as you hurry yourself around
during an overshot final can have you spinning-in awfully quick.

Kirschner used to have a dandy series of drawings in the old Private
Pilot Guide. Did they go away in the new book?

Don

[Newps]

Ken Hornstein wrote:

>
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
> coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
> I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
> My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
> but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?

I couldn't either for a while, but now I never have to look inside the
plane to land. How many hours do you have?

[Mike O'Malley]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Roger Long" m> wrote in
> message ...
> > [...] You should always be dividing your attention between inside
> > and outside.
>
> IMHO, not even close. Not for VFR flight.
>
> The airplane is perfectly flyable without ANY reference to the instruments,
> or anything inside the airplane. Turning base to final is no time to be
> wasting ANY effort looking at instruments, and is certainly no time to be
> attempting to use the instruments as feedback for control inputs.

<snip lots of good stuff>

I'll make that another "me too" post. You want to learn how to fly without
instruments? Get a lesson in a Cub, or another tandem seat airplane you fly
from the back. Most have only an airspeed, tach and altimeter, and with an
instructor in front, all you can see is a little bit of the tach.

You learn to fly by feel, by noting what the engine sounds like and where your
throttle is at a certian RPM, and what the pitch attitude looks like in all
regimes of flight. And for the pilot who didn't know what "uncoordinated" felt
like, swinging back and forth in the tail will show 'ya. If not, open the door
and windows. If the wind isn't hitting your face, you're coordinated.

FWIW, I learned to fly in Skyhawks and Archers. Then I towed banners for a few
seasons in Cubs and PA-12's. One of our planes had an airspeed indicator out of
an Aztec (ever see a Cub with a blue line?) For most of our pattern and towing,
the airspeed just wasn't sensative enough, and would sit on the peg. After
about the second day, you didn't even miss it. My second season, I went and
flew a "new" PA-12. I picked up two banners before I even looked at the
airspeed indicator, because you learn what it "feels" like.

--
Mike

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On 11 Nov 2003 04:25:56 -0800, (Ekim) wrote:

>"Never cross control!!!"
>"Keep that ball centered!"
>"Never use more than 20 degrees bank!"
>"Too high on final - go around. Never slip unless its an emergency
>landing."
>
>These are things that were hammered in my head by my numerous CFIs
>during pattern training as a student pilot. Now that I have my PPL,
>you would think I should have this understood. Unfortunately, now this
>is really twisted up in my head.
>
>Was all that preaching JUST to reduce the chance of invoking a deadly
>spin in case the wings are accidentally stalled? It seems to all
>contradict everything about slips on final and the famous
>"low-wing-into-the-wind" crosswind landings?
>
>In my mind, as long as I keep my airspeed sufficiently high and keep
>the nose pointed down, (ie. keep my AOA under control) things like a
>steeper banks and routine slip to landings should be relatively safe.
>Right?
>
>Thanks,
>Ekim

Now that you have your PPL, you should seek out some experienced
instructors. The "numerous CFIs" you had "during pattern training as a
student pilot" have done you a great disservice by hammering those things
into your head.

As a matter of fact, every single one of those caveats are WRONG, depending
on the phase of flight and type aircraft you are flying. They are
certainly WRONG for the usual GA aircraft.

(They may be correct if you are learning to fly B-52's or other large
aircraft with which I am not familiar).



Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Steve Robertson]

Here's a bet for you: I bet that a metric ****load more GA pilots have crashed
due to NOT looking at the instruments (like in IMC) than have crashed due to
(over)reliance on instruments.

It's a great exercise to do a landing with the ASI, etc. out once in a while
whether a student or experienced pilot just to know that it can be done in the
event of an instrument failure. But I will tell you that when one is faced with
it, either real or simulated, it is a grave mistake to fly any sort pattern
other than an unhurried one with gentle turns. There is no good reason to
compound one problem (e.g. ASI inop) with another (steep
turn/uncoordinated/sudden pitch changes/etc.). Most accidents, including
training accidents, are caused by a series of events and bad decisions - not
just one. You know, my old C-150 was real easy to land without looking at the
ASI. It had a low stall speed, lots of warning before a stall, and a wide band
of approach speeds that would work. But my Musketeer, while easier in general to
fly and land, has a high(er) stall speed, little warning before a stall, and a
narrow band of approach speeds that will work. Can I land without an ASI? Damn
skippy I can, but I'm going to take advantage of everything in my toolbox if it
comes to it. I'll try to go to an airport with a long runway, make shallow
turns, use full flaps, keep the ball centered, and I'm not going to practice it
either. It's just not worth it.

Stepping up on an even higher soap box now: I get absolutly worn out with the
guys who want to tell everybody that they aren't a good/safe/real pilot if they
aren't completely minimalist and avoid use of any new-fangled inventions. Like
the slip/skid ball. Oh please! "Boy, you just ain't a real pilot if you can't
fly a tail dragger". Fine. I don't want to be a "real" pilot then. Tricycle gear
is easier and safer. Ask your insurance man if you want proof. Good enough for
me. "Back in my day, we had to learn to spin them aeroplanes. You just ain't no
kinda pilot if you don't do it and like it.". Well why is it now that spin
avoidance rather than spin training is taught that the occurance of stall/spin
accidents is lower? And so forth. If you want to fly a plane with no dials, then
go right ahead. Just stop telling everybody that you are superior to those of us
who divide their time properly to looking at the panel and out the window.

Off my soap box now.

Best regards,

Steve Robertson, CFI and old guy
N4732J 1967 Beechcraft A23-24 Musketeer Super III

Roger Long wrote:

> Guilty as charged of poor word choice. The key point is that an overshot
> turn, in most cases, doesn't have to even be salvaged. Just hold normal
> pattern turn attitude and you'll come back to centerline in time to get down
> on most runways used by anything larger than trainers. Holding attitude
> instead of trying to increase the turn with bank and or rudder is the core
> message. Even if you are going around, you want to get back to the
> centerline in case someone is flying a real tight downwind. Holding that 20
> degree bank until you get there will make it easier to look for them.
>
> I got us off on instrument use which is really a separate discussion that
> applies to all pattern flying; not just an overshot turn. If I were a CFI
> and my student got into that position, I would sure want to think he would
> take a quick check at the gauges to be sure he hadn't strayed too far out of
> the envelope instead of thinking he wasn't supposed to do that and trying to
> feel his way out.
>
> Learning to rely less on the instruments, attitude flying, and all that is
> an important part of training and an objective for proficiency. However,
> "Don't look at the panel!", is not a dogma that should be handed out to
> blindly apply to all landing situations. Learning to fly without reference
> to the instruments is something the student should be initially doing with a
> CFI in the right seat. Most students will be overshooting a number of final
> turns before they are ready to judge RPM, airspeed, and coordination
> without instruments.
>
> Being able to get a plane landed with out looking at the instruments is one
> thing. Flying a precise pattern, landing in the minimum distance, at the
> lowest touchdown speed is another. Most pilots are not going to be able to
> maintain the level of proficiency where they can do those things safely
> without a glance at the panel at certain points in the pattern. Flying like
> it was flight simulator is a different issue which should be addressed.
>
> Pilots should practice patterns without looking at gauges. They should also
> do patterns with gauge checks to be sure that they really are flying the
> flight profile they are practicing.
>
> A sad but true thing is that the kind of training most students are going to
> get will require that they use the instruments as checks while they teach
> themselves how to fly the pattern properly. Having CFI's who teach attitude
> flying properly telling them in a forum like this that looking at the panel
> is a bad thing is, in my view, a bad thing.
>
> --
> Roger Long
>
> A Lieberman > wrote in message
> ...
> > Roger Long wrote:
> >
> > > Sure it is, if you are a low time student pilot trying to salvage an
> > > overshot turn before you have developed a good feel for the plane.
> >
> > Hi Roger,
> >
> > Just "my opinion". but salvage and student in the same sentence is a bad
> > choice of words.
> >
> > If the low time student overshot the turn to the point where the word
> > salvage comes into play, I would suggest just going around and trying
> > again.....
> >
> > Allen
> > (who is not a CFI).

[Ron Natalie]

> If you never use a slip until it's an emergency.. you may not do it right
> when you need to..
>
> Slip to landing is part of the Glider Practical Test Standard..
>
It's part of the Private AIRPLANE test standards as well.

[Ron Natalie]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message ...

> We ought to be mentioning that the danger in crossing controls is
> skids, not slips.

And skidding is not normally CROSS controlled.

[Roger Long]

Steve,

Thank you for taking time to write such a long and excellent post. I'm used
to all sorts wacky opinions and divergent viewpoints in these newsgroups but
the near unanimous position that I'm a dangerous nut because I look at my
gauges while flying was startling. I asked the question in the Pilot
Techniques Forum at Cessna Pilots Association where I spend a lot of time
and the unanimous position there backed up my view point. Interesting
cultural difference. A fellow who teaches seminars for advanced pilots
said, "Relying on the sight picture ONLY and not glancing at the airspeed
has resulted in many a flatlander stalling on final at a high altitude
airport. Airspeed, airspeed, airspeed."

I would hate to thing that a student pilot, perhaps not getting the best of
instruction, would look at the consensus of lot of high time pilots here and
decide that he should stop looking at his gauges as opposed to properly
integrating no panel flying into his training.

Let's see if we can get anyone to take you up on your bet:)

--
Roger Long

[Peter Duniho]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message ...
> [...] I asked the question in the Pilot
> Techniques Forum at Cessna Pilots Association where I spend a lot of time
> and the unanimous position there backed up my view point. Interesting
> cultural difference. A fellow who teaches seminars for advanced pilots
> said, "Relying on the sight picture ONLY and not glancing at the airspeed
> has resulted in many a flatlander stalling on final at a high altitude
> airport. Airspeed, airspeed, airspeed."

No one here is proposing one rely ONLY on the sight picture. I made it very
clear that one needs to pay attention to the other sensory input. In
particular, engine and airstream noise along with control feel are very
important and clear indications of airspeed. If all else fails, you have a
stall warning indicator (on any reasonably "modern" airplane), but it really
shouldn't get that far.

The sight picture is useful only for airplane attitude information and for
that, is only completely accurate in unaccelerated flight (though it's still
useful in accelerated flight).

I am always amused when someone takes a debate from one forum, claims to
have posed it in another forum and then comes back and says "well, at least
*those* guys agree 100% with me". It is almost never the case that a) the
nature of the debate was actually conveyed accurately, and b) that the
support in the other forum is as unanimous as claimed (unless the
information posed in the other forum was SO skewed as to be absurdly and
obviously wrong).

Steve's post also demonstrates a sad misinterpretation of the debate at
hand. He's obviously a bit touchy about the subject and is taking things
personally. No one is claiming that he isn't a good pilot just because he
wants to use "new-fangled" inventions, nor is this debate anything like the
"tricycle vs conventional" stuffed-shirt crap. He's getting his ego bent
out of shape for no reason at all.

No one is suggesting that aircraft instruments should be ignored. But to
claim that during VFR flight, the aircraft's instruments deserve anywhere
close to 50% of your attention is just plain absurd. Yes, pilots need to
"divide their time properly to looking at the panel and out the window".
But "divide their time properly" means the vast majority of time is spent
looking OUTSIDE. And those instruments are NOT the primary reference for
maneuvering, not even close.

Pete

[Gig Giacona]

"Ken Hornstein" > wrote in message
...
> In article <rxdsb.127082$9E1.626279@attbi_s52>,
> mike regish > wrote:
> >Good article in one of my mags (Plane and pilot maybe?) about seat of the
> >pants flying. It's called that for a reason. Cause the butt knows.
> >
> >Listen to your butt, grasshopper.
>
> I tried ... my butt's stupid, I guess. Unfortunately, I always run into
> problems like this ... common explanations are "you should feel it in
> your butt/seat of the pants/take your pick". Well, I _don't_. No one
> can really explain to me what I'm supposed to feel. I suspect there are
> a bunch of cues that contribute to this feeling, and I'm just not
> putting them all together. Other than flying a lot, I'm not sure how
> I'm supposed to train for this.
>
> --Ken

Your butt will be doing exactly what the ball in the T&B does in the same
situation.

[Roger Long]

Well, now you're doing it. I never said 50%. Dividing time properly could
be 5% / 95% or even 1% / 99%

Anyway, we've had fun. I think we all know where we stand.

Excuse me, gotta go check my airspeed:)

--
Roger Long

Peter Duniho > wrote in message
...
> "Roger Long" m> wrote
in
> message ...
> > [...] I asked the question in the Pilot
> > Techniques Forum at Cessna Pilots Association where I spend a lot of
time
> > and the unanimous position there backed up my view point. Interesting
> > cultural difference. A fellow who teaches seminars for advanced pilots
> > said, "Relying on the sight picture ONLY and not glancing at the
airspeed
> > has resulted in many a flatlander stalling on final at a high altitude
> > airport. Airspeed, airspeed, airspeed."
>
> No one here is proposing one rely ONLY on the sight picture. I made it
very
> clear that one needs to pay attention to the other sensory input. In
> particular, engine and airstream noise along with control feel are very
> important and clear indications of airspeed. If all else fails, you have
a
> stall warning indicator (on any reasonably "modern" airplane), but it
really
> shouldn't get that far.
>
> The sight picture is useful only for airplane attitude information and for
> that, is only completely accurate in unaccelerated flight (though it's
still
> useful in accelerated flight).
>
> I am always amused when someone takes a debate from one forum, claims to
> have posed it in another forum and then comes back and says "well, at
least
> *those* guys agree 100% with me". It is almost never the case that a) the
> nature of the debate was actually conveyed accurately, and b) that the
> support in the other forum is as unanimous as claimed (unless the
> information posed in the other forum was SO skewed as to be absurdly and
> obviously wrong).
>
> Steve's post also demonstrates a sad misinterpretation of the debate at
> hand. He's obviously a bit touchy about the subject and is taking things
> personally. No one is claiming that he isn't a good pilot just because he
> wants to use "new-fangled" inventions, nor is this debate anything like
the
> "tricycle vs conventional" stuffed-shirt crap. He's getting his ego bent
> out of shape for no reason at all.
>
> No one is suggesting that aircraft instruments should be ignored. But to
> claim that during VFR flight, the aircraft's instruments deserve anywhere
> close to 50% of your attention is just plain absurd. Yes, pilots need to
> "divide their time properly to looking at the panel and out the window".
> But "divide their time properly" means the vast majority of time is spent
> looking OUTSIDE. And those instruments are NOT the primary reference for
> maneuvering, not even close.
>
> Pete
>
>

[Ken Hornstein]

In article >,
Peter Duniho > wrote:
>Mike's comments have been the most helpful so far, IMHO. In a car, if you
>turn a corner quickly, I assume you'd be able to tell with your eyes closed
>whether the turn was a right turn or a left, correct? The reason is that
>your body is pushed to one side of the car or the other by centrifugal force
>(ignore anyone who replies to this telling you or me that there is no such
>thing :) ). If your body tries to slide to the right, it's a left turn and
>vice a versa. This corresponds to a skid in an airplane.

I can feel a (sharp) turn in my car, but it seems like the forces
involved in a turn in a car are much greater than the average turn in
an airplane (at least, that what it feels like to me).

>Now, to demonstrate this in an airplane, fly a level slip. That is, in
>level flight bank to one direction or the other and use the rudder to hold
>the heading constant. You'll find your body trying to slide toward the
>downhill side of the airplane. This is your "butt" telling you that you are
>in uncoordinated flight. You might need a pretty decent bank angle for you
>to notice this, but any airplane ought to be able to slip with a large
>enough angle that you can feel what we're talking about.

Well, hm ... I don't know what to say. I've certainly done plenty of
slips, with the ball pegged at one end of the tube, but I don't really
recall feeling anything like you describe.

>You can also do the same exercise with the skid. In level flight, yaw the
>aircraft with the rudder while keeping the wings level with the aileron.
>Use a lot of rudder input. Again, your body will try to slide, only this
>time it will be toward the outside of the yaw or turn. And again, this is
>your "butt" telling you that you are in uncoordinated flight.

Again, I've done these yaws, mostly for my own curiousity; I've
certainly felt a sensation during the yaw motion, but I don't feel
anything once the yaw is stopped.

>I simply don't believe that you are incapable of distinguishing coordinated
>and uncoordinated flight without the use of the turn coordinator. For minor
>deviations, the difference is subtle, to be sure. But with the proper
>demonstration, I think you will be well on your way to easy, coordinated
>flight without worrying about the instrument.

I'll agree it's probably not impossible for me to learn this; I was just
trying to point out that I don't have this skill, even though my instructor
did try to teach it to me. What I ended up using was using the visual
cues to make sure my turn roll-in and roll-outs were coordinated, and
that worked well enough to pass the checkride. Of course, one shouldn't
use the checkride as the minimum flight proficiency.

>I'll also reiterate that even if you don't immediately learn to distinguish
>small deviations, you certainly ought to be able to distinguish deviations
>large enough to be a safety issue. I suspect you already can, and just
>don't know it because no one ever showed you that you can.

Well, whether or not I can sense this is debatable, I suppose. I can only
tell you that I certainly _think_ I can't sense it.

But next time I go up, I will try some of those exercises you mentioned.
Thanks for the suggestions!

--Ken

[Ken Hornstein]

In article >,
Gig Giacona > wrote:
>Your butt will be doing exactly what the ball in the T&B does in the same
>situation.

You mean my butt will be rolling back and forth in a tube filled with
kerosene? Man, there's more involved to this flying thing than I
thought.

--Ken

[Ken Hornstein]

In article <gEhsb.177262$e01.632969@attbi_s02>,
Newps > wrote:
>> I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never been able to judge turn
>> coordination without the use of the ball (bank angle, I'm "ok" on). If
>> I don't look at the ball, I have no idea if I'm coordinated or not.
>> My instructor tried very hard to get me to judge coordination "naturally",
>> but I just never got it. How do you teach something like that?
>
>I couldn't either for a while, but now I never have to look inside the
>plane to land. How many hours do you have?

Ummm ... I'd have to look at my log book, but call it around 85.

--Ken

[mike regish]

Huh?

mike regish

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...
>
> > We ought to be mentioning that the danger in crossing controls is
> > skids, not slips.
>
> And skidding is not normally CROSS controlled.
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message .. .
> Well, now you're doing it. I never said 50%. Dividing time properly
could
> be 5% / 95% or even 1% / 99%

You're right. That figure was simply an example, my interpretation of more
general and vague comments.

But the actual figure doesn't matter that much. IMHO, any non-zero amount
of time spent watching the instruments while making a downwind-to-base or
base-to-final turn while in the pattern is too much time. That's for any
kind of turn, but becomes especially true in the overshoot case.
Transitioning to instrument flight (as your original post suggested) while
attempting to reintercept final approach in a VFR pattern is just plain
wrong.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
news:IBxsb.184901$e01.665122@attbi_s02...
> > And skidding is not normally CROSS controlled.
>
> Huh?

I think he means that skidding usually doesn't happen in the presence of
opposite aileron input.

"Cross-controlled" is not exactly the same as "uncoordinated".

Pete

[Don Tuite]

I think Ron means I was so terse I uttered nonsense. For what I was
trying to say, see:

http://www.faatest.com/books/FLT/Chapter11/CrossedControlStall.htm

Don

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:28:08 GMT, "mike regish" >
wrote:

>Huh?
>
>mike regish
>
>"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>>
>> "Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> > We ought to be mentioning that the danger in crossing controls is
>> > skids, not slips.
>>
>> And skidding is not normally CROSS controlled.

[Ron Natalie]

"mike regish" > wrote in message news:IBxsb.184901$e01.665122@attbi_s02...
> Huh?
>
Just what I said. Skid is usually caused by the same direction
control rudder input as the stick, just too much. Slips are usually
indicated by crosscontrolled inputs. Of course there are exceptions
to both.

[Roger Long]

The instruments may well be a VFR crutch. This all started by my suggesting
that pilots who are still at the stage where they need a crutch sometimes,
make use of it when they've gotten in a situation where many pilots have
screwed up. Since we are clarifying, I was didn't mean to say (although it
wasn't my best and clearest piece of newsgroup banter) that they should
transition to the instruments and use them to fly through the turn, just
that it would be a good time to check that were still comfortably within the
envelope.

While the underlying cause may well have been lack of proper training or
proficiency, there are certainly a lot of pilots who wish they had checked
their airspeed during their last base to final turn. I wish we could hear
from them but their computer access is kinda blocked right now....

--
Roger Long

Peter Duniho > wrote in message
...
> "Roger Long" m> wrote
in
> message .. .
> > Well, now you're doing it. I never said 50%. Dividing time properly
> could
> > be 5% / 95% or even 1% / 99%
>
> You're right. That figure was simply an example, my interpretation of
more
> general and vague comments.
>
> But the actual figure doesn't matter that much. IMHO, any non-zero amount
> of time spent watching the instruments while making a downwind-to-base or
> base-to-final turn while in the pattern is too much time. That's for any
> kind of turn, but becomes especially true in the overshoot case.
> Transitioning to instrument flight (as your original post suggested) while
> attempting to reintercept final approach in a VFR pattern is just plain
> wrong.
>
> Pete
>
>

[mike regish]

Ah.

mike regish

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "mike regish" > wrote in message
news:IBxsb.184901$e01.665122@attbi_s02...
> > Huh?
> >
> Just what I said. Skid is usually caused by the same direction
> control rudder input as the stick, just too much. Slips are usually
> indicated by crosscontrolled inputs. Of course there are exceptions
> to both.
>
>

[mike regish]

Thing that got me was that when you put in that extra rudder, the plane will
want to bank more in that direction also. The pilot, not wanting to bank
more will apply opposite aileron. Then it becomes cross controlled.

mike regish

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "mike regish" > wrote in message
news:IBxsb.184901$e01.665122@attbi_s02...
> > Huh?
> >
> Just what I said. Skid is usually caused by the same direction
> control rudder input as the stick, just too much. Slips are usually
> indicated by crosscontrolled inputs. Of course there are exceptions
> to both.
>
>

[David CL Francis]

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 at 19:35:28 in message
>, Ken Hornstein >
wrote:
>In article >,
>Peter Duniho > wrote:
[Snip]
>
>>Now, to demonstrate this in an airplane, fly a level slip. That is, in
>>level flight bank to one direction or the other and use the rudder to hold
>>the heading constant. You'll find your body trying to slide toward the
>>downhill side of the airplane. This is your "butt" telling you that you are
>>in uncoordinated flight. You might need a pretty decent bank angle for you
>>to notice this, but any airplane ought to be able to slip with a large
>>enough angle that you can feel what we're talking about.
>
>Well, hm ... I don't know what to say. I've certainly done plenty of
>slips, with the ball pegged at one end of the tube, but I don't really
>recall feeling anything like you describe.
>
>>You can also do the same exercise with the skid. In level flight, yaw the
>>aircraft with the rudder while keeping the wings level with the aileron.
>>Use a lot of rudder input. Again, your body will try to slide, only this
>>time it will be toward the outside of the yaw or turn. And again, this is
>>your "butt" telling you that you are in uncoordinated flight.
>
>Again, I've done these yaws, mostly for my own curiousity; I've
>certainly felt a sensation during the yaw motion, but I don't feel
>anything once the yaw is stopped.
>
And why should you? If an object is travelling at a steady speed in a
straight line then the only thing you should be able to notice is that
the 1 g of gravity is slightly inclined. You should notice a slip with a
30 degree bank all right but small ones would not be very noticeable.
What we notice is also closely connected to what we expect to notice. So
if you expect a given sensation you may not notice it!

I hesitate to put forward anything from my very limited flying
experience from 60 years ago here with all the experience there is.
However I do recall that my instructor never even drew my attention to
the old 'turn and bank' indicator, nor did I ever look at it. I did
steep turns both dual and solo and a couple of dual spins in a Tiger
Moth. When approaching to land I only looked at the speed to make sure
it was right for the degree of flap and to trim to that speed.
Revcounter, altimeter and airspeed were the important ones. Speed was
important if you did a 'go-around' as the flap trim change was quite
large. Flap was lowered in three steps. Final approach with full flap
showed 45 mph would you believe?

I remember on one occasion the grass field was soggy and we had to land
on the runway ( I was used to looking at the windsock and landing into
wind on the grass). I had had a very little training in cross wind
landing but on this occasion as I approached the runway I think I may
have forgotten about the possibility of a cross wind.

I was nicely lined up when I noticed a peculiar wind roar. I realised
that I must be moving sideways and that air was coming through the
poorly shut window. I detected no corresponding sensation. What I had
done was to line up on the runway with crossed controls without ever
giving it any conscious thought. I undid the control inputs and turned
slightly to crab as I had been taught. Landed with a slight squeal of
tyres as I needed more practice to kick the crab off at the right
moment. The aircraft (British Taylorcraft Auster Autocrat) had such a
short landing roll that I could land slightly diagonal on the runway
with no problem at all. The wind was light and so was the cross wind
otherwise my instructor would not have let me off solo.

That was along time ago.

[Snip]
--
David CL Francis