Visual coordination of turns revisited

[Mxsmanic]

I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make coordinated turns
in a PC simulator that does not include a motion platform.

I've turned on the visual alignment indicator that MSFS provides, which is a
red "V" that sits squarely ahead in the visual field, effectively bolted to
the airframe. I've been trying to turn such that this V always moves along
the horizon at a constant speed for a given bank angle. Logically, a specific
bank angle in a coordinated turn will always produce a heading change at the
same speed. If the speed at which the horizon is moving varies, the turn is
not coordinated.

Also, it seems that in a coordinated, level turn, this V should stay at the
same distance above the horizon throughout the turn.

As I roll into a turn, the speed of movement of the V along the horizon should
increase in precise relationship to the bank angle. The opposite should occur
as I roll out of the turn, with the speed along the horizon slowing as I
return to level flight.

Any problems with this? The only remaining problem is to figure out _how_
fast the V should be moving for a given bank angle. Maybe that can come with
practice.

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

[A Lieberma]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make coordinated
> turns in a PC simulator that does not include a motion platform.

Please don't reply to this troll....

If your desire is so bad to reply, set the followups to the sim groups!

Thanks!

Allen

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make
> coordinated turns in a PC simulator that does not include a motion
> platform.
>
> I've turned on the visual alignment indicator that MSFS provides,
> which is a red "V" that sits squarely ahead in the visual field,
> effectively bolted to the airframe. I've been trying to turn such
> that this V always moves along the horizon at a constant speed for a
> given bank angle. Logically, a specific bank angle in a coordinated
> turn will always produce a heading change at the same speed. If the
> speed at which the horizon is moving varies, the turn is not
> coordinated.
>
> Also, it seems that in a coordinated, level turn, this V should stay
> at the same distance above the horizon throughout the turn.
>
> As I roll into a turn, the speed of movement of the V along the
> horizon should increase in precise relationship to the bank angle.
> The opposite should occur as I roll out of the turn, with the speed
> along the horizon slowing as I return to level flight.
>
> Any problems with this? The only remaining problem is to figure out
> _how_ fast the V should be moving for a given bank angle. Maybe that
> can come with practice.

In the real world we don't have that little V superimposed on the wind
sheild. What we do have is that little dodad ball in most cases in the turn
coordinator. Keep that little ball so it looks like this

|O| and you will be in a coordinated turn.

If you want to know how to make that V do what you want you are going to
have to ask in a flight sim newsgroup.

[Mxsmanic]

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

> In the real world we don't have that little V superimposed on the wind
> sheild. What we do have is that little dodad ball in most cases in the turn
> coordinator. Keep that little ball so it looks like this
>
> |O| and you will be in a coordinated turn.

I know, but under VFR I'm supposed to be looking out the window, not staring
at the ball.

I found some Web pages on this; one of them suggests looking out the side of
the aircraft at the wing. If I'm in level flight, the extension of the wing
out the window points to the horizon, and it moves forward (very slowly,
depending on the distance of terrain). If I turn, however--and if the turn is
coordinated--it seems that the extension of the wing will point to a spot on
the ground that remains stationary. This spot is the center of my turn. The
steeper the turn, the closer this spot will be to my aircraft, but it will
always be aligned with the wing. If no spot above the wing is stationary in
the turn, the turn is uncoordinated.

Does that seem logical?

> If you want to know how to make that V do what you want you are going to
> have to ask in a flight sim newsgroup.

The pages I read suggest making a mark on the windshield for the purpose, with
a grease pencil or something. The sim provides a more perfect mark than one
can achieve in real life (because in real life one moves one's head, etc.),
but the same technique can be used in real life. The problem with it, though,
is that I'm not sure how fast the heading should be changing for a given
degree of bank, and it's not clear that there is a way to recognize this
intuitively.

Watching the extension of the wing out the side of the aircraft seems to work,
although it's more awkward. The page I read said you can fly the aircraft all
day by watching the wingtip, and this does indeed seem to be true, although I
suppose one would finish the day with a sore neck.

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

[Tony]

Your model is wrong.


You might check with the sim group on how they do it.

On Feb 7, 6:24 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder writes:
> > In the real world we don't have that little V superimposed on the wind
> > sheild. What we do have is that little dodad ball in most cases in the turn
> > coordinator. Keep that little ball so it looks like this
>
> > |O| and you will be in a coordinated turn.
>
> I know, but under VFR I'm supposed to be looking out the window, not staring
> at the ball.
>
> I found some Web pages on this; one of them suggests looking out the side of
> the aircraft at the wing. If I'm in level flight, the extension of the wing
> out the window points to the horizon, and it moves forward (very slowly,
> depending on the distance of terrain). If I turn, however--and if the turn is
> coordinated--it seems that the extension of the wing will point to a spot on
> the ground that remains stationary. This spot is the center of my turn. The
> steeper the turn, the closer this spot will be to my aircraft, but it will
> always be aligned with the wing. If no spot above the wing is stationary in
> the turn, the turn is uncoordinated.
>
> Does that seem logical?
>
> > If you want to know how to make that V do what you want you are going to
> > have to ask in a flight sim newsgroup.
>
> The pages I read suggest making a mark on the windshield for the purpose, with
> a grease pencil or something. The sim provides a more perfect mark than one
> can achieve in real life (because in real life one moves one's head, etc.),
> but the same technique can be used in real life. The problem with it, though,
> is that I'm not sure how fast the heading should be changing for a given
> degree of bank, and it's not clear that there is a way to recognize this
> intuitively.
>
> Watching the extension of the wing out the side of the aircraft seems to work,
> although it's more awkward. The page I read said you can fly the aircraft all
> day by watching the wingtip, and this does indeed seem to be true, although I
> suppose one would finish the day with a sore neck.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Tony writes:

> Your model is wrong.

What is wrong with the model?

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

[Mxsmanic]

Mark Levin writes:

> Guess what. In VFR conditions real pilots make coordinated turns by feel.

I don't have that option in simulation, so I have to find some other way.

> But of course in your world pilots should never rely on physical sensations
> for anything so I don't know how you would do it.

I guess you'd be lost in IMC, eh?

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

[chris[_1_]]

On Feb 8, 12:24 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder writes:
> > In the real world we don't have that little V superimposed on the wind
> > sheild. What we do have is that little dodad ball in most cases in the turn
> > coordinator. Keep that little ball so it looks like this
>
> > |O| and you will be in a coordinated turn.
>
> I know, but under VFR I'm supposed to be looking out the window, not staring
> at the ball.
>
> I found some Web pages on this; one of them suggests looking out the side of
> the aircraft at the wing. If I'm in level flight, the extension of the wing
> out the window points to the horizon, and it moves forward (very slowly,
> depending on the distance of terrain). If I turn, however--and if the turn is
> coordinated--it seems that the extension of the wing will point to a spot on
> the ground that remains stationary. This spot is the center of my turn. The
> steeper the turn, the closer this spot will be to my aircraft, but it will
> always be aligned with the wing. If no spot above the wing is stationary in
> the turn, the turn is uncoordinated.
>
> Does that seem logical?
>
> > If you want to know how to make that V do what you want you are going to
> > have to ask in a flight sim newsgroup.
>
> The pages I read suggest making a mark on the windshield for the purpose, with
> a grease pencil or something. The sim provides a more perfect mark than one
> can achieve in real life (because in real life one moves one's head, etc.),
> but the same technique can be used in real life. The problem with it, though,
> is that I'm not sure how fast the heading should be changing for a given
> degree of bank, and it's not clear that there is a way to recognize this
> intuitively.
>
> Watching the extension of the wing out the side of the aircraft seems to work,
> although it's more awkward. The page I read said you can fly the aircraft all
> day by watching the wingtip, and this does indeed seem to be true, although I
> suppose one would finish the day with a sore neck.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Step on the ball...

You may or may not know about adverse yaw - when you use the ailerons
they are producing more lift on the upgoing wing, and lift produces
drag so the wing initially moves the wrong way. You need to apply
rudder in the direction of the turn as you are using the ailerons,
then back off the rudder as you centre the yoke / stick. You will
then find you need to apply a small amount of left rudder, no rudder
or right rudder depending on the angle of bank. You will soon work it
out.
I still have to glance at the ball from time to time, but it is
something you do get used to.. Every aircraft is different with
regards to how much rudder you need to apply.

[Tony]

Look up the meaning of coordinated flight and the errors in your model
should be obvious.

On Feb 7, 6:54 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Tony writes:
> > Your model is wrong.
>
> What is wrong with the model?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[chris[_1_]]

On Feb 8, 3:15 pm, "Tony" > wrote:
> Look up the meaning of coordinated flight and the errors in your model
> should be obvious.

Aye??? What does that mean ???

[Newps]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Tony writes:
>
>
>>Your model is wrong.
>
>
> What is wrong with the model?


It's wrong.

[Mxsmanic]

Tony writes:

> Look up the meaning of coordinated flight and the errors in your model
> should be obvious.

In other words, there aren't any errors. Why did you claim otherwise?

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

[Mxsmanic]

Newps writes:

> It's wrong.

That doesn't answer my question.

Do you really believe that a blanket assertion that it is "wrong," followed by
a refusal to explain why, would be credible to anyone seriously interested in
an answer? I suppose that technique might work on the school playground, but
it's not very useful in productive discussions.

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

[Tony]

This might be a productive discussion in a sim group.



On Feb 8, 1:57 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Newps writes:
> > It's wrong.
>
> That doesn't answer my question.
>
> Do you really believe that a blanket assertion that it is "wrong," followed by
> a refusal to explain why, would be credible to anyone seriously interested in
> an answer? I suppose that technique might work on the school playground, but
> it's not very useful in productive discussions.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[d&tm]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make coordinated
turns
> in a PC simulator that does not include a motion platform.
>
> I've turned on the visual alignment indicator that MSFS provides, which is
a
> red "V" that sits squarely ahead in the visual field, effectively bolted
to
> the airframe. I've been trying to turn such that this V always moves
along
> the horizon at a constant speed for a given bank angle. Logically, a
specific
> bank angle in a coordinated turn will always produce a heading change at
the
> same speed. If the speed at which the horizon is moving varies, the turn
is
> not coordinated.
>
> Also, it seems that in a coordinated, level turn, this V should stay at
the
> same distance above the horizon throughout the turn.
>
> As I roll into a turn, the speed of movement of the V along the horizon
should
> increase in precise relationship to the bank angle. The opposite should
occur
> as I roll out of the turn, with the speed along the horizon slowing as I
> return to level flight.
>
> Any problems with this? The only remaining problem is to figure out _how_
> fast the V should be moving for a given bank angle. Maybe that can come
with
> practice.

Does this help?
For a given bank angle ( theta) the time taken for the heading to change 360
degrees in a coordinated turn will be given by

t = 2 Pi v / g tan( theta)

t = time in secs
Pi = 3.14159
g =gravitational accleration 9.8 m/s2
v = speed ( m/s)

Terry
PPL downunder.

[Mxsmanic]

d&tm writes:

> Does this help?
> For a given bank angle ( theta) the time taken for the heading to change 360
> degrees in a coordinated turn will be given by
>
> t = 2 Pi v / g tan( theta)
>
> t = time in secs
> Pi = 3.14159
> g =gravitational accleration 9.8 m/s2
> v = speed ( m/s)

Thanks!

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

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder writes:
>
>> In the real world we don't have that little V superimposed on the
>> wind sheild. What we do have is that little dodad ball in most cases
>> in the turn coordinator. Keep that little ball so it looks like this
>>
>>> |O| and you will be in a coordinated turn.
>
> I know, but under VFR I'm supposed to be looking out the window, not
> staring at the ball.

It isn't a binary set solution. One of the things you learn in basic flight
training is to use the instruments you have without fixating on them.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 7, 2:47 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make coordinated turns
> in a PC simulator that does not include a motion platform.
>
> I've turned on the visual alignment indicator that MSFS provides, which is a
> red "V" that sits squarely ahead in the visual field, effectively bolted to
> the airframe. I've been trying to turn such that this V always moves along
> the horizon at a constant speed for a given bank angle. Logically, a specific
> bank angle in a coordinated turn will always produce a heading change at the
> same speed. If the speed at which the horizon is moving varies, the turn is
> not coordinated.

Nope, that's not true. It may be true on a windless day in absolutely
level
flight with no changes in pitch, altitude, or airspeed, but it's not
true
in a real plane.

In coordinated flight, the tangent of the bank angle is the ratio
of the horizontal component of lift to the vertical component of
lift.
The horizontal component of lift is what produces centripetal
acceleration, and thus turning.

But if you change total lift, you change both components of lift
simultaneously without changing bank angle.

Try this. Set up a 30 degree bank angle, keeping things coordinated,
and then pull back on the stick sharply. Your turn rate will
increase as your lift increases. Push forward on the stick and your
turn rate will decrease as your lift decreases.

I know, you're going to say "but I just have to maintain level
flight during the turn!" True enough, but now your head
has to be down in the cockpit watching the altimeter and VSI,
which is a very indirect way of getting the information that you
would have gotten from looking at the ball (or still more
directly by feeling the seat of your pants in a real plane).

Furthermore, as already pointed out, the centripetal acceleration
is related to the turn rate by an equation that includes airspeed.
If your airspeed changes during the turn, your turn rate will
change. And your airspeed WILL change.

When you set up the bank, you must increase total
lift in order to maintain the vertical component of lift, and
thus maintain altitude. You increase total lift by increasing
angle of attack. This increased angle of attack increases
drag. Absent a corresponding change in power setting,
this causes a drop in airspeed. The drop in airspeed
causes a further requirement to increase pitch in
order to maintain altitude, causing more drag,
etc. Most small planes don't have enough power to
maintain cruise airspeed if the pilot attempts to
maintain altitude while steeply banked. Even in a
plane with plenty of power in reserve, it's not easy
to precisely judge exactly how much additional
power must be applied to keep airspeed exactly
constant through the turn -- typically, the
pilot doesn't worry about such things for small
turns, and keeps the throttle at its cruise setting.

> Also, it seems that in a coordinated, level turn, this V should stay at the
> same distance above the horizon throughout the turn.

No. As stated before, you've got to increase angle of attack to
maintain lift. And as your airspeed drops, you keep having
to further pitch up.

[Danny Deger]

This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to have a
massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window. If you
have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full left. Then
try it with the rudder full right. The only thing I can think of showing up
in the visuals would be a turn rate either more or less than it should be
based on the bank angle.

Give it a try and tell us if you can tell on your sim.

Danny Deger

[Tony]

MX always experiences 1 g straight down. That's as coordinated as you
can get.


Feb 9, 10:43 am, "Danny Deger" > wrote:
> This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to have a
> massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window. If you
> have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full left. Then
> try it with the rudder full right. The only thing I can think of showing up
> in the visuals would be a turn rate either more or less than it should be
> based on the bank angle.
>
> Give it a try and tell us if you can tell on your sim.
>
> Danny Deger

[Don Tuite]

On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 09:43:29 -0600, "Danny Deger"
> wrote:

>This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to have a
>massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window. If you
>have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full left. Then
>try it with the rudder full right. The only thing I can think of showing up
>in the visuals would be a turn rate either more or less than it should be
>based on the bank angle.
>
>Give it a try and tell us if you can tell on your sim.
>
Consider boundary conditions. A slip, for example, could be
considered to be a turn so uncoordinated that there is no turn -- what
you see out the front window just goes by sideways.

Don

[birdog]

"Mark Levin" > wrote in message
...
>
>> On Feb 7, 6:24 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>
>> I know, but under VFR I'm supposed to be looking out the window, not
>> staring at the ball.
>
> Guess what. In VFR conditions real pilots make coordinated turns by feel.
> True you double check with a glance at the ball but it's done primarily by
> feeling whether whether the force is pulling you down or whether it's
> pulling you to one side. Down and you're coordinated. Simple. After a
> while (and not a very long while either) it's just done subconciously. At
> least on the small GA planes I've flown.
>
> But of course in your world pilots should never rely on physical
> sensations
> for anything so I don't know how you would do it.
> ml

This is your answer. In a sim you can't coordinate a turn realistically
without the ball. Why can't you coordinate a turn with quick glances at the
ball? I can do it in a light plane - by feel you can come close, so by quick
glances at the ball to verify, which I think most pilots do, you're doing
the same thing. If you have to sit and stare at the ball in order to
accomplish a coordinated turn, it's not much of a "simulation", is it?

[[email protected]]

> Consider boundary conditions. A slip, for example, could be
> considered to be a turn so uncoordinated that there is no turn -- what
> you see out the front window just goes by sideways.
>
> Don

Well, no, it's just a slip - the plane is flying sideways through the
sky. The turn needle won't show any turn, but the ball will be at
full deflection.

OTOH, try a "flat" turn sometime. Full rudder, enough opposite
aileron to keep the wings level. With enough patience, you can turn
this way, although stopping the turn on a specific heading becomes a
bit of a math problem (think about it)!

Watch out for spinning out of this one, though...

Kirk

[Tony]

If you want to see an extreme flat turn, click on the video whose URL
is in the They'e not good at straight and level -- it's a week or so
old posting.

On Feb 9, 4:50 pm, wrote:
> > Consider boundary conditions. A slip, for example, could be
> > considered to be a turn so uncoordinated that there is no turn -- what
> > you see out the front window just goes by sideways.
>
> > Don
>
> Well, no, it's just a slip - the plane is flying sideways through the
> sky. The turn needle won't show any turn, but the ball will be at
> full deflection.
>
> OTOH, try a "flat" turn sometime. Full rudder, enough opposite
> aileron to keep the wings level. With enough patience, you can turn
> this way, although stopping the turn on a specific heading becomes a
> bit of a math problem (think about it)!
>
> Watch out for spinning out of this one, though...
>
> Kirk

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:55:39 -0800, Don Tuite
> wrote:

>On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 09:43:29 -0600, "Danny Deger"
> wrote:
>
>>This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to have a
>>massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window. If you
>>have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full left. Then
>>try it with the rudder full right. The only thing I can think of showing up
>>in the visuals would be a turn rate either more or less than it should be
>>based on the bank angle.

It's almost impossible to do a coordinated turn just looking out the
window in FS9 or FSX. However they are "usually" good enough. OTOH if
you have a foot get heavy on one of the rudder pedals, unlike the real
world you will never notice it until you remove your foot and the
nose abruptly swings back. Then again that tendency is not unheard of
in the real world either. "Step on the ball and put it back in the dog
house" is an oft used phrase. Coordinated turns in FSX are tighter
than most turns, but almost impossible with out looking at the ball.
OTOH I've noticed that tendency in real life as well.

I think *most* pilots who fly the same plane for years will eventually
adjust to the amount of rudder pressure required to keep the ball
centered on climb out and in turns. Not all, but most. However I'll
defer to those on the group who fly with far more pilots than I do.
I would add that after having flown the same plane for many years I
decided to rent a 172 just to play. The first time I made a turn I
rolled left and the nose seemed to go right. The instructor checking
me out sat over there laughing. He remarked, you fly like that after
how many thousand hours?

>>
>>Give it a try and tell us if you can tell on your sim.
>>
>Consider boundary conditions. A slip, for example, could be
>considered to be a turn so uncoordinated that there is no turn -- what
>you see out the front window just goes by sideways.

Or you are laying over on your side, but going where the plane is
pointed as in slipping down final.

Another interesting phenomena. In Real Life (IRL in simmer talk) is
the slip. IRL they are easy. With no tactile feed back in the sim
they can be very difficult. OTOH they will tell you how well the
flight dynamics have been modeled. In the sim they are done strictly
by what you see outside.

For instance, in the Deb I'm used to doing full deflection slips. Slow
to maneuvering speed, roll left and add right rudder to keep you
pointed straight. Use just enough aileron to require full rudder
deflection. This takes a fair amount of strength both to over come
the aerodynamic loads and the aileron to rudder interconnect. In the
sim there is no such feedback with stick and rudder pressure remaining
unchanged. BTW it can give some pretty spectacular rates of descent in
the Deb. If you are only interested in losing altitude in a hurry you
drop the gear and do as above, but you will find a bit more aileron is
available. This puts you in a steeply descending fairly slow turn and
I'd not recommend it except in an emergency. For one if you have any
passengers along it'll scare the crap out of them along with the
likely hood of dinner as well, but it's described in the emergency
maneuvers section of the POH.

>
>Don
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Mxsmanic]

birdog writes:

> This is your answer. In a sim you can't coordinate a turn realistically
> without the ball. Why can't you coordinate a turn with quick glances at the
> ball?

I can certainly do that, but I'm trying to develop some type of automatic
coordination of turns, once I figure out how exactly to move the rudder and
when. It would take only a few seconds to learn this in a moving aircraft,
but in a non-moving simulator it is a considerably greater challenge. It's
not critical because it is so easy and natural to do in real life, but it's
still something I'd like to learn. It's one of only a handful of aspects of
flying that depends heavily on physical sensation in practice.

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

[Mxsmanic]

Danny Deger writes:

> This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to have a
> massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window.

I think you're right. It seems really hard to detect a lack of coordination
just by looking out the window, even with a fixed reference (which MSFS can
provide).

> If you have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full left.

In that case, the lack of coordination is obvious, but it doesn't help for
more normal turns.

One thing I'm not clear on is just how much the ball represents uncoordinated
motion in real life. If it's just out of its box but still touching it, how
much of a perceptible error is that in the aircraft? Is that enough to easily
feel, or does the ball react before you notice the sensation? Or, conversely,
do you notice the lack of coordination before the ball even begins to move.

I notice, for example, that the ball moves dramatically on the ground while
turning on taxiways, as one might expect, but I also know that in real life,
these turns would not produce powerful sensations. So the ball must be
sensitive indeed.

I've also read that the ball sometimes is not reliable at certain points in a
turn or during other maneuvers, but I'm not clear on exactly at what points
those are (when rolling out of a turn?).

> The only thing I can think of showing up
> in the visuals would be a turn rate either more or less than it should be
> based on the bank angle.

That would work very well if I could calculate the proper turn rate in my head
quickly enough. I haven't been able to do that thus far.

My main consolation is that coordinated turns come so naturally that they
would not require much training in a real aircraft, only a few minutes of
practice.

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

[Casey Wilson]

--

NOTICE!!!!
Mxsmanic is NOT a pilot, has NEVER flown an aircraft and is NOT qualified to
issue competent information regarding any aspect of the operation of any
aircraft.

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> birdog writes:
>
>> This is your answer. In a sim you can't coordinate a turn realistically
>> without the ball. Why can't you coordinate a turn with quick glances at
>> the
>> ball?
>
> I can certainly do that, but I'm trying to develop some type of automatic
> coordination of turns, once I figure out how exactly to move the rudder
> and
> when. It would take only a few seconds to learn this in a moving
> aircraft,
> but in a non-moving simulator it is a considerably greater challenge.
> It's
> not critical because it is so easy and natural to do in real life, but
> it's
> still something I'd like to learn. It's one of only a handful of aspects
> of
> flying that depends heavily on physical sensation in practice.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Roger writes:

> It's almost impossible to do a coordinated turn just looking out the
> window in FS9 or FSX. However they are "usually" good enough.

That's part of my question. Yes, the ball moves a bit, but does that movement
correspond to a really bad turn in real life, or an okay turn, or is the error
so small that I wouldn't perceive it in real life, anyway? The ball seems to
move just from looking at it the wrong way, so it must be quite sensitive (if
it's like a spirit level or something, it must be quite sensitive and perhaps
also prone to brief overreaction).

> OTOH if you have a foot get heavy on one of the rudder pedals, unlike the real
> world you will never notice it until you remove your foot and the
> nose abruptly swings back.

How would you notice it in the real world?

I have to be careful to keep the rudder centered when I don't need it. I set
the sensitivity to maximum and removed the dead zone, because I want it to
work like the real thing (in which, apparently, there is rarely a perceptible
"neutral" position for the rudder).

> I think *most* pilots who fly the same plane for years will eventually
> adjust to the amount of rudder pressure required to keep the ball
> centered on climb out and in turns. Not all, but most.

I'd expect coordinated turns to be learned very quickly indeed, since so much
of it can be done by feel alone, and many people learn more quickly that way
than they do in a purely intellectual way (as by following the ball).

> However I'll
> defer to those on the group who fly with far more pilots than I do.
> I would add that after having flown the same plane for many years I
> decided to rent a 172 just to play. The first time I made a turn I
> rolled left and the nose seemed to go right. The instructor checking
> me out sat over there laughing. He remarked, you fly like that after
> how many thousand hours?

Would he laugh if you had just changed cars?

> Another interesting phenomena. In Real Life (IRL in simmer talk) is
> the slip. IRL they are easy. With no tactile feed back in the sim
> they can be very difficult. OTOH they will tell you how well the
> flight dynamics have been modeled. In the sim they are done strictly
> by what you see outside.

It is perfectly possible to do slips in MSFS and I've done them to lose
altitude quickly when landing (after studying how to do them). It's true that
you don't feel anything, but you can recognize the proper attitude visually.
It can be difficult to hold a steady slip in simulation, and it's particularly
awkward to come out of the slip, but I don't know if it's that way in a real
aircraft.

> For instance, in the Deb I'm used to doing full deflection slips. Slow
> to maneuvering speed, roll left and add right rudder to keep you
> pointed straight. Use just enough aileron to require full rudder
> deflection. This takes a fair amount of strength both to over come
> the aerodynamic loads and the aileron to rudder interconnect.

It's awkward in the sim as well. But it is possible to do it well with
practice. You do need independent rudder control, of course, and preferably
pedals (with a twist throttle it's challenging indeed).

> In the
> sim there is no such feedback with stick and rudder pressure remaining
> unchanged.

You can see what the aircraft is doing, though. If it's properly coordinated
things are steady outside the window.

> BTW it can give some pretty spectacular rates of descent in
> the Deb. If you are only interested in losing altitude in a hurry you
> drop the gear and do as above, but you will find a bit more aileron is
> available. This puts you in a steeply descending fairly slow turn and
> I'd not recommend it except in an emergency. For one if you have any
> passengers along it'll scare the crap out of them along with the
> likely hood of dinner as well, but it's described in the emergency
> maneuvers section of the POH.

I get very rapid rates of descent in a Baron with the technique, and the
airspeed stays the same, which is very handy. My passengers trust me
completely.

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

[Casey Wilson]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Danny Deger writes:
>
>> This is an interesting question. My first guess is you would have to
>> have a
>> massively uncoordinated turn to detect it by looking out the window.
>
> I think you're right. It seems really hard to detect a lack of
> coordination
> just by looking out the window, even with a fixed reference (which MSFS
> can
> provide).
>
>> If you have rudders in your sim, try a turn with the rudder almost full
>> left.
>
> In that case, the lack of coordination is obvious, but it doesn't help for
> more normal turns.
>
> One thing I'm not clear on is just how much the ball represents
> uncoordinated
> motion in real life. If it's just out of its box but still touching it,
> how
> much of a perceptible error is that in the aircraft? Is that enough to
> easily
> feel, or does the ball react before you notice the sensation? Or,
> conversely,
> do you notice the lack of coordination before the ball even begins to
> move.

If it is caused by P-factor it is virtually unnoticeable without looking at
the ball.

>
> I notice, for example, that the ball moves dramatically on the ground
> while
> turning on taxiways, as one might expect, but I also know that in real
> life,
> these turns would not produce powerful sensations. So the ball must be
> sensitive indeed.


NOTICE!!!!
Mxsmanic is NOT a pilot, has NEVER flown an aircraft and is NOT qualified to
issue competent information regarding any aspect of the operation of any
aircraft.


>
> My main consolation is that coordinated turns come so naturally that they
> would not require much training in a real aircraft, only a few minutes of
> practice.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

I have been flying real airplanes since 1975 and I still occasionaly have
to "step on the ball." And I'll bet every other pilot in this forum does
also.
Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
IT!!

[Mxsmanic]

Casey Wilson writes:

> Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
> IT!!

I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the types
of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them. And I expect
that there are many people like me. It's an easy and natural task (natural in
the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
interpretations).

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

[Casey Wilson]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Casey Wilson writes:
>
>> Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
>> IT!!
>
> I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the
> types
> of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them. And I
> expect
> that there are many people like me. It's an easy and natural task
> (natural in
> the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
> interpretations).
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

You have no idea how wrong you are. One 45-degree bank, climbing 540, and
your perceptions would be worthless in the real world. And would you please
define default interpretations.

[Mxsmanic]

Casey Wilson writes:

> You have no idea how wrong you are.

You don't know me, and so you cannot know if I'm right or wrong.

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

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Casey Wilson writes:
>
>> You have no idea how wrong you are.
>
> You don't know me, and so you cannot know if I'm right or wrong.

He doesn't have to know you, to know that you are wrong. If he
has the experience, which you do not and he DOES, it is safe to say
that he knows what he's talking about.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFzWvOyBkZmuMZ8L8RAuCfAKCo7hN208B5Hl8Wx/lAO8exAWbPhgCggYl+
hvi/uypLKGVJ+g/evXpJI/w=
=M3Yx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Mxsmanic]

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

> He doesn't have to know you, to know that you are wrong.

Yes, he does. I'm a significant variable, with an unexpected value.

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

[Tony]

I think the expression as to what would follow is "augered in".
There's nothing like 1.4 g's in aa climbing turn, followed by an
abrupt leveling off to make a novice's perception of coordinated
flight amusing.




On Feb 9, 10:50 pm, "Casey Wilson" > wrote:
> "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Casey Wilson writes:
>
> >> Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
> >> IT!!
>
> > I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the
> > types
> > of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them. And I
> > expect
> > that there are many people like me. It's an easy and natural task
> > (natural in
> > the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
> > interpretations).
>
> > --
> > Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
>
> You have no idea how wrong you are. One 45-degree bank, climbing 540, and
> your perceptions would be worthless in the real world. And would you please
> define default interpretations.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Tony]

Real pilots of powered airplanes do refer to their instruments in VMC.

On Feb 7, 6:55 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Mark Levin writes:
> > Guess what. In VFR conditions real pilots make coordinated turns by feel.
>
> I don't have that option in simulation, so I have to find some other way.
>
> > But of course in your world pilots should never rely on physical sensations
> > for anything so I don't know how you would do it.
>
> I guess you'd be lost in IMC, eh?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Tony]

On Feb 10, 7:17 am, "Tony" > wrote:
> I think the expression as to what would follow is "augered in".
> There's nothing like 1.4 g's in aa climbing turn, followed by an
> abrupt leveling off to make a novice's perception of coordinated
> flight amusing.
>
> On Feb 9, 10:50 pm, "Casey Wilson" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > > Casey Wilson writes:
It just occured to me -- there is a group of real pilots here who do
maintain coordinated with outside reference only. Those glider guys
who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have
to look at the ball, do they?

>
> > >> Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
> > >> IT!!
>
> > > I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the
> > > types
> > > of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them. And I
> > > expect
> > > that there are many people like me. It's an easy and natural task
> > > (natural in
> > > the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
> > > interpretations).
>
> > > --
> > > Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
>
> > You have no idea how wrong you are. One 45-degree bank, climbing 540, and
> > your perceptions would be worthless in the real world. And would you please
> > define default interpretations.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Tony]

I doubt one would do this, but a real Baron pilot could in fact fly
coordinated by outside reference only by taping a piece of yarn to the
middle of his windshield and flying such that it pointed straight up
along the windshield axis.


On Feb 7, 5:47 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> I'm still in a bit of a quandry as to how to learn to make coordinated turns
> in a PC simulator that does not include a motion platform.
>
> I've turned on the visual alignment indicator that MSFS provides, which is a
> red "V" that sits squarely ahead in the visual field, effectively bolted to
> the airframe. I've been trying to turn such that this V always moves along
> the horizon at a constant speed for a given bank angle. Logically, a specific
> bank angle in a coordinated turn will always produce a heading change at the
> same speed. If the speed at which the horizon is moving varies, the turn is
> not coordinated.
>
> Also, it seems that in a coordinated, level turn, this V should stay at the
> same distance above the horizon throughout the turn.
>
> As I roll into a turn, the speed of movement of the V along the horizon should
> increase in precise relationship to the bank angle. The opposite should occur
> as I roll out of the turn, with the speed along the horizon slowing as I
> return to level flight.
>
> Any problems with this? The only remaining problem is to figure out _how_
> fast the V should be moving for a given bank angle. Maybe that can come with
> practice.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[chris[_1_]]

> It just occured to me -- there is a group of real pilots here who do
> maintain coordinated with outside reference only. Those glider guys
> who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have
> to look at the ball, do they?
>
>

They seem to spend so much of their time watching the ten other
gliders all turning in the same thermal and making sure they don't
bang into them that I doubt they'd want to be looking in the
cockpit!!!

[601XL Builder]

Tony wrote:

> It just occured to me -- there is a group of real pilots here who do
> maintain coordinated with outside reference only. Those glider guys
> who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have
> to look at the ball, do they?
>


Not just the glider pilots. The R22 I got my helicopter rating had the
same thing.

[Thomas Borchert]

Tony,

> Those glider guys
> who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have
> to look at the ball, do they?
>

The yarn is the (much more sensitive) equivalent to the ball, but it
obviously only works in the absence of a prop slipstream. Might work on
twins, come to think of it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Tony]

Tom, I was careful, as you noted, to say it would work for a Baron.
The only prop driven single I can think of where it would work would
be a Lake ('prop driven' is intended to take SE jets off the table!).
I suppose you could put 'tells' out on the wings of SE prop driven
airplanes, but somehow I don't think I'd want to be looking at the
wing to figure out if I was coordinated.



On Feb 10, 4:53 pm, Thomas Borchert >
wrote:
> Tony,
>
> > Those glider guys
> > who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have
> > to look at the ball, do they?
>
> The yarn is the (much more sensitive) equivalent to the ball, but it
> obviously only works in the absence of a prop slipstream. Might work on
> twins, come to think of it.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Roger[_4_]]

On 10 Feb 2007 05:35:09 -0800, "Tony" > wrote:

>On Feb 10, 7:17 am, "Tony" > wrote:
>> I think the expression as to what would follow is "augered in".
>> There's nothing like 1.4 g's in aa climbing turn, followed by an
>> abrupt leveling off to make a novice's perception of coordinated
>> flight amusing.
>>
>> On Feb 9, 10:50 pm, "Casey Wilson" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > > Casey Wilson writes:
>It just occured to me -- there is a group of real pilots here who do
>maintain coordinated with outside reference only. Those glider guys
>who tape a piece of yarn to the middle of their windscreen never have

However that's sorta cheating as it directly indicates the direction
and relative strength of the air flow. They are still looking at
someting on the aircraft.

>to look at the ball, do they?

It's real handy when doing aerobatics too<:-))

Spose it'd work stuck to the middle of the monitor screen?
>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Tony" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Tom, I was careful, as you noted, to say it would work for a Baron.
> The only prop driven single I can think of where it would work would
> be a Lake ('prop driven' is intended to take SE jets off the table!).
> I suppose you could put 'tells' out on the wings of SE prop driven
> airplanes, but somehow I don't think I'd want to be looking at the
> wing to figure out if I was coordinated.

Yaw strings are used on the U-2...
http://www.barryschiff.com/high_flight.htm

Probably would work on Vari-eze's and the like also.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Roger[_4_]]

On 10 Feb 2007 04:17:29 -0800, "Tony" > wrote:

>I think the expression as to what would follow is "augered in".
>There's nothing like 1.4 g's in aa climbing turn, followed by an
>abrupt leveling off to make a novice's perception of coordinated
>flight amusing.

Years ago I took my cousin for a ride. Dan was an adventerous sort.
After a bit of flying he wanted to see a steep turn. When I was a
student I learned steep turns at 60 degrees of bank and 2 Gs. I still
do them that way.

Dan thought that was fun so we did a 720 one way followed by
immediately rolling into a 720 the other way. He said it felt a bit
strange on the first 720 but it didn't bother him. He said he was
really doing good until we headed the other direction. At that point
he said he lost all connection with up, down, right, left, IOW he was
completely disoriented. It didn't bother him and he rather enjoyed it.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[[email protected]]

On Feb 9, 7:13 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Casey Wilson writes:
> > Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
> > IT!!
>
> I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the types
> of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them.

Been in the flight training industry for fourteen years now, and
the above statement is so familiar it's not funny. And after a few
hours they either realize they're wrong and start listening, or we
have to stop flying with them because they're such a threat, failing
to understand that they don't understand. They got their minds made up
and that's all there is to it. Some of them even come back from the
first flight either sick (had no idea what to expect in terms of
motion, especially in rough air), or had their tails between their
legs when they discovered they actually couldn't fly. Can't push the
PAUSE button and sort things out.
>And I expect
> that there are many people like me.

Yup. Way too many.

It's an easy and natural task (natural in
> the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
> interpretations).

Easy until you try it.

Dan

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> Been in the flight training industry for fourteen years now, and
> the above statement is so familiar it's not funny. And after a few
> hours they either realize they're wrong and start listening, or we
> have to stop flying with them because they're such a threat, failing
> to understand that they don't understand. They got their minds made up
> and that's all there is to it. Some of them even come back from the
> first flight either sick (had no idea what to expect in terms of
> motion, especially in rough air), or had their tails between their
> legs when they discovered they actually couldn't fly. Can't push the
> PAUSE button and sort things out.

And then there are always exceptions to the rule.

> Yup. Way too many.

So you've seen students who do very well from the start?

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

[[email protected]]

On Feb 12, 1:57 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> writes:
> > Been in the flight training industry for fourteen years now, and
> > the above statement is so familiar it's not funny. And after a few
> > hours they either realize they're wrong and start listening, or we
> > have to stop flying with them because they're such a threat, failing
> > to understand that they don't understand. They got their minds made up
> > and that's all there is to it. Some of them even come back from the
> > first flight either sick (had no idea what to expect in terms of
> > motion, especially in rough air), or had their tails between their
> > legs when they discovered they actually couldn't fly. Can't push the
> > PAUSE button and sort things out.
>
> And then there are always exceptions to the rule.
>
> > Yup. Way too many.
>
> So you've seen students who do very well from the start?

Yes, of course, but not one of them came in with the attitude
that it would be a piece of cake. They were teachable and willing to
set aside any preconceived notions. Many new students will say things
like "It's so much different than I'd imagined." The students who
think they know it all have a tough time adjusting, and often find
themselves far behind the students who didn't come in with a bunch of
sim time and the assumption that they were therefore ahead somehow.
The simmers have a pile of bad habits they have to unlearn, and a pile
of wrong ideas to discard. All that takes time and the digesting of
large amounts of humble pie.
Almost all students have no idea how much bookwork there is to
learning to fly. The handling of the airplane is only part of it:
there's air law, meteorology, aerodynamic theory, airmanship,
navigation, and so on. Lots of reading and studying. Some tough exams
and complex concepts. An example is the changing angle of attack of
the wing in various maneuvers, attitudes and airspeeds, and the
dangers inherent in some of those maneuvers as the boundary layer
begins to break up. I read of too many accidents that happened because
a pilot that should have known better got himself into a situation
beyond his understanding. Even some of those that study hard have
trouble visualizing AOA.
It's not all hands-and-feet stuff like a simulator implies.
Computers are great but they can fool a person into thinking that it's
easy. The sim is a good tool for teaching instrument scan and some IFR
stuff, but it's only of benefit to those who have had flight training
already.

Dan

[Roger[_4_]]

On 12 Feb 2007 12:24:19 -0800, wrote:

>On Feb 9, 7:13 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Casey Wilson writes:
>> > Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
>> > IT!!
>>
>> I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the types
>> of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them.
>
> Been in the flight training industry for fourteen years now, and
>the above statement is so familiar it's not funny. And after a few

I started flying in 63, picked up the basics quickly and was flying on
my own in a few weeks. Things were different back then, but
necessarily easier. Most of the planes had a simpler panel by far and
sometimes the radios even worked. We had to do steep turns at 60
degrees of bank and were expected to fly cross country's with nothing
more than a map, compass, ruler, and watch. surprisingly, we had *far*
more traffic at the lower altitudes in many areas than today. Our
airport probably had on the order of 5 to 10 times the average
movements per day as now.

It was a typical case of starting out flying, a wife, two kids, and a
new home in the country came along and the flying fell by the way
side. The last entry in the log was September 1 st, 1964. The next
entry was October 30, 1987 when I went back to flying with the intent
of getting my license.

When I went in, I talked to two instructors. I told them although I
had been ready to take my cross country in a previous life I had not
flown in over 23 years. I thought we should just start from scratch
and would not be offended if they treated me in that manner. They
said that was fine and which of them did I wish to fly with. I
replied, "Why not both? That way I stand a better chance of having an
instructor available.".

Even now if I've not flown for a few weeks I can feel the cobwebs
gathering. I can tell if I am or am not proficient and I'm not afraid
to admit when I'm not. I also happen to fly an airplane that seems to
be sentient as it knows exactly when and how to remind me.

Procedures I can practice on a sim with or without an instructor, but
that does nothing for my good old airmanship, or proficiency at flying
the airplane.

>hours they either realize they're wrong and start listening, or we

Hours? 10 minutes isn't enough?<:-))

>have to stop flying with them because they're such a threat, failing
>to understand that they don't understand. They got their minds made up
>and that's all there is to it. Some of them even come back from the
>first flight either sick (had no idea what to expect in terms of

After well over a 1000 hours I still have to caution any new
instructor that "I do not ride well"<:-)) I can do basic aerobatics,
but I still do not ride well. After this long I doubt I'd do the
aerobatics well either. <:-))
>motion, especially in rough air), or had their tails between their
>legs when they discovered they actually couldn't fly. Can't push the
>PAUSE button and sort things out.

You mean you are one of those sadistic instructors?

>>And I expect
>> that there are many people like me.
>
> Yup. Way too many.
>
> It's an easy and natural task (natural in
>> the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
>> interpretations).
>
> Easy until you try it.

What do you mean I have to hold heading, altitude, and airspeed all at
the same time? Who'd have guessed that holding altitude IRL within a
100 feet could be so difficult and I have to hold it wile doing steep
turns too?

>
> Dan
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:50:22 -0500, Roger >
wrote:

>On 12 Feb 2007 12:24:19 -0800, wrote:
>
>>On Feb 9, 7:13 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>> Casey Wilson writes:
>>> > Quit making statements like the one above until you go out and DO
>>> > IT!!
>>>
>>> I guarantee that I would have it down very quickly indeed. I know the types
>>> of coordination tasks that I do well, and this is one of them.
>>
>> Been in the flight training industry for fourteen years now, and
>>the above statement is so familiar it's not funny. And after a few
>
>I started flying in 63, picked up the basics quickly and was flying on
>my own in a few weeks. Things were different back then, but

Whoa....That was supposed to say "Not necessarily easier" Got a bit to
enthusiastic on the editing.

>necessarily easier. Most of the planes had a simpler panel by far and
>sometimes the radios even worked. We had to do steep turns at 60
>degrees of bank and were expected to fly cross country's with nothing
>more than a map, compass, ruler, and watch. surprisingly, we had *far*
>more traffic at the lower altitudes in many areas than today. Our
>airport probably had on the order of 5 to 10 times the average
>movements per day as now.
>
>It was a typical case of starting out flying, a wife, two kids, and a
>new home in the country came along and the flying fell by the way
>side. The last entry in the log was September 1 st, 1964. The next
>entry was October 30, 1987 when I went back to flying with the intent
>of getting my license.
>
>When I went in, I talked to two instructors. I told them although I
>had been ready to take my cross country in a previous life I had not
>flown in over 23 years. I thought we should just start from scratch
>and would not be offended if they treated me in that manner. They
>said that was fine and which of them did I wish to fly with. I
>replied, "Why not both? That way I stand a better chance of having an
>instructor available.".
>
>Even now if I've not flown for a few weeks I can feel the cobwebs
>gathering. I can tell if I am or am not proficient and I'm not afraid
>to admit when I'm not. I also happen to fly an airplane that seems to
>be sentient as it knows exactly when and how to remind me.
>
>Procedures I can practice on a sim with or without an instructor, but
>that does nothing for my good old airmanship, or proficiency at flying
>the airplane.
>
>>hours they either realize they're wrong and start listening, or we
>
>Hours? 10 minutes isn't enough?<:-))
>
>>have to stop flying with them because they're such a threat, failing
>>to understand that they don't understand. They got their minds made up
>>and that's all there is to it. Some of them even come back from the
>>first flight either sick (had no idea what to expect in terms of
>
>After well over a 1000 hours I still have to caution any new
>instructor that "I do not ride well"<:-)) I can do basic aerobatics,
>but I still do not ride well. After this long I doubt I'd do the
>aerobatics well either. <:-))
>>motion, especially in rough air), or had their tails between their
>>legs when they discovered they actually couldn't fly. Can't push the
>>PAUSE button and sort things out.
>
>You mean you are one of those sadistic instructors?
>
>>>And I expect
>>> that there are many people like me.
>>
>> Yup. Way too many.
>>
>> It's an easy and natural task (natural in
>>> the sense that what perception indicates is accurate with default
>>> interpretations).
>>
>> Easy until you try it.
>
>What do you mean I have to hold heading, altitude, and airspeed all at
>the same time? Who'd have guessed that holding altitude IRL within a
>100 feet could be so difficult and I have to hold it wile doing steep
>turns too?
>
>>
>> Dan
>Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>www.rogerhalstead.com
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com