Is rudder required for coordinated turns?

[Mxsmanic]

Is it always necessary to use the rudder to execute a coordinated
turn? When I turn (in simulation) it seems that just rolling the
aircraft suffices, as long as the bank angle isn't too steep. (And
no, I don't have automatic rudder control enabled.)

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Robert M. Gary]

It depends on the plane. High performance planes almost always have
rudder interconnect. Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons. In addition,
these planes are designed to not require much rudder anyway. However,
if the J-3 simulation acts that way, the sim developer doesn't know
what he's doing.

-Robert


Mxsmanic wrote:
> Is it always necessary to use the rudder to execute a coordinated
> turn? When I turn (in simulation) it seems that just rolling the
> aircraft suffices, as long as the bank angle isn't too steep. (And
> no, I don't have automatic rudder control enabled.)
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Jose[_1_]]

> Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
> automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.

Dunno about the Mooney or Bo, but the Arrows I've flown do not have interconnect. You have full individual control of each of the three axis. What it =does= have is differential deflection of the alerons, which reduces adverse yaw. The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
>> Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
>> automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.
>
> Dunno about the Mooney or Bo, but the Arrows I've flown do not have
> interconnect. You have full individual control of each of the three axis.
> What it =does= have is differential deflection of the alerons, which
> reduces
> adverse yaw. The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the
> Ercoupe.

In addition, many airplanes are designed with Frise type ailerons, which
also reduce adverse yaw by creating extra drag on the up-deflected aileron
(to balance the drag on the down-deflected one).

Pete

[Tom Young]

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:02:58 GMT, Jose <...> wrote:
> The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.

Sundowners and some other Beeches have bungees (or springs -- not sure
which) that interconnect the rudder and ailerons. It helps with
coordination but doesn't enforce it.

Tom Young

[nrp]

Tom Young wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:02:58 GMT, Jose <...> wrote:
> > The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.

Our '51 TriPacer (S/N 13) had rudder-to-airleron interconnects which we
hooked up before annual insp but tied off before anyone wanted to fly
it afterwards. I never understood why there was an interconnect.

[Jay Beckman]

"nrp" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Tom Young wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:02:58 GMT, Jose <...> wrote:
>> > The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.
>
> Our '51 TriPacer (S/N 13) had rudder-to-airleron interconnects which we
> hooked up before annual insp but tied off before anyone wanted to fly
> it afterwards. I never understood why there was an interconnect.
>

Marketing.

Some manufacturers wanted people to view flying as being just like driving.
After all, you don't steer a car with your feet, right?

Jay B

[[email protected]]

Cardinals have both aileron-rudder interconnect and Frise ailerons to
counteract adverse yaw.

Bud

Jose wrote:
> > Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
> > automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.
>
> Dunno about the Mooney or Bo, but the Arrows I've flown do not have interconnect. You have full individual control of each of the three axis. What it =does= have is differential deflection of the alerons, which reduces adverse yaw. The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.
>
> Jose
> --
> There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[mike regish]

My Tripacer has the interconnect. I can perform easy turns with aileron
control only and stay coordinated. I can also turn with rudder pedals only,
but the bank kind of lags a little. I am able to cross control for crosswind
landings and slips since the interconnects are connected with springs. Steep
or abrupt turns require some rudder input.

mike

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
>> Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
>> automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.
>
> Dunno about the Mooney or Bo, but the Arrows I've flown do not have
> interconnect. You have full individual control of each of the three axis.
> What it =does= have is differential deflection of the alerons, which
> reduces adverse yaw. The only plane I know of that had interconnect is
> the Ercoupe.
>
> Jose
> --
> There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[mike regish]

Just makes life a little simpler. I once flew from Block Island to Barnes in
Westfield, Ma. without touching the wheel from climbout to final.

mike
"nrp" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Tom Young wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:02:58 GMT, Jose <...> wrote:
>> > The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.
>
> Our '51 TriPacer (S/N 13) had rudder-to-airleron interconnects which we
> hooked up before annual insp but tied off before anyone wanted to fly
> it afterwards. I never understood why there was an interconnect.
>

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article . com>,
"nrp" > wrote:

> Tom Young wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:02:58 GMT, Jose <...> wrote:
> > > The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.
>
> Our '51 TriPacer (S/N 13) had rudder-to-airleron interconnects which we
> hooked up before annual insp but tied off before anyone wanted to fly
> it afterwards. I never understood why there was an interconnect.

When the Pie Chaser was certified (about 1951), interconnect was all the
rage among manufacturers, including Beech and Piper. Personally, I have
always found interconnect to give an objectionable feel to a plane. I
hate the extra load on the controls!

[Robert M. Gary]

Jose wrote:
> Dunno about the Mooney or Bo, but the Arrows I've flown do not have interconnect. You have full individual control of each of the three axis. What it =does= have is differential deflection of the alerons, which reduces adverse yaw. The only plane I know of that had interconnect is the Ercoupe.

I flew a 71 Arrow and it did have an interconnect.

[Mxsmanic]

Robert M. Gary writes:

> It depends on the plane. High performance planes almost always have
> rudder interconnect. Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
> automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.

Do you feel this in the rudder pedals? Also, do you still have
independent rudder control? That is, can you inhibit the automatic
rudder movement, or increase it?

I'll look at the sim aircraft on the ground and see if the rudder is
moving with the ailerons.

> However, if the J-3 simulation acts that way, the sim developer doesn't know
> what he's doing.

What is J-3?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[mike regish]

Yes. The rudder pedals move with aileron control inputs. And yes, they can
be moved independently of the ailerons due to the spring configuration. It
makes slipping down final in a crosswind a little more difficult since you
have the usual control forces due to aerodynamic pressure plus the pressure
applied by the springs. That's why I prefer to crab down final and
straighten out just before the wheels touch down. That's also easier on the
passengers.

A J-3 is a Piper Cub.

mike

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Robert M. Gary writes:
>
>> It depends on the plane. High performance planes almost always have
>> rudder interconnect. Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc
>> automatically move the rudder when you roll the ailerons.
>
> Do you feel this in the rudder pedals? Also, do you still have
> independent rudder control? That is, can you inhibit the automatic
> rudder movement, or increase it?
>
> I'll look at the sim aircraft on the ground and see if the rudder is
> moving with the ailerons.
>
>> However, if the J-3 simulation acts that way, the sim developer doesn't
>> know
>> what he's doing.
>
> What is J-3?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

mike regish writes:

> Yes. The rudder pedals move with aileron control inputs. And yes, they can
> be moved independently of the ailerons due to the spring configuration.

So they move, but you can feel the movement and override it if you
want? I guess that's okay. I have an aversion to true fly-by-wire
systems, but if you know what it's doing and you can override it, it's
probably still safe.

> It makes slipping down final in a crosswind a little more difficult since you
> have the usual control forces due to aerodynamic pressure plus the pressure
> applied by the springs. That's why I prefer to crab down final and
> straighten out just before the wheels touch down. That's also easier on the
> passengers.

The crabbing technique is the only one I've tried in the sim thus far.
It was impossible with just a keyboard; adding a joystick made it
possible, although it's not easy.

> A J-3 is a Piper Cub.

Thanks.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Marc Adler]

Mxsmanic wrote:

> Is it always necessary to use the rudder to execute a coordinated
> turn? When I turn (in simulation) it seems that just rolling the
> aircraft suffices, as long as the bank angle isn't too steep. (And
> no, I don't have automatic rudder control enabled.)

What plane are you using? If I turn off auto rudder control with the
Cessna 172, the little ball is all over the place.

Marc

[Mxsmanic]

Marc Adler writes:

> What plane are you using?

I've been flying the Baron 58 and the 737 from the stock game, plus
the Dreamfleet Bonanza A36 and the PMDG 737-800. In all cases,
standard, gradual turns don't seem to require much rudder input, even
with auto rudder control turned off.

I did look at the A36 from the outside while moving the stick, and the
rudder doesn't move. So presumably the loose connection that the real
aircraft has between ailerons and rudder is not being simulated, but
I'm not really sure (it could be simulated without the video, although
that's unlikely--or it could be so gentle that it's hard to see
movement in the rudder).

> If I turn off auto rudder control with the
> Cessna 172, the little ball is all over the place.

I see the ball move occasionally, but not much. I tend to make
gradual turns, though, especially in large aircraft. (Remember that I
flew MSFS with just a keyboard for 15 years, and that teaches you to
be gentle.)

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Marc Adler]

Mxsmanic wrote:

> I see the ball move occasionally, but not much. I tend to make
> gradual turns, though, especially in large aircraft. (Remember that I
> flew MSFS with just a keyboard for 15 years, and that teaches you to
> be gentle.)

I always fly out of one airport (KAUS) with the weather set to
real-time and the time of day the current time of day (because that's
the airport where (I'm assuming) I'll learn to fly), so maybe the wind
conditions affect performance, because even on level flight the ball in
the inclinometer is hard to keep in place.

Incidentally, speaking of input devices, do any people here who use a
yoke* and who also actually fly think the yoke is more realistic (and
therefore worth the price tag) than the joystick?

Marc

*e.g.:
http://www.pilotshop.com/flight-yoke-p-274.html?osCsid=4b57c3b770371f75234bf5edfca0c21b

[Darrell S[_1_]]

"Rudder" is required to make coordinated rolls into banks in most aircraft.
The next question would be: is the rudder applied automatically by the
movement of the lateral controls? If not, then the pilot may have to
displace the rudder himself. Some aircraft have rudder input applied
automatically when the control column/stick is displaced.

One example of that is the B-58 which has a rudder/elevon interconnect which
uses a computer to determine when, if, how much, and in what direction the
rudder should be moved when the pilot makes a lateral input to the elevons.
In subsonic flight the rudder is normally displaced in the same direction as
the lateral input. In transonic flight the shock wave hits the vertical
stabilizer producing a "rudder" force which has to be corrected. At some
speeds the rudder is actually moved in the opposite direction since the
shockwave force on the vertical stabilizer produces more "rudder" input that
is desirable. The automatic rudder input changes more as the aircraft
accelerates to mach 2.

The B-52 is different also, in that the H model (that I flew) has no
ailerons and uses hydraulic spoilers on the top of the wings to produce the
required roll input. With no speed brakes deployed a roll input causes the
spoilers on the downward moving wing to be deployed, spoiling lift and
dropping the wing. The resultant drag makes a rudder input in that
direction to not be required. Because the spoilers are aft of the center of
lift, deploying a spoiler on a clean wing also causes an undesired pitch up.
In the traffic pattern speed brakes are normally deployed to an intermediate
position. In this case a roll input to the left will cause the left
speedbrake/spoilers to rise further and the right speedbrake/spoilers to
lower somewhat. This about eliminates the pitchup and makes flying more
stable.

That said, most aircraft require a pilot input of rudder to coordinate a
roll input. Little, if any, rudder is required once the roll stops and a
constant bank is maintained. Fancier aircraft have yaw dampers which also
reduces the required pilot rudder input. So, to answer your original
question it is necessary to change your question somewhat. Change the word
"turns" to "rolls", since most rudder coordination is necessary only while
rolling into a bank and little is needed once bank is established to further
coordinate the turn while bank stays constant. In light aircraft the amount
of wing dihedral can affect turn coordination.
--
Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler Web Site URL (below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Is it always necessary to use the rudder to execute a coordinated
> turn? When I turn (in simulation) it seems that just rolling the
> aircraft suffices, as long as the bank angle isn't too steep. (And
> no, I don't have automatic rudder control enabled.)
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Robert M. Gary]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> mike regish writes:
>
> > Yes. The rudder pedals move with aileron control inputs. And yes, they can
> > be moved independently of the ailerons due to the spring configuration.
>
> So they move, but you can feel the movement and override it if you
> want? I guess that's okay. I have an aversion to true fly-by-wire
> systems, but if you know what it's doing and you can override it, it's
> probably still safe.

You can feel it slightly. However it takes very little effort to
override it by pressing the rudder. Actually, in my Mooney is gives a
bit too much rudder such that I give a little bit of outside rudder
when I roll into a turn.

This works the same as your Cessna nosewheel vs rudder. On the ground
the rudder on the Cessna is a little harder to press because you are
moving the tire against the pavement but you can still get rull
deflection of the rudder.

-Robert

[Bob Moore]

Mxsmanic wrote
> I've been flying the Baron 58 and the 737 from the stock game

All swept wing airliners that I am familiar with (Boeings) have
a full time yaw damper that keeps the rudder where it belongs at
all times. The airplanes make perfectly coordinated turns with
one's feet flat on the floor. :-)

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

[Stefan]

Darrell S schrieb:

> That said, most aircraft require a pilot input of rudder to coordinate a
> roll input. Little, if any, rudder is required once the roll stops and a
> constant bank is maintained.

Ever flown a glider? You'd be surprized! A coordinated turn is *always*
a turn around all three axis.

If some powered airplanes don't require rudder, it's because a) the
rudder is somehow coupled to the ailerons, b) the weight of the engine
will cause the nose to drop enough without rudder or c) the pilot
doesn't care enough about being coordinated. My experience says that
power-only pilots tend to solution c). (Note: The ball is a pretty
coarse instrument.)

Stefan

[Peter Dohm]

> Darrell S schrieb:
>
> > That said, most aircraft require a pilot input of rudder to coordinate a
> > roll input. Little, if any, rudder is required once the roll stops and
a
> > constant bank is maintained.
>
> Ever flown a glider? You'd be surprized! A coordinated turn is *always*
> a turn around all three axis.
>
> If some powered airplanes don't require rudder, it's because a) the
> rudder is somehow coupled to the ailerons, b) the weight of the engine
> will cause the nose to drop enough without rudder or c) the pilot
> doesn't care enough about being coordinated. My experience says that
> power-only pilots tend to solution c). (Note: The ball is a pretty
> coarse instrument.)
>
> Stefan

I've only had one introductory flight in a glider and that was more than 20
years ago in a two place Blanick.

The most memorable thing, aside from being about the most fun a person can
have in daylight, is that turn cooridination is much more than rolling in
and rolling out. Due to the combination of slow forward speed (when
spiralling at minimum rate of descent) and long wing span, the wing toward
the inside of the turn is much closer to the stall and a noticeable amount
of cross control is required.

Typically, powered aircraft are rarely flown in that portion of the flight
envelope and many pilots regard turns at low airspeed as extremely dangerous
and an invitation to an unintentional spin. Most of us were taught that the
low end of the airspeed envelope is hazardous and to be avoided in flight,
with the result that very few powered airplane pilots maintain proficiency
in very slow flight. Also, since the wings are short and the stall speeds
are generally higher, I doubt that the effect is ever really noticeable.

As to "c", the yaw string is a lor more sensitive, but takes a little more
practice than I was able to give it--since the doggoned thing works
backward!

Peter
Just my $0.02

[george]

mike regish wrote:
> Yes. The rudder pedals move with aileron control inputs. And yes, they can
> be moved independently of the ailerons due to the spring configuration. It
> makes slipping down final in a crosswind a little more difficult since you
> have the usual control forces due to aerodynamic pressure plus the pressure
> applied by the springs. That's why I prefer to crab down final and
> straighten out just before the wheels touch down. That's also easier on the
> passengers.
>
> A J-3 is a Piper Cub.

That takes me way back to sideslipping DH82's when rudder was used in
bucketfulls :-)

[Mxsmanic]

Bob Moore writes:

> All swept wing airliners that I am familiar with (Boeings) have
> a full time yaw damper that keeps the rudder where it belongs at
> all times. The airplanes make perfectly coordinated turns with
> one's feet flat on the floor. :-)

I thought a yaw damper was just intended to prevent dutch roll.

At least on the 737-800, the yaw damper can be turned on or off at
pilot discretion.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Thomas Borchert]

Marc,

> because even on level flight the ball in
> the inclinometer is hard to keep in place.

Have you compared realism settings yet? Also, in the bigger aircraft,
the ball will move less.

>
> Incidentally, speaking of input devices, do any people here who use a
> yoke* and who also actually fly think the yoke is more realistic (and
> therefore worth the price tag) than the joystick?
>

As long as the yoke also has engine controls, I'd say yes, it's worth
it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-09-19, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Is it always necessary to use the rudder to execute a coordinated
> turn?

It depends on the aircraft. In something like a Piper Arrow, virtually
no rudder is required for the kind of gentle turns you might do when
flying IFR - you can practically fly it with your feet on the floor.

At the other extreme is something like most gliders which need
significant rudder input when initiating a turn. Somewhere in between
are aircraft such as the Cessna 140, which needs some rudder when
initiating any turn, but not boot loads of rudder.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Bob Moore]

Mxsmanic wrote
> At least on the 737-800, the yaw damper can be turned on or off at
> pilot discretion.

Turned ON and OFF...Yes, but hardly at the pilot's discretion.

I have no 737 experience, but the 727 has 2 rudders and 2 yaw
dampers. If just one of them fails, the pilot must descend below
30,000' and slow to a specified maximum speed, just in case the
other one should fail also.

Bob Moore

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> It depends on the plane. High performance planes almost always have
> rudder interconnect. Planes like Arrows, Mooneys, Bonanzas, etc

My Beech Sundowner has an interconnect, but you still need a tad of input.

I'm pretty sure Arrows don't have an interconnect, but I only know about
the standard version, not the T-tail.

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> In addition, many airplanes are designed with Frise type ailerons, which
> also reduce adverse yaw by creating extra drag on the up-deflected aileron
> (to balance the drag on the down-deflected one).
>
> Pete

Is this the same as "differential" ailerons, more "up" travel than "down"?

[Anno v. Heimburg]

B A R R Y wrote:
> Is this the same as "differential" ailerons, more "up" travel than "down"?

Nope. An illustraion of a friese aileron is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_yaw

[Gary Drescher]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote in message
...
> Most of us were taught that the
> low end of the airspeed envelope is hazardous and to be avoided in flight,
> with the result that very few powered airplane pilots maintain proficiency
> in very slow flight.

Probably true, but (as with everything else in the PP PTS) we're taught that
we *should* practice slow flight (just above stall speed) on occasion (if
for no other reason than to be able to recognize and properly respond to
very low airspeed should we inadvertently find ourselves in that situation
during normal flight).

--Gary

[Peter Dohm]

> > Most of us were taught that the
> > low end of the airspeed envelope is hazardous and to be avoided in
flight,
> > with the result that very few powered airplane pilots maintain
proficiency
> > in very slow flight.
>
> Probably true, but (as with everything else in the PP PTS) we're taught
that
> we *should* practice slow flight (just above stall speed) on occasion (if
> for no other reason than to be able to recognize and properly respond to
> very low airspeed should we inadvertently find ourselves in that situation
> during normal flight).
>
> --Gary
>
>
Hangar flying is not statistically usefull, but annecdotal evidence suggests
that more of us *should* practice slow flight, including turns and
configuration changes, at a safe altitude.

However, you're right and I was wrong to imply a statistic that can't be
documented.

Peter

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Bob Moore wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote
>> At least on the 737-800, the yaw damper can be turned on or off at
>> pilot discretion.
>
> Turned ON and OFF...Yes, but hardly at the pilot's discretion.
>
> I have no 737 experience,


Don't feel bad.... neither does he.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Anno v. Heimburg wrote:
> B A R R Y wrote:
>> Is this the same as "differential" ailerons, more "up" travel than "down"?
>
> Nope. An illustraion of a friese aileron is here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_yaw


THANKS!

[Peter Duniho]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
m...
>> In addition, many airplanes are designed with Frise type ailerons, which
>> also reduce adverse yaw by creating extra drag on the up-deflected
>> aileron (to balance the drag on the down-deflected one).
>
> Is this the same as "differential" ailerons, more "up" travel than "down"?

Well, no. As Anno posted, it's something different.

Interestingly, the post to which I replied was specifically talking about
"differential" deflection, and my post specifically said "in addition". I
think maybe the answer to your question could have been had through more
careful reading. :)

Pete

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> Interestingly, the post to which I replied was specifically talking about
> "differential" deflection, and my post specifically said "in addition". I
> think maybe the answer to your question could have been had through more
> careful reading. :)

Or I possibly thought that the two weren't mutually exclusive and sought
more information.

Sorry I forced you to type an extra response.

[Mxsmanic]

Bob Moore writes:

> Turned ON and OFF...Yes, but hardly at the pilot's discretion.

I don't know what the procedures say for the 737-800. I understand
that it isn't always on (not for takeoffs and landings).

> I have no 737 experience, but the 727 has 2 rudders and 2 yaw
> dampers. If just one of them fails, the pilot must descend below
> 30,000' and slow to a specified maximum speed, just in case the
> other one should fail also.

One big difference is that the 727 had the split rudder, whereas the
737 (and successors) does not.

Here's an interesting but somewhat sensationalized article on
uncommanded rudder movements in the 737 (potentially blamed on the yaw
damper):

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/local/737/part01/

This was in 1996; I'm not sure how things have evolved in the
following decade. It's not ideally relevant to this discussion, but
it's an interesting article (and a very long one).

I'm not sure why an inoperative yaw damper would be a no-go item, but
perhaps the unusual characteristics of the 727 made it so (?).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Capt.Doug]

>"Mxsmanic" wrote in message > This was in 1996; I'm not sure how things
have evolved in the
> following decade.

Procedures were changed for flap/slat extension speeds and the YD actuators
were redesigned.

> I'm not sure why an inoperative yaw damper would be a no-go item, but
> perhaps the unusual characteristics of the 727 made it so (?).

The 727 wasn't unusual in that respect. It's a characteristic of swept wing
aircraft.

D.

[Marc Adler]

Thomas Borchert wrote:

> Have you compared realism settings yet? Also, in the bigger aircraft,
> the ball will move less.

I have the realism settings set to maximum.

> As long as the yoke also has engine controls, I'd say yes, it's worth
> it.

My Christmas list is growing like a tapeworm... <g>

Marc

[Clay]

A rudder on an airplane helps make coordinated turns as do turning
brakes on a farm tractor.

[Julian Scarfe]

"Darrell S" > wrote in message
news:60eQg.26$rS.9@fed1read05...

> That said, most aircraft require a pilot input of rudder to coordinate a
> roll input. Little, if any, rudder is required once the roll stops and a
> constant bank is maintained.

Without rudder input, the yaw required to change the heading of the aircraft
(as its flight path progresses around the turn) must come from the aircraft
being in a slip.

In an aircraft at high speed and/or with high directional stability, the yaw
rate required is low and the slip angle required is small, almost
unoticeable. The ball will be almost centered

In an aircraft at low speed and/or with low directional stability, the yaw
rate required is high and the slip angle required is therefore large. The
ball will be way off to the side.

Thus glider pilots learn to use their feet rather more than fast jet pilots.

Julian