Pitch vs. trim in flight phases [Archive]

gatt[_3_]

May 16th 08, 05:55 PM

> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you normally use mostly trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will you normally mostly use
>> the yoke?

Good question for r.a.s.

You don't want to use the trim to adjust pitch, just to relieve the
control pressure. Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
aircraft. Always remember "Pitch, power, trim."

The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
"The pilot must avoid using the trim to establish or correct airplane
attitude. The airplane attitude must be established and held first, then
control pressures trimmed out so that the airplane will maintain the
desired attitude in 'hands off' flight. Attempting to 'fly the airplane
with trim tabs' is a common fault in basic flying technique even among
experienced pilots."

It's important for the pilot to feel the elevator pressure whereas with
a trim tab you're delegating that to mechanical authority.

Also, if you get out of the habit of knowing where your trim is set, you
increase the likelihood of approaching an elevator trim stall in a
missed approach or go-around. This can be demonstrated pretty well in
MSFS2004--I think in the Mooney--by adjusting the elevator trim as if
you were in full-flaps landing configuration and then adding full power;
back-elevator trim will cause a radical nose-up pitch, exceeding the
critical angle of attack. To avoid elevator trim stall the pilot must
exert a great deal of forward pressure on the nose -and- retrim the
airplane, and it has to be brisk and smooth. Whether by hand or
electric motor, controlling it by trim is too slow.

-c

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 06:32 PM

Dudley Henriques writes:

> You adjust pitch and hold that pitch, then trim. The general "rule" is
> nose attitude, adjust power, trim the airplane.

OK, I will try that.

Bill Denton[_2_]

May 16th 08, 06:33 PM

'So, you consider a correct answer to be "noise"?'

ANY response to MX and the other trolls who are rapidly destroying this
group is noise...

"Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From:
>
>>Thanks for contributing so many lines to the noise level.
>>"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".
>
> So, you consider a correct answer to be "noise"?
> Get a life.
>
>
> /"\
> |\./|
> | |
> | |
> /''\| |/''\..
> /~\| | | | \
> | | | | | \
> | | | | | \
> | ~ ~ ~ ~ |
> | /
> \ /
> \ /
> \ ___ /
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQCVAwUBSC3Yp5MoscYxZNI5AQGiBwP6AlUktYBeoEGF7lkMso WyeZbkLVBnhqBy
> 1KiGQ99DiQxaw2hhea9nTG9likpfm3q8D8IwPd6FMUfjdEen+y 4GJm+RlmTt9JH0
> 3RiSSbVEgVQUQfufyCc+rYYUKYlY6sF8W+99v46M0UXxc49ptE FKoieZR585TxG1
> RekUW9pKA94=
> =KTa0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 06:40 PM

Tina writes:

> Perhaps the difference between the MSFS and reality is the notion of
> adjusting trim to take pressure off the yoke is one of those 'it
> doesn't matter in simulated flight' issues.

Some controls for use with the sim, including the Saitek X52 joystick that I
have, are spring loaded, and MSFS behaves in such a way that you must maintain
pressure against the springs if the aircraft isn't properly trimmed. It's not
the same as control pressure, but it has much the same effect, although the
spring resistance isn't correlated with control surface positions as precisely
as a real yoke would be. Some airliners use springs for exactly the same
purpose, so it can't be that far from reality.

In the sim I trim until I don't have to hold the joystick. The joystick
position doesn't actually change, of course, but the springs give the same
general idea, and I don't think it is creating any bad habits.

The Cessna models I have seem to have a lot more travel in the trim adjustment
than the Baron or Bonanza. I don't know if this is a peculiarity of the sim
models of these aircraft or whether it actually reflects differences among the
real aircraft.

Ken S. Tucker

May 16th 08, 06:51 PM

On May 16, 9:55 am, gatt > wrote:
> > Mxsmanic wrote:
> >> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you normally use mostly trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will you normally mostly use
> >> the yoke?
>
> Good question for r.a.s.
>
> You don't want to use the trim to adjust pitch, just to relieve the
> control pressure. Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
> aircraft. Always remember "Pitch, power, trim."
>
> The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
> "The pilot must avoid using the trim to establish or correct airplane
> attitude. The airplane attitude must be established and held first, then
> control pressures trimmed out so that the airplane will maintain the
> desired attitude in 'hands off' flight. Attempting to 'fly the airplane
> with trim tabs' is a common fault in basic flying technique even among
> experienced pilots."
>
> It's important for the pilot to feel the elevator pressure whereas with
> a trim tab you're delegating that to mechanical authority.
>
> Also, if you get out of the habit of knowing where your trim is set, you
> increase the likelihood of approaching an elevator trim stall in a
> missed approach or go-around. This can be demonstrated pretty well in
> MSFS2004--I think in the Mooney--by adjusting the elevator trim as if
> you were in full-flaps landing configuration and then adding full power;
> back-elevator trim will cause a radical nose-up pitch, exceeding the
> critical angle of attack. To avoid elevator trim stall the pilot must
> exert a great deal of forward pressure on the nose -and- retrim the
> airplane, and it has to be brisk and smooth. Whether by hand or
> electric motor, controlling it by trim is too slow.
> -c

Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?

Personally I had real friggin hassle with trim. I'd get
to 4000' set a course for x-country, maybe an hour
away, set cruise, then touch-up trim, to relieve yoke
control. Well it never really worked for me.
As soon as I thought I had it right, by Descent Indicator
(no jokes guys, women of the opposite sex might be lurkin)
would start wandering off zero.
My habit became, set Trim slightly down and use my
pinky pressure back on the yoke to keep my Descent
Indicator at zero, with an occasional glance so I could
enjoy the view and work nav.
Ken
PS: Kens Rule: Use your pinky to stop being InDescent,
and use the rest of your fingers anyway you want.

Robert M. Gary

May 16th 08, 06:56 PM

On May 16, 10:32*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
> > You adjust pitch and hold that pitch, then trim. The general "rule" is
> > nose attitude, adjust power, trim the airplane.
>
> OK, I will try that.

I'm not sure how you can without a force feedback joy stick. You use
the trim to remove pressure from the yoke.

-Robert

Maxwell[_2_]

May 16th 08, 07:22 PM

> wrote in message
...
> On May 16, 1:10 am, Nomen Nescio > wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>Juevie bull**** snipped<<
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> Thanks for contributing so many lines to the noise level.
> "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".

That was an ounce of prevention hoping to avoid the several pounds of cure
that will certainly follow.

More_Flaps

May 16th 08, 07:49 PM

On May 17, 5:51*am, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
> On May 16, 9:55 am, gatt > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Mxsmanic wrote:
> > >> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you normally use mostly trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will you normally mostly use
> > >> the yoke?
>
> > Good question for r.a.s.
>
> > You don't want to use the trim to adjust pitch, just to relieve the
> > control pressure. *Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
> > bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
> > aircraft. *Always remember "Pitch, power, trim."
>
> > The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
> > "The pilot must avoid using the trim to establish or correct airplane
> > attitude. The airplane attitude must be established and held first, then
> > control pressures trimmed out so that the airplane will maintain the
> > desired attitude in 'hands off' flight. Attempting to 'fly the airplane
> > with trim tabs' is a common fault in basic flying technique even among
> > experienced pilots."
>
> > It's important for the pilot to feel the elevator pressure whereas with
> > a trim tab you're delegating that to mechanical authority.
>
> > Also, if you get out of the habit of knowing where your trim is set, you
> > increase the likelihood of approaching an elevator trim stall in a
> > missed approach or go-around. *This can be demonstrated pretty well in
> > MSFS2004--I think in the Mooney--by adjusting the elevator trim as if
> > you were in full-flaps landing configuration and then adding full power;
> > back-elevator trim will cause a radical nose-up pitch, exceeding the
> > critical angle of attack. *To avoid elevator trim stall the pilot must
> > exert a great deal of forward pressure on the nose -and- retrim the
> > airplane, and it has to be brisk and smooth. *Whether by hand or
> > electric motor, controlling it by trim is too slow.
> > -c
>
> Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
> is the trim (Cessna 152) *in the center, right of the
> pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?
>

It's also around the windows and other edges. Hope this helps your
understading what you are seeing on your computer screen.
Cheers

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 07:49 PM

Robert M. Gary writes:

> I'm not sure how you can without a force feedback joy stick. You use
> the trim to remove pressure from the yoke.

As I've explained, I can trim until I no longer need to hold the joystick away
from the neutral position. The stick is spring-loaded, which provides a so-so
simulation of control pressure.

I've read that force-feedback sticks are so inaccurate that it's better to
just have a stick with springs.

Tina

May 16th 08, 07:55 PM

Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we who
fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not understand
ga trimming procedures.

We feel the pressure on the yoke reducing as trim is corrected. You
don't. We maintain the desired attitude (note - "attitude" ) with the
yoke and trim away the pressure. You can't.

This is basic piloting, the notion of trimming away yoke pressure
happens in the first hour of flight training for a PP.
..
Is there any question as to why your pronouncements regarding GA are
viewed with suspicion?

On May 16, 2:49 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Robert M. Gary writes:
> > I'm not sure how you can without a force feedback joy stick. You use
> > the trim to remove pressure from the yoke.
>
> As I've explained, I can trim until I no longer need to hold the joystick away
> from the neutral position. The stick is spring-loaded, which provides a so-so
> simulation of control pressure.
>
> I've read that force-feedback sticks are so inaccurate that it's better to
> just have a stick with springs.

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 08:05 PM

Tina writes:

> Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we who
> fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not understand
> ga trimming procedures.

It is not "vastly different," merely different. Don't overestimate the
importance of minor differences. If such differences were that important,
then pilots would have to start learning from scratch again every time they
moved from one aircraft to another.

> We feel the pressure on the yoke reducing as trim is corrected. You
> don't.

Yes, I do. The closer I am to correct trim, the less I have to move the
joystick from its neutral position, and the less spring pressure there is on
my hand. When the aircraft stays put without me touching the stick at all, it
is trimmed correctly.

> Is there any question as to why your pronouncements regarding GA are
> viewed with suspicion?

How often do you fly with MSFS, and what configuration do you use?

gatt[_3_]

May 16th 08, 08:19 PM

Ken S. Tucker wrote:

>
> Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
> is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
> pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?

Correct. (Well it has a "takeoff position" which is more or less center.)

In the '74 PA-28R I rent it's between the seats and harder to see, and
takeoff position is about "a quarter-inch back" on the slot since
there's no visible mark. I don't like the trim-wheel there. The first
time I flew in the right seat and reached for the trim handle I cracked
my knuckle against the door.

-c

More_Flaps

May 16th 08, 08:21 PM

On May 17, 7:05*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Tina writes:
> > Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we who
> > fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not understand
> > ga trimming procedures.
>
> It is not "vastly different," merely different. *Don't overestimate the
> importance of minor differences. *If such differences were that important,
> then pilots would have to start learning from scratch again every time they
> moved from one aircraft to another.
>
> > We feel the pressure on the yoke reducing as trim is corrected. You
> > don't.
>
> Yes, I do. *The closer I am to correct trim, the less I have to move the
> joystick from its neutral position, and the less spring pressure there is on
> my hand. *When the aircraft stays put without me touching the stick at all, it
> is trimmed correctly.
>
> > Is there any question as to why your pronouncements regarding GA are
> > viewed with suspicion?
>
> How often do you fly with MSFS

They have an airline?

Cheers

gatt[_3_]

May 16th 08, 08:40 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:

>
> Yes, I do. The closer I am to correct trim, the less I have to move the
> joystick from its neutral position, and the less spring pressure there is on
> my hand. When the aircraft stays put without me touching the stick at all, it
> is trimmed correctly.

That the general idea, but in an airplane the stick isn't generally
-moved- (except at very slow speeds); rather, pressure is exerted on it
by the pilot to counter the forces exerted by the airflow over the
control surfaces.

I recommended to somebody else that they call around the local flight
schools and see if they can find a Frasca-type simulator like this one
http://www.frasca.com/body/TruVision170.Lo.jpg and spend a half-hour or
so in it. The pressure feedback is strikingly similar to that of a
small airplane, and you'll get a good sense of the correct feel as well
as the correct use of trim to alleviate control pressure.

"During flight, it is the rudder -pressure- the pilot exerts on the
control yoke and rudder pedals that causes the airplane to move about
the axes. When a control surface is moved out of its streamlined
position (even slightly), the air flowing past it will exert a force
against it and will try to return it to its streamlined position. It is
this force that the pilot feels as pressure on the control yoke and the
rudder pedals." Airplane Flying Handbook

I imagine it would be pretty expensive, but I'd really like to see a
motorized flight sim yoke that accurately represents control surface
pressures. I have all the hardware (spare Battlebot parts) to make a
dual-axis prototype, but not enough knowledge of the software interface
or specific pressure values.

-c

gatt[_3_]

May 16th 08, 08:45 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Tina writes:
>
>> Perhaps the difference between the MSFS and reality is the notion of
>> adjusting trim to take pressure off the yoke is one of those 'it
>> doesn't matter in simulated flight' issues.
>
> Some controls for use with the sim, including the Saitek X52 joystick that I
> have, are spring loaded, and MSFS behaves in such a way that you must maintain
> pressure against the springs if the aircraft isn't properly trimmed.

I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.

-c

Ken S. Tucker

May 16th 08, 08:49 PM

On May 16, 12:19 pm, gatt > wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> > Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
> > is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
> > pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?
>
> Correct. (Well it has a "takeoff position" which is more or less center.)
>
> In the '74 PA-28R I rent it's between the seats and harder to see, and
> takeoff position is about "a quarter-inch back" on the slot since
> there's no visible mark. I don't like the trim-wheel there. The first
> time I flew in the right seat and reached for the trim handle I cracked
> my knuckle against the door.

Ok thanks.
I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
Regards
Ken

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 16th 08, 08:49 PM

gatt wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> Tina writes:
>>
>>> Perhaps the difference between the MSFS and reality is the notion of
>>> adjusting trim to take pressure off the yoke is one of those 'it
>>> doesn't matter in simulated flight' issues.
>>
>> Some controls for use with the sim, including the Saitek X52 joystick
>> that I
>> have, are spring loaded, and MSFS behaves in such a way that you must
>> maintain
>> pressure against the springs if the aircraft isn't properly trimmed.
>
> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>
> -c

Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs unboosted
control surfaces :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Steve Foley

May 16th 08, 08:57 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Tina writes:
>
> > Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we who
> > fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not understand
> > ga trimming procedures.
>
> It is not "vastly different," merely different. Don't overestimate the
> importance of minor differences. If such differences were that important,
> then pilots would have to start learning from scratch again every time
they
> moved from one aircraft to another.

It is, in fact, vastly different.

I have flown many different aircraft, and have never had to ask someone how
to trim the plane.

I recently purchased FS2004, and if you care to check google groups, you'll
see I did need to ask how to trim.

BDS[_2_]

May 16th 08, 09:16 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote

> Yes, I do. The closer I am to correct trim, the less I have to move the
> joystick from its neutral position, and the less spring pressure there is
on
> my hand. When the aircraft stays put without me touching the stick at
all, it
> is trimmed correctly.

That's the difference, and it is a big difference.

In an airplane you might be holding forward pressure on the yoke at say 2
lbs to hold a particular attitude. As you start rolling in forward trim the
force required to hold the yoke in the position it is currently being held
diminishes until it is gone altogether. The yoke never moves but the force
required to hold it where it is diminishes to zero.

In your sim what happens is that as you roll in forward trim you have to
move the yoke back to compensate which results in less spring pressure based
on the new position of the yoke - the previously held desired attitude now
occurs with the yoke in a different position. This is not at all how it
works in an airplane, and not at all how it feels to the pilot.

In addition, in my experience the springs in these toy yokes and joysticks
do not feel at all like normal control pressures in an airplane - the "feel"
is all wrong and the force curves are not the same.

BDS

Tina

May 16th 08, 09:32 PM

Let's not overlook, as Dudley has mentioned, how the pressures needed
on the yoke, and yoke deflections, change with airspeed. These are the
things pilots know, and something the computer based sims I have flown
do not replicate. It is anothr sensation light airplane pilots use
automatically, and not available on most sims.

One needs experience in both realms to be able to compare them. It's a
given many pilots here have flown(?) sims so their observations have
some validity. Maybe the non pilots got wise staying in a Holiday Inn
Express last night.

gatt[_3_]

May 16th 08, 09:44 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:

>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>>

> Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs unboosted
> control surfaces :-))

Ooh. Good point. I wonder if a series of small electric motors could
be used to spool up bungee tension corresponding to appropriate
pressures. Not sure how the big sims do it.

-c

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 16th 08, 09:52 PM

gatt wrote:
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>>>
>
>> Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs unboosted
>> control surfaces :-))
>
> Ooh. Good point. I wonder if a series of small electric motors could
> be used to spool up bungee tension corresponding to appropriate
> pressures. Not sure how the big sims do it.
>
>
>
>
> -c
>
Not sure myself. It would have to be a complicated program. Even the
control surface area is a factor, and each aircraft would be affected
differently.

--
Dudley Henriques

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe

May 16th 08, 09:57 PM

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
...
>On May 16, 10:32 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>> > You adjust pitch and hold that pitch, then trim. The general "rule" is
>> > nose attitude, adjust power, trim the airplane.
>>
>> OK, I will try that.
>
>I'm not sure how you can without a force feedback joy stick. You use
>the trim to remove pressure from the yoke.

As you surmise, the "trim" doesn't work like real life when you are using a
spring loaded joystick.

Instead of changing stick forces, the "trim" adds (up or down) pitch - so
you have to move the stick as you change the trim to maintain the same
attitude. In the end, you can fly at "zero stick force" by using "trim", but
the way it works and feels is way different (based on my experience with
both).

--
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.

Thomas Borchert

May 16th 08, 10:22 PM

Gatt,

> The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
>

Ah, another free source our local hotshot doesn't even bother to read.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Scott Skylane

May 16th 08, 10:34 PM

gatt wrote:
/snip/ Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
> aircraft. /snip

Gatt, you owe me a new keyboard, I just spewed my coffee all over mine!
The plethora of inop electric trim swithces in GA is due to them being
broken, and the ownerws too cheap to have them fixed.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 10:51 PM

Steve Foley writes:

> I have flown many different aircraft, and have never had to ask someone how
> to trim the plane.

Nothing obliged me to ask. I could have simply used trial and error.

If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it follows
that no training is required to do so, in which case a pilot has no advantage
over a non-pilot when it comes to trim, since everyone does it instinctively,
without having to ask anyone anything.

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 10:54 PM

BDS writes:

> That's the difference, and it is a big difference.

No, it's not.

> In an airplane you might be holding forward pressure on the yoke at say 2
> lbs to hold a particular attitude. As you start rolling in forward trim the
> force required to hold the yoke in the position it is currently being held
> diminishes until it is gone altogether. The yoke never moves but the force
> required to hold it where it is diminishes to zero.
>
> In your sim what happens is that as you roll in forward trim you have to
> move the yoke back to compensate which results in less spring pressure based
> on the new position of the yoke - the previously held desired attitude now
> occurs with the yoke in a different position. This is not at all how it
> works in an airplane, and not at all how it feels to the pilot.

You're exaggerating a difference that is insignificant.

> In addition, in my experience the springs in these toy yokes and joysticks
> do not feel at all like normal control pressures in an airplane - the "feel"
> is all wrong and the force curves are not the same.

They don't feel the same from one airplane to the next, either. So what?

Before I drove a car, I trained on a simulator that had no motion. When I
switched to the real thing, I didn't notice any significant difference, except
that the car actually moved.

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 10:55 PM

Tina writes:

> Let's not overlook, as Dudley has mentioned, how the pressures needed
> on the yoke, and yoke deflections, change with airspeed. These are the
> things pilots know, and something the computer based sims I have flown
> do not replicate. It is anothr sensation light airplane pilots use
> automatically, and not available on most sims.

It seems almost self-evident. Why make such a big deal of it?

> One needs experience in both realms to be able to compare them. It's a
> given many pilots here have flown(?) sims so their observations have
> some validity.

From the way some of them talk, it doesn't sound like they've done any recent
or serious simming.

Benjamin Dover

May 16th 08, 10:56 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> I have flown many different aircraft, and have never had to ask
>> someone how to trim the plane.
>
> Nothing obliged me to ask. I could have simply used trial and error.
>
> If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it
> follows that no training is required to do so, in which case a pilot
> has no advantage over a non-pilot when it comes to trim, since
> everyone does it instinctively, without having to ask anyone anything.
>

YOU ARE A ****ING MORON! YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND A WORD YOU READ!

Once you learn how to trim an airplane, it becomes very easy to adapt to
the differences. A concept you are incapable of understanding. You have
got to learn to trim first, though. And you will never learn to trim a
real airplane with MSFS.

GO STICK YOUR HEAD BACK UP YOUR ASS. IT'S THE ONLY USEFULL THING YOU'LL
EVER DO IN YOU LIFE.

Mxsmanic

May 16th 08, 10:59 PM

gatt writes:

> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.

I'm sure there's some lack of realism, but I don't fly to feel control
pressures. I don't take an interest in the visceral sensations of flying.

I'm sure that the same pilots who enjoy flying in an open-cockpit biplane
built of cloth-covered wood probably wouldn't enjoy a desktop sim, because
they like physical sensations. However, pilots (and others) who like the
considerable intellectual exercise of flying and navigation might not care
about the physical effects, and indeed, for some (important) types of flying,
those physical sensations are not important.

If someone thinks that physical sensations are essential, I suggest he put on
a blindfold and see how long he can remain in straight and level flight with
those sensations alone.

Benjamin Dover

May 16th 08, 11:08 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> gatt writes:
>
>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>
> I'm sure there's some lack of realism, but I don't fly to feel control
> pressures. I don't take an interest in the visceral sensations of
> flying.
>

Trimming an airplane by feeling the control pressure is an essential part
of being a pilot. Since you take no interest in it, you're just jerking
yourself off while playing a game.

> I'm sure that the same pilots who enjoy flying in an open-cockpit
> biplane built of cloth-covered wood probably wouldn't enjoy a desktop
> sim, because they like physical sensations. However, pilots (and
> others) who like the considerable intellectual exercise of flying and
> navigation might not care about the physical effects, and indeed, for
> some (important) types of flying, those physical sensations are not
> important.
>
Pilots certainly do care about the physical effects. You've just
fantasized an scenario where they don't so you can delude yourself into
believing that jerking yourself off while playing a game is flying.
> If someone thinks that physical sensations are essential, I suggest he
> put on a blindfold and see how long he can remain in straight and
> level flight with those sensations alone.
>
No pilot has ever claimed you use physical sensations alone to fly. Only
in the twisted fecal matter which passes for your brain does that myth
exist.

Anthony, you become a bigger moron with every breath you take. You
constantly prove that you don't know **** from shinola.

[email protected]

May 16th 08, 11:25 PM

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:
> gatt writes:

> > I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
> > use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
> > stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.

> I'm sure there's some lack of realism, but I don't fly to feel control
> pressures. I don't take an interest in the visceral sensations of flying.

And once again you've totally missed the point.

Nobody flies to feel control pressure or gets their jollies from its
presence.

Control pressure enables the pilot to more precisely control the aircraft.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

gatt[_3_]

May 17th 08, 01:07 AM

Scott Skylane wrote:
> gatt wrote:
> /snip/ Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
>> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
>> aircraft. /snip
>
> Gatt, you owe me a new keyboard, I just spewed my coffee all over mine!
> The plethora of inop electric trim swithces in GA is due to them being
> broken, and the ownerws too cheap to have them fixed.

That too!

Our chief CFI "INOPed" the autopilot but occasionally turns it on while
taxiing to make sure the CFI candidates are paying attention to the
checklist. It actually works just fine. He just marked it INOP to keep
people from using it.

-c

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 01:10 AM

writes:

> Control pressure enables the pilot to more precisely control the aircraft.

How do pilots fly aircraft that lack control pressure, or aircraft that only
simulate it?

[email protected]

May 17th 08, 02:05 AM

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:
> writes:

> > Control pressure enables the pilot to more precisely control the aircraft.

> How do pilots fly aircraft that lack control pressure, or aircraft that only
> simulate it?

On aircraft that simulate it, the simulation is realistic.

In the early days of fly by wire airplanes without any control feedback,
the airplane tended to wander about the sky the way simmers do.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

BDS

May 17th 08, 02:28 AM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote

> > That's the difference, and it is a big difference.
>
> No, it's not.

I have experience with both and to me (and probably every other pilot on
this ng) it is a big difference.

> You're exaggerating a difference that is insignificant.

I don't think you have the background to comment on this and have it
actually carry any weight. A spring-based yoke on a PC sim feels nothing
like the real thing, not even close.

> They don't feel the same from one airplane to the next, either. So what?

Various aircraft are more similar to each other in the way that yoke vs trim
forces feel than the spring-based yoke is to any actual airplane. The
spring-based yoke feels like a child's toy, nothing more, nothing less. I
have one and I know what it feels like to use it with a PC based sim.

In addition, trim in the PC sim changes where the elevator is positioned for
a given yoke location (in software). This is fundamentally different from
what it does and how it functions in an actual aircraft.

> Before I drove a car, I trained on a simulator that had no motion. When I
> switched to the real thing, I didn't notice any significant difference,
except
> that the car actually moved.

That is not relevant to the topic.

BDS

The Visitor

May 17th 08, 05:21 AM

I've lost track. Now I just fly the trim.

Mxsmanic wrote:
> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you normally use mostly
> trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will you normally mostly use the
> yoke?

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 07:43 AM

Nomen Nescio > wrote in
:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: Mxsmanic >
>
>>If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it
>>follows that no training is required to do so
>
> Does anyone here really need further proof that MX is functionally
> retarded?
>

That's an extremely charitable overassessment of MX's mental capabilities.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 11:19 AM

BDS writes:

> I have experience with both and to me (and probably every other pilot on
> this ng) it is a big difference.

But your experience is limited, just like mine, and the fact that it includes
time in a real plane isn't necessarily significant.

I find that most pilots here have an amazingly narrow view of flying that does
not extend beyond whatever experience they have personally with real aircraft.
There's a lot more to aviation than Cessnas or Pipers. They complain that I
overestimate the competence I can acquire from using a simulator, but at the
very same time they seem to believe they know everything about flying even
though they've only flown a handful of tiny little planes for a total of a few
hundred hours at most.

> I don't think you have the background to comment on this and have it
> actually carry any weight. A spring-based yoke on a PC sim feels nothing
> like the real thing, not even close.

I've been in real aircraft--at least in airliners--and the importance of
sensation is _wildly_ exaggerated, if what I felt was representative (and I
felt exactly the same thing that the pilots did). Sensations are surely
stronger in tiny GA aircraft, but you can't fly aircraft on sensations alone,
and in many aircraft sensations just aren't important.

> Various aircraft are more similar to each other in the way that yoke vs trim
> forces feel than the spring-based yoke is to any actual airplane.

Except that there are actual airplanes that use spring-based feedback. In
fly-by-wire aircraft, the control pressure (if any) is completely simulated.
If simulation is so bad, why is it being used in actual aircraft?

The answer is that these sensations are, at best, mere conveniences. They are
not reliable. They are simulated for pilot comfort where they do not
naturally exist. They cannot be depended upon for flying. To fly safely you
need to be able to see things, either the world outside, or instruments, or
both. At _best_, sensation tells you that something has changed, but if you
are keeping your eyes where they belong, you don't need to be told that
something has changed by physical sensations.

> The spring-based yoke feels like a child's toy, nothing more, nothing less.

Some might well say that small aircraft feel like children's toys. It's just
a matter of viewpoint.

> In addition, trim in the PC sim changes where the elevator is positioned for
> a given yoke location (in software). This is fundamentally different from
> what it does and how it functions in an actual aircraft.

So?

> That is not relevant to the topic.

Yes, it is. It illustrates how unimportant some things are. You cannot drive
a car based on physical sensations, and you certainly cannot fly based on
them. They might feel nice (or not nice), and they might attract your
attention to the driving/flying task (if you've been careless enough to let
your attention wander), but they are not important, and that's one reason why
desktop simulators work as well as they do.

Things like sensation and control feedback can be adapted to in seconds, not
hours or days or weeks. And they aren't very useful.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 11:20 AM

writes:

> On aircraft that simulate it, the simulation is realistic.

But I thought that nothing is the same as the real thing, therefore _any_
simulation is unacceptable. If that's not true, then there must be some
simulations of flying that are just as realistic as the real thing.

You can't have it both ways. Either simulation works, or it doesn't.

> In the early days of fly by wire airplanes without any control feedback,
> the airplane tended to wander about the sky the way simmers do.

Simmers don't wander about the sky any more than real pilots.

Which airplanes do you have in mind, specifically?

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 11:21 AM

Robert Moore writes:

> In FAR Part 23, The FAA specifies the pressures that MUST exist,
> and how it MUST vary with airspeed.

Jim just said that early FBW didn't have feedback. Who's right?

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 11:22 AM

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 16, 12:19 pm, gatt > wrote:
>> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>>
>> > Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
>> > is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
>> > pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?
>>
>> Correct. (Well it has a "takeoff position" which is more or less
>> center.)
>>
>> In the '74 PA-28R I rent it's between the seats and harder to see,
>> and takeoff position is about "a quarter-inch back" on the slot since
>> there's no visible mark. I don't like the trim-wheel there. The first
>> time I flew in the right seat and reached for the trim handle I
>> cracked my knuckle against the door.
>
> Ok thanks.
> I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
> was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
> My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
> give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
> to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!

Good grief, he's criticising design now.

Bertie

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 11:23 AM

Nomen Nescio writes:

> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?

No, I discount them because (1) they are not important; (2) they vary
considerably from one aircraft to another; and (3) they are unreliable and
cannot be depended upon.

Additionally, I get no pleasure from these sensations. Some people enjoy
roller-coasters and midway rides; I don't. I do not have a thrill-seeking
personality. My enjoyment comes from other aspects of aviation.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 11:23 AM

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 16, 9:55 am, gatt > wrote:
>> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>> >> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you
>> >> normally use mostly trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will
>> >> you normally mostly use the yoke?
>>
>> Good question for r.a.s.
>>
>> You don't want to use the trim to adjust pitch, just to relieve the
>> control pressure. Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
>> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
>> aircraft. Always remember "Pitch, power, trim."
>>
>> The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
>> "The pilot must avoid using the trim to establish or correct airplane
>> attitude. The airplane attitude must be established and held first,
>> then control pressures trimmed out so that the airplane will maintain
>> the desired attitude in 'hands off' flight. Attempting to 'fly the
>> airplane with trim tabs' is a common fault in basic flying technique
>> even among experienced pilots."
>>
>> It's important for the pilot to feel the elevator pressure whereas
>> with a trim tab you're delegating that to mechanical authority.
>>
>> Also, if you get out of the habit of knowing where your trim is set,
>> you increase the likelihood of approaching an elevator trim stall in
>> a missed approach or go-around. This can be demonstrated pretty well
>> in MSFS2004--I think in the Mooney--by adjusting the elevator trim as
>> if you were in full-flaps landing configuration and then adding full
>> power; back-elevator trim will cause a radical nose-up pitch,
>> exceeding the critical angle of attack. To avoid elevator trim stall
>> the pilot must exert a great deal of forward pressure on the nose
>> -and- retrim the airplane, and it has to be brisk and smooth.
>> Whether by hand or electric motor, controlling it by trim is too
>> slow. -c
>
> Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
> is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
> pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?
>
> Personally I had real friggin hassle with trim. I'd get
> to 4000' set a course for x-country, maybe an hour
> away, set cruise, then touch-up trim, to relieve yoke
> control. Well it never really worked for me.
> As soon as I thought I had it right, by Descent Indicator
> (no jokes guys, women of the opposite sex might be lurkin)
> would start wandering off zero.
> My habit became, set Trim slightly down and use my
> pinky pressure back on the yoke to keep my Descent
> Indicator at zero, with an occasional glance so I could
> enjoy the view and work nav.
> Ken
> PS: Kens Rule: Use your pinky to stop being InDescent,
> and use the rest of your fingers anyway you want.
>

Descent indicator?

You're a moron.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 11:24 AM

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> > wrote in message
> news:2da21ff1-b22d-4dad-8ac7-
.
> ..
>> On May 16, 1:10 am, Nomen Nescio > wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>Juevie bull**** snipped<<
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> Thanks for contributing so many lines to the noise level.
>> "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".
>
>
> That was an ounce of prevention hoping to avoid the several pounds of
> cure that will certainly follow.
>
>

Yeah, good luck with that fjukktard.

Bertie
>
>

Marty Shapiro

May 17th 08, 12:03 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> writes:
>
>> On aircraft that simulate it, the simulation is realistic.
>
> But I thought that nothing is the same as the real thing, therefore _any_
> simulation is unacceptable. If that's not true, then there must be some
> simulations of flying that are just as realistic as the real thing.
>
> You can't have it both ways. Either simulation works, or it doesn't.
>
>> In the early days of fly by wire airplanes without any control feedback,
>> the airplane tended to wander about the sky the way simmers do.
>
> Simmers don't wander about the sky any more than real pilots.
>
> Which airplanes do you have in mind, specifically?
>

Anthony, you're a moron. You don't know **** from shinola.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 12:04 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Robert Moore writes:
>
>> In FAR Part 23, The FAA specifies the pressures that MUST exist,
>> and how it MUST vary with airspeed.
>
> Jim just said that early FBW didn't have feedback. Who's right?
>

Anthony, you're a moron. You don't know **** from shinola and lack the
mental capacity to comprehend what you've been told. Stick your head back
up your ass. At least you'll be doing something useful for mankind when
you do.

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 12:05 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Nomen Nescio writes:
>
>> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?
>
> No, I discount them because (1) they are not important; (2) they vary
> considerably from one aircraft to another; and (3) they are unreliable
> and cannot be depended upon.
>
> Additionally, I get no pleasure from these sensations. Some people
> enjoy roller-coasters and midway rides; I don't. I do not have a
> thrill-seeking personality. My enjoyment comes from other aspects of
> aviation.
>

BULL ****. You're a ****ing moron who doesn't know **** from shinola. You
have no idea what aviation is. You just jerk off playing MSFS and think
you're aviating. You're just a jerk jerking off.

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 12:07 PM

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in
:

> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
> :
>
>> On May 16, 9:55 am, gatt > wrote:
>>> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>> >> In a small GA aircraft, in which phases of flight will you
>>> >> normally use mostly trim to adjust pitch, and in which phases will
>>> >> you normally mostly use the yoke?
>>>
>>> Good question for r.a.s.
>>>
>>> You don't want to use the trim to adjust pitch, just to relieve the
>>> control pressure. Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
>>> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
>>> aircraft. Always remember "Pitch, power, trim."
>>>
>>> The Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, states:
>>> "The pilot must avoid using the trim to establish or correct airplane
>>> attitude. The airplane attitude must be established and held first,
>>> then control pressures trimmed out so that the airplane will maintain
>>> the desired attitude in 'hands off' flight. Attempting to 'fly the
>>> airplane with trim tabs' is a common fault in basic flying technique
>>> even among experienced pilots."
>>>
>>> It's important for the pilot to feel the elevator pressure whereas
>>> with a trim tab you're delegating that to mechanical authority.
>>>
>>> Also, if you get out of the habit of knowing where your trim is set,
>>> you increase the likelihood of approaching an elevator trim stall in
>>> a missed approach or go-around. This can be demonstrated pretty well
>>> in MSFS2004--I think in the Mooney--by adjusting the elevator trim as
>>> if you were in full-flaps landing configuration and then adding full
>>> power; back-elevator trim will cause a radical nose-up pitch,
>>> exceeding the critical angle of attack. To avoid elevator trim stall
>>> the pilot must exert a great deal of forward pressure on the nose
>>> -and- retrim the airplane, and it has to be brisk and smooth.
>>> Whether by hand or electric motor, controlling it by trim is too
>>> slow. -c
>>
>> Quick question, (it's been awhile since I've piloted)
>> is the trim (Cessna 152) in the center, right of the
>> pilot, and has zero mark to be set null in pre-flight?
>>
>> Personally I had real friggin hassle with trim. I'd get
>> to 4000' set a course for x-country, maybe an hour
>> away, set cruise, then touch-up trim, to relieve yoke
>> control. Well it never really worked for me.
>> As soon as I thought I had it right, by Descent Indicator
>> (no jokes guys, women of the opposite sex might be lurkin)
>> would start wandering off zero.
>> My habit became, set Trim slightly down and use my
>> pinky pressure back on the yoke to keep my Descent
>> Indicator at zero, with an occasional glance so I could
>> enjoy the view and work nav.
>> Ken
>> PS: Kens Rule: Use your pinky to stop being InDescent,
>> and use the rest of your fingers anyway you want.
>>
>
> Descent indicator?
>
>
> You're a moron.
>
>
> Bertie
>

Hey Bertie, maybe Ken will set the bow planes for emergency dive and use
the depth meter to monitor his descent!

Jay Maynard

May 17th 08, 12:13 PM

On 2008-05-16, Scott Skylane > wrote:
> gatt wrote:
> /snip/ Electronic trim switches mounted to the yoke are a
>> bad habit waiting to happen; they're disabled in a lot of training
>> aircraft. /snip
> Gatt, you owe me a new keyboard, I just spewed my coffee all over mine!
> The plethora of inop electric trim swithces in GA is due to them being
> broken, and the ownerws too cheap to have them fixed.

There are some aircraft (such as the Zodiac) where the trim is only
electric. The control forces are light enough that runaway/broken trim can
be overpowered, but I consider inop electric trim (either elevator or
aileron) to be a no go condition in the Zodiac.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

Buster Hymen

May 17th 08, 12:16 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> BDS writes:
>
>> I have experience with both and to me (and probably every other pilot
>> on this ng) it is a big difference.
>
> But your experience is limited, just like mine, and the fact that it
> includes time in a real plane isn't necessarily significant.
>
> I find that most pilots here have an amazingly narrow view of flying
> that does not extend beyond whatever experience they have personally
> with real aircraft. There's a lot more to aviation than Cessnas or
> Pipers. They complain that I overestimate the competence I can
> acquire from using a simulator, but at the very same time they seem to
> believe they know everything about flying even though they've only
> flown a handful of tiny little planes for a total of a few hundred
> hours at most.
>
>> I don't think you have the background to comment on this and have it
>> actually carry any weight. A spring-based yoke on a PC sim feels
>> nothing like the real thing, not even close.
>
> I've been in real aircraft--at least in airliners--and the importance
> of sensation is _wildly_ exaggerated, if what I felt was
> representative (and I felt exactly the same thing that the pilots
> did). Sensations are surely stronger in tiny GA aircraft, but you
> can't fly aircraft on sensations alone, and in many aircraft
> sensations just aren't important.
>
>> Various aircraft are more similar to each other in the way that yoke
>> vs trim forces feel than the spring-based yoke is to any actual
>> airplane.
>
> Except that there are actual airplanes that use spring-based feedback.
> In fly-by-wire aircraft, the control pressure (if any) is completely
> simulated. If simulation is so bad, why is it being used in actual
> aircraft?
>
> The answer is that these sensations are, at best, mere conveniences.
> They are not reliable. They are simulated for pilot comfort where
> they do not naturally exist. They cannot be depended upon for flying.
> To fly safely you need to be able to see things, either the world
> outside, or instruments, or both. At _best_, sensation tells you that
> something has changed, but if you are keeping your eyes where they
> belong, you don't need to be told that something has changed by
> physical sensations.
>
>> The spring-based yoke feels like a child's toy, nothing more, nothing
>> less.
>
> Some might well say that small aircraft feel like children's toys.
> It's just a matter of viewpoint.
>
>> In addition, trim in the PC sim changes where the elevator is
>> positioned for a given yoke location (in software). This is
>> fundamentally different from what it does and how it functions in an
>> actual aircraft.
>
> So?
>
>> That is not relevant to the topic.
>
> Yes, it is. It illustrates how unimportant some things are. You
> cannot drive a car based on physical sensations, and you certainly
> cannot fly based on them. They might feel nice (or not nice), and
> they might attract your attention to the driving/flying task (if
> you've been careless enough to let your attention wander), but they
> are not important, and that's one reason why desktop simulators work
> as well as they do.
>
> Things like sensation and control feedback can be adapted to in
> seconds, not hours or days or weeks. And they aren't very useful.
>

Anthony, you are totally unimportant to the human race.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 12:35 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Tina writes:
>
>> Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we
>> who fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not
>> understand ga trimming procedures.
>
> It is not "vastly different," merely different. Don't overestimate
> the importance of minor differences. If such differences were that
> important, then pilots would have to start learning from scratch again
> every time they moved from one aircraft to another.

Nope, completely different thing, fjukkwit.

Bertie

BDS

May 17th 08, 12:36 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote

> But your experience is limited, just like mine, and the fact that it
includes
> time in a real plane isn't necessarily significant.

Everyone's experience is limited to some extent. However, yours is the more
limited in this case, and yet you claim to know better. Go figure.

> I find that most pilots here have an amazingly narrow view of flying that
does
> not extend beyond whatever experience they have personally with real
aircraft.
> There's a lot more to aviation than Cessnas or Pipers. They complain that
I
> overestimate the competence I can acquire from using a simulator, but at
the
> very same time they seem to believe they know everything about flying even
> though they've only flown a handful of tiny little planes for a total of a
few
> hundred hours at most.

I am not them. What makes you group everyone into the same category here?

> I've been in real aircraft--at least in airliners--and the importance of
> sensation is _wildly_ exaggerated, if what I felt was representative (and
I
> felt exactly the same thing that the pilots did). Sensations are surely
> stronger in tiny GA aircraft, but you can't fly aircraft on sensations
alone,
> and in many aircraft sensations just aren't important.

Did you fly the airliner, or ride in the back?

> Except that there are actual airplanes that use spring-based feedback. In
> fly-by-wire aircraft, the control pressure (if any) is completely
simulated.
> If simulation is so bad, why is it being used in actual aircraft?

I have flown some of these and the simulated feedback provided is very close
to the real thing. Believe me, it is nothing like the toy yoke used on PC
sims.

> Some might well say that small aircraft feel like children's toys. It's
just
> a matter of viewpoint.

Find me an actual pilot who says this. So far, you are the only one I've
ever heard say this and coming from a non-pilot it doesn't really mean
anything.

> Yes, it is. It illustrates how unimportant some things are. You cannot
drive
> a car based on physical sensations, and you certainly cannot fly based on
> them. They might feel nice (or not nice), and they might attract your
> attention to the driving/flying task (if you've been careless enough to
let
> your attention wander), but they are not important, and that's one reason
why
> desktop simulators work as well as they do.

I agree that you cannot fly based on physical sensations alone, nor can you
drive a car in this manner. Would you agree however that sensations can
tell you things like relative speed, you just got a flat tire, your brakes
are shot, something bad is about to happen to your engine, your power
steering just failed, etc., etc. Some sensations in flying can be relied
upon and they add to the total picture about what is happening at any given
moment. No pilot would ever disagree with this. If you disagree, find
someone who is a pilot to back you up and you will gain some small level of
credibility.

BDS

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 12:40 PM

Steve Foley

May 17th 08, 01:20 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> I have flown many different aircraft, and have never had to ask someone
>> how
>> to trim the plane.
>
> Nothing obliged me to ask. I could have simply used trial and error.
>
> If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it follows
> that no training is required to do so

No, that doesn't follow.

Mike Isaksen

May 17th 08, 01:55 PM

"Jay Maynard" wrote ...
> ... I consider inop electric trim (either elevator or
> aileron) to be a no go condition in the Zodiac.
>

Do Zodiacs come with aileron trim standard, or did you mean rudder trim?

Mike Isaksen

May 17th 08, 02:01 PM

"Steve Foley" wrote...
>
> "Mxsmanic" wrote ...
>> If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane,
>> then it follows that no training is required to do so
>
> No, that doesn't follow.

This is the typical MX dance where each and every partner walks away feeling
dizzy. The music hasn't changed since he started posting.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 02:11 PM

BDS writes:

> What makes you group everyone into the same category here?

I don't. But quite a few of the most vocal posters to this group seem to
belong to some sort of odd subset of all pilots. Their behavior is unlike
what I've seen in other pilots, and their knowledge is also peculiarly
limited. I think that other factors besides being a pilot enter into whatever
motivates them to post here and behave as they do.

> Did you fly the airliner, or ride in the back?

I was on board, and that's all that was required, since the entire aircraft
moves at once.

> I have flown some of these and the simulated feedback provided is very close
> to the real thing. Believe me, it is nothing like the toy yoke used on PC
> sims.

But it's still simulation, provided by springs. How can it be realistic?

> Find me an actual pilot who says this.

Most pilots are polite, especially those with the much greater experience that
is usually required before they can fly aircraft other than tiny tin cans.

> I agree that you cannot fly based on physical sensations alone, nor can you
> drive a car in this manner. Would you agree however that sensations can
> tell you things like relative speed, you just got a flat tire, your brakes
> are shot, something bad is about to happen to your engine, your power
> steering just failed, etc., etc.

They can tell you some of these things, but not all. A flat tire produces a
very distinctive sensation. However, you cannot tell how fast you're going,
or even how much you've changed speed, by sensation alone. Overall, it's a
pretty poor indicator for everything.

Inner-ear sensations are designed to help you stand and walk, and for those
purposes they work reasonably well, particularly when combined with visual
input. However, they fail pretty miserably in situations for which they are
not designed, such as flying an aircraft. The literature is absolutely
constant on this point. About the only thing you can glean from sensations is
that a change in sensations generally correlates with a change in status. If
you suddenly feel that you are turning, chances are that something about the
aircraft has changed ... but you cannot assume that the change is actually a
turn unless you can confirm that by other means.

> Some sensations in flying can be relied
> upon and they add to the total picture about what is happening at any given
> moment. No pilot would ever disagree with this. If you disagree, find
> someone who is a pilot to back you up and you will gain some small level of
> credibility.

Some sensations can be relied upon in a small way. No sensations are actually
required. An absence of sensations does not prevent you from flying if you
have other sources of information, and sensations alone are never sufficient.

This is why motion is not very important in simulation. Motion helps convince
a pilot that he is flying a real airplane, just like sound, but he doesn't
need motion to fly, and in fact, he is supposed to be able to fly without it.

Many pilots here seem to cling to this idea that simulation without motion is
inadequate. I'm not sure whether they are really addicted to motion as much
as they seem to be, or whether they are just using it as an excuse because it
is one of the salient differences between a desktop simulation and a real
aircraft. Perhaps if MSFS included motion, they'd find something else to
latch onto.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 02:27 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> BDS writes:
>
>> What makes you group everyone into the same category here?
>
> I don't. But quite a few of the most vocal posters to this group seem
> to belong to some sort of odd subset of all pilots. Their behavior is
> unlike what I've seen in other pilots, and their knowledge is also
> peculiarly limited. I think that other factors besides being a pilot
> enter into whatever motivates them to post here and behave as they do.
>
>> Did you fly the airliner, or ride in the back?
>
> I was on board, and that's all that was required, since the entire
> aircraft moves at once.
>
>> I have flown some of these and the simulated feedback provided is
>> very close to the real thing. Believe me, it is nothing like the toy
>> yoke used on PC sims.
>
> But it's still simulation, provided by springs. How can it be
> realistic?
>
>> Find me an actual pilot who says this.
>
> Most pilots are polite, especially those with the much greater
> experience that is usually required before they can fly aircraft other
> than tiny tin cans.
>
>> I agree that you cannot fly based on physical sensations alone, nor
>> can you drive a car in this manner. Would you agree however that
>> sensations can tell you things like relative speed, you just got a
>> flat tire, your brakes are shot, something bad is about to happen to
>> your engine, your power steering just failed, etc., etc.
>
> They can tell you some of these things, but not all. A flat tire
> produces a very distinctive sensation. However, you cannot tell how
> fast you're going, or even how much you've changed speed, by sensation
> alone. Overall, it's a pretty poor indicator for everything.
>
> Inner-ear sensations are designed to help you stand and walk, and for
> those purposes they work reasonably well, particularly when combined
> with visual input. However, they fail pretty miserably in situations
> for which they are not designed, such as flying an aircraft. The
> literature is absolutely constant on this point. About the only thing
> you can glean from sensations is that a change in sensations generally
> correlates with a change in status. If you suddenly feel that you are
> turning, chances are that something about the aircraft has changed ...
> but you cannot assume that the change is actually a turn unless you
> can confirm that by other means.
>
>> Some sensations in flying can be relied
>> upon and they add to the total picture about what is happening at any
>> given moment. No pilot would ever disagree with this. If you
>> disagree, find someone who is a pilot to back you up and you will
>> gain some small level of credibility.
>
> Some sensations can be relied upon in a small way. No sensations are
> actually required. An absence of sensations does not prevent you from
> flying if you have other sources of information, and sensations alone
> are never sufficient.
>
> This is why motion is not very important in simulation. Motion helps
> convince a pilot that he is flying a real airplane, just like sound,
> but he doesn't need motion to fly, and in fact, he is supposed to be
> able to fly without it.
>
> Many pilots here seem to cling to this idea that simulation without
> motion is inadequate.

No, simulation is in inadequate, period.

Bertie

Steve Foley

May 17th 08, 03:14 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
>
> From the way some of them talk, it doesn't sound like they've done any
> recent
> or serious simming.

That's because almost nobody (yourself included) takes simming seriously.
Otherwise, your recent tragic crash would have involved more than
"half-hearted attempts to recover control".

Steve Foley

May 17th 08, 03:22 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

> Most pilots are polite, especially those with the much greater experience
> that
> is usually required before they can fly aircraft other than tiny tin cans.

I find your choice to of the term 'tiny tin cans' particularly telling.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 03:27 PM

BDS

May 17th 08, 03:33 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote

> But it's still simulation, provided by springs. How can it be realistic?

First, it's generally more than a couple of springs and second, it costs
more than the $150 you probably spent on your toy yoke. That's why it's
more realistic.

> Some sensations can be relied upon in a small way. No sensations are
actually
> required. An absence of sensations does not prevent you from flying if
you
> have other sources of information, and sensations alone are never
sufficient.

No one here has argued against this.

> Many pilots here seem to cling to this idea that simulation without motion
is
> inadequate.

I disagree. What I have seen here is mainly the argument that the sim (and
especially the PC sim) is not a true substitute for the real thing - in this
case trim function being the latest example.

I think you have an emotional investment in arguing against this because
your arguments lack logic and tend to dismiss anything that points to that
conclusion. When you are backed into a corner you always seem to resort to
the thinly veiled "tin can pilot" insult without having any idea of the type
of pilot you are corresponding with, or the experience level they might
have.

BDS

Peter Clark

May 17th 08, 03:44 PM

On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:52:53 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> wrote:

>gatt wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>>
>>>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>>>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>>>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>>>>
>>
>>> Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs unboosted
>>> control surfaces :-))
>>
>> Ooh. Good point. I wonder if a series of small electric motors could
>> be used to spool up bungee tension corresponding to appropriate
>> pressures. Not sure how the big sims do it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -c
>>
>Not sure myself. It would have to be a complicated program. Even the
>control surface area is a factor, and each aircraft would be affected
>differently.

Unless I'm mistaken here, since the big jets have boosted controls and
run everything through an artificial feel unit for the yokes don't
they just install the same artificial feel unit in the sim as is in
the aircraft?

Bertie?

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 03:54 PM

Peter Clark > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:52:53 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> > wrote:
>
>>gatt wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what
>>>>> I use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them
>>>>> with stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs
>>>> unboosted control surfaces :-))
>>>
>>> Ooh. Good point. I wonder if a series of small electric motors
>>> could be used to spool up bungee tension corresponding to
>>> appropriate pressures. Not sure how the big sims do it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -c
>>>
>>Not sure myself. It would have to be a complicated program. Even the
>>control surface area is a factor, and each aircraft would be affected
>>differently.
>
> Unless I'm mistaken here, since the big jets have boosted controls and
> run everything through an artificial feel unit for the yokes don't
> they just install the same artificial feel unit in the sim as is in
> the aircraft?
>

Nah, the artificial feel is fairly simple compared to the arrangement in
a sim. In an aircraft there's an airspeed input ( some older airplanes
have seperate pitot tubes on the tail to feed the feel) that goes to a
computer which operates a bunch of arms and levers that give a mecanical
advantage type feedback to the stick. While it's similar in a sim, the
number of parametrs the sim's computer has to look at to make a feel
adjustemnt is enormous. In the airplane it's pretty natural in
operation. Even the best sims tend to be a bit notchy and not so natural
to fly. Good smooth RL pilots tend to be fairly poor at controlling
sims, particulkarly the old ones, wheras guys who are good at flying the
sims tend to be automatons and fly the airplane as such. Not a hard and
fast rule, but it's the case more often than not. I was in an old three
axis sim years ago and noticed the altimeter wasn't moving while we were
in S+L flight. I just assumed the sim was acting up and was broken....

Bertie

Robert M. Gary

May 17th 08, 03:56 PM

On May 16, 2:51*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steve Foley writes:

> If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it follows
> that no training is required to do so, in which case a pilot has no advantage
> over a non-pilot when it comes to trim, since everyone does it instinctively,
> without having to ask anyone anything.

Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.

-Robert, CFII

Thomas Borchert

May 17th 08, 03:56 PM

Gatt,

> He just marked it INOP to keep
> people from using it.
>

How extremely dumb of him! I'd run, not walk out of that "flight
school".

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert

May 17th 08, 03:56 PM

Bds,

> I have experience with both and to me (and probably every other pilot on
> this ng) it is a big difference.
>

Why, oh why, do you bother with the idiot? It's going the same route it
always goes (and you're right, of course).

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 17th 08, 04:02 PM

Peter Clark wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:52:53 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> > wrote:
>
>> gatt wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>>>>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>>>>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>>>>>
>>>> Ah yes......but at what airspeed? (slugs dynamic pressure vs unboosted
>>>> control surfaces :-))
>>> Ooh. Good point. I wonder if a series of small electric motors could
>>> be used to spool up bungee tension corresponding to appropriate
>>> pressures. Not sure how the big sims do it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -c
>>>
>> Not sure myself. It would have to be a complicated program. Even the
>> control surface area is a factor, and each aircraft would be affected
>> differently.
>
> Unless I'm mistaken here, since the big jets have boosted controls and
> run everything through an artificial feel unit for the yokes don't
> they just install the same artificial feel unit in the sim as is in
> the aircraft?
>
> Bertie?

Here's a great article written by Joe Bill Dryden, test pilot in the F16
program. Dry does a very credible job of explaining artificial feel in
rate control systems as opposed to displacement systems.
I believe this will help clear the air a bit.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1986/articles/jan_86/f16_control/index.html

--
Dudley Henriques

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 05:01 PM

Robert M. Gary writes:

> Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
> bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
> enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
> students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.

I make the same mistake in the sim. I've been trying to train myself out of
it. I need to do more hand-flying (without autopilot) and things like pattern
work.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 05:03 PM

Steve Foley writes:

> That's because almost nobody (yourself included) takes simming seriously.

A lot of people do, including many real-world pilots--at least those with open
minds. There is much to be gained from simulation.

> Otherwise, your recent tragic crash would have involved more than
> "half-hearted attempts to recover control".

That was a one-purpose experiment, not a regular flight.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 05:04 PM

Steve Foley writes:

> I find your choice to of the term 'tiny tin cans' particularly telling.

I don't hold them in the same high esteem that many private pilots seem to.
There are many types of aircraft, not just little Cessnas. One of the
advantages to simulation is that you can try flying all sorts of aircraft, not
just the ones for which you might have an appropriate certification.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 05:07 PM

BDS writes:

> First, it's generally more than a couple of springs and second, it costs
> more than the $150 you probably spent on your toy yoke. That's why it's
> more realistic.

So how realistic does a simulation have to be before it counts, exactly?

> I disagree. What I have seen here is mainly the argument that the sim (and
> especially the PC sim) is not a true substitute for the real thing - in this
> case trim function being the latest example.

By definition, no simulation is a true substitute for the real thing,
otherwise it would _be_ the real thing. But the real question is whether or
not a given simulation fulfills a given purpose. And for some reason, some
people here have an irrational need to dismiss desktop simulators, or perhaps
just MSFS specifically.

> I think you have an emotional investment in arguing against this because
> your arguments lack logic and tend to dismiss anything that points to that
> conclusion.

I'm not an emotional person.

> When you are backed into a corner you always seem to resort to
> the thinly veiled "tin can pilot" insult without having any idea of the type
> of pilot you are corresponding with, or the experience level they might
> have.

It's not an insult, it's an observation. The most vocal and single-minded
pilot posters also seem to be the ones whose experience is limited to the tin
cans. I know this because they describe flying in terms that apply only to
the tin cans, as if no other type of flying existed.

Steve Foley

May 17th 08, 05:09 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> I find your choice to of the term 'tiny tin cans' particularly telling.
>
> I don't hold them in the same high esteem that many private pilots seem
> to.

I was thinking more along the lines of your statements that you only want to
engage others in
discussions about aviation, but the terminology you choose is clearly
intended to be inflammatory.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 05:30 PM

Steve Foley writes:

> I was thinking more along the lines of your statements that you only want to
> engage others in discussions about aviation, but the terminology you choose is clearly
> intended to be inflammatory.

Language isn't inflammatory; only a person's reaction to language can be that.
Some people become inflamed by a cloudy day; others, including myself, are
entirely refractory even to language intended by its author to produce
inflammatory reactions.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 17th 08, 05:32 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> That's because almost nobody (yourself included) takes simming seriously.
>
> A lot of people do, including many real-world pilots--at least those with open
> minds. There is much to be gained from simulation.

I have enjoyed tremendously both my work on MSFS with both Microsoft and
other designers in the sim community. I find the program has many
educational and practical uses in the real world of aviation if used
properly by creative instructors.
In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.

--
Dudley Henriques

Steve Foley

May 17th 08, 05:35 PM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> I was thinking more along the lines of your statements that you only want
>> to
>> engage others in discussions about aviation, but the terminology you
>> choose is clearly
>> intended to be inflammatory.
>
> Language isn't inflammatory; only a person's reaction to language can be
> that.
> Some people become inflamed by a cloudy day; others, including myself, are
> entirely refractory even to language intended by its author to produce
> inflammatory reactions.

OK, Let me re-phrase:

I was thinking more along the lines of your statements that you only want to
engage others in discussions about aviation, but the terminology you choose
is clearly
intended by its author to produce inflammatory reactions.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 17th 08, 05:42 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Robert M. Gary writes:
>
>> Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
>> bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
>> enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
>> students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.
>
> I make the same mistake in the sim. I've been trying to train myself
> out of it. I need to do more hand-flying (without autopilot) and
> things like pattern work.
>

Good grief.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 05:46 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> That's because almost nobody (yourself included) takes simming
>> seriously.
>
> A lot of people do, including many real-world pilots--at least those
> with open minds. There is much to be gained from simulation.
>
>> Otherwise, your recent tragic crash would have involved more than
>> "half-hearted attempts to recover control".
>
> That was a one-purpose experiment, not a regular flight.

None of your "flighs" are regualr flights. They're jerking off.

Bertie
>

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 05:46 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> I find your choice to of the term 'tiny tin cans' particularly
>> telling.
>
> I don't hold them in the same high esteem that many private pilots
> seem to. There are many types of aircraft, not just little Cessnas.
> One of the advantages to simulation is that you can try flying all
> sorts of Pixtels

I have fixored your poast.

Bertie

[email protected]

May 17th 08, 06:25 PM

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:
> writes:

> > On aircraft that simulate it, the simulation is realistic.

> But I thought that nothing is the same as the real thing, therefore _any_
> simulation is unacceptable. If that's not true, then there must be some
> simulations of flying that are just as realistic as the real thing.

Did you miss the word "aircraft"?

On an AIRCRAFT where there is no natural control feedback, systems
much more complex and expensive than a couple of springs provide
the feedback. That is not a "simulation of flying", it is actual flight.

> You can't have it both ways. Either simulation works, or it doesn't.

Irrelevant to the statement.

> > In the early days of fly by wire airplanes without any control feedback,
> > the airplane tended to wander about the sky the way simmers do.

> Simmers don't wander about the sky any more than real pilots.

As long as they have the autopilot on.

> Which airplanes do you have in mind, specifically?

Any real one.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[email protected]

May 17th 08, 06:35 PM

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Robert Moore writes:

> > In FAR Part 23, The FAA specifies the pressures that MUST exist,
> > and how it MUST vary with airspeed.

> Jim just said that early FBW didn't have feedback. Who's right?

Get a dictionary from someone who owns one and look up the words
"development", "reasearch", "testing", "production" and "certified".

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Barry

May 17th 08, 06:41 PM

> Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
> bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
> enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
> students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.

A good way to keep students from doing this is to have them fly with a pen or
pencil interwoven between the fingers. If the student squeezes too hard, it
hurts, which reminds the student to relax the grip.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 17th 08, 06:55 PM

Barry wrote:
>> Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
>> bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
>> enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
>> students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.
>
> A good way to keep students from doing this is to have them fly with a pen or
> pencil interwoven between the fingers. If the student squeezes too hard, it
> hurts, which reminds the student to relax the grip.
>
>
>
Another good way of preventing excessive grip on the stick or yoke is to
start the student from day one handling the airplane with their
fingertips ONLY. Worked well for me for every student I taught to fly.

--
Dudley Henriques

[email protected]

May 17th 08, 07:15 PM

In rec.aviation.piloting Barry > wrote:
> > Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
> > bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
> > enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
> > students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.

> A good way to keep students from doing this is to have them fly with a pen or
> pencil interwoven between the fingers. If the student squeezes too hard, it
> hurts, which reminds the student to relax the grip.

The way my instructor broke me of the death grip on the controls was
to have me establish cruise then fold my arms and fly a short cross
country using only the rudder.

I was allowed to make trim tweeks, but if I unfolded my arms for any
other reason I got a BIG gutteral noise and reminder.

On the return trip I got to hold the yoke with 2 fingers.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Helen Waite

May 17th 08, 07:20 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Many pilots here seem to cling to this idea that simulation without
> motion is inadequate. I'm not sure whether they are really addicted
> to motion as much as they seem to be, or whether they are just using
> it as an excuse because it is one of the salient differences between a
> desktop simulation and a real aircraft. Perhaps if MSFS included
> motion, they'd find something else to latch onto.

Good grief. You're knowledge of aviation decreases with every post you
make.

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 07:21 PM

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 07:24 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> I'm not an emotional person.
>

You're not a person, period. You're fecal matter attached to a keyboard.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 07:43 PM

Dudley Henriques writes:

> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
> created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
> flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
> these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
> even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
> and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.

I looked at some of the companies you recommended and their aircraft seem very
cool, even though I'm not a big warbird fan. I'm always on the lookout for
companies that produce top-quality, ultrarealistic add-ons.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 07:44 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
>> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS
>> have created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I
>> have flown and been involved with personally during my career and I
>> have these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in
>> real life even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing
>> both my family and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in
>> aviation.
>
> I looked at some of the companies you recommended and their aircraft
> seem very cool, even though I'm not a big warbird fan. I'm always on
> the lookout for companies that produce top-quality, ultrarealistic
> add-ons.
>

So you can rip them off by downloading them without paying for them.

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 17th 08, 08:18 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
>> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
>> created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
>> flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
>> these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
>> even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
>> and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.
>
> I looked at some of the companies you recommended and their aircraft seem very
> cool, even though I'm not a big warbird fan. I'm always on the lookout for
> companies that produce top-quality, ultrarealistic add-ons.

Something you might be interested in if realism is your thing is a
museum quality freeware project I'm working on now with a combined team
of some of the best designers, graphics people, and flight model
developers in the world.
When finished in the next few months, this aircraft will be as close to
being an exact replication graphics, performance, and systems wise, of a
North American F86E/F Sabre as has ever been developed for Microsoft
flight simulator.
This project is so real, and the depth of fidelity so deep and authentic
that I wouldn't hesitate to use it in acclimating a prospective pilot
doing a checkout in the F86.
Even if you are not into Warbirds, this add on will be well worth having.
You might try it. I think you'll like this one.
I'll be reviewing it for Simflight as it comes on line. I'll post
something on the Usenet sim forum and let you know when it's available.

--
Dudley Henriques

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 08:51 PM

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

> So you can rip them off by downloading them without paying for them.

Most payware add-ons cannot be downloaded until you pay for them.

Mxsmanic

May 17th 08, 08:51 PM

Dudley Henriques writes:

> I'll be reviewing it for Simflight as it comes on line. I'll post
> something on the Usenet sim forum and let you know when it's available.

I'll look forward to it.

di+gi+es

May 17th 08, 09:08 PM

On 5/17/2008 9:07 AM Mxsmanic ignored two million years of human
evolution to write:

> I'm not an emotional person.

You're not a person at all. You're just a name on a screen.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

May 17th 08, 09:28 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip writes:
>
>> So you can rip them off by downloading them without paying for them.
>
> Most payware add-ons cannot be downloaded until you pay for them.
>

What, no begging bowl for them?

Bertie

george

May 17th 08, 09:45 PM

On May 18, 5:41 am, "Barry" > wrote:
> > Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
> > bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
> > enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
> > students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.
>
> A good way to keep students from doing this is to have them fly with a pen or
> pencil interwoven between the fingers. If the student squeezes too hard, it
> hurts, which reminds the student to relax the grip.

Anything more than thumb and forefinger is overcontrol

george

May 17th 08, 09:47 PM

On May 18, 6:24 am, Benjamin Dover > wrote:
> Mxsmanic > wrote :
>
> > I'm not an emotional person.
>
> You're not a person, period. You're fecal matter attached to a keyboard.

Hey !
Fecal matter -has- had a use

Benjamin Dover

May 17th 08, 11:09 PM

george > wrote in
:

> On May 18, 6:24 am, Benjamin Dover > wrote:
>> Mxsmanic > wrote
>> :
>>
>> > I'm not an emotional person.
>>
>> You're not a person, period. You're fecal matter attached to a
>> keyboard.
>
> Hey !
> Fecal matter -has- had a use
>

Sure, but in Anthony's case it's used toxic fecal matter. Not even fit for
feeding flies.

BakedandFried

May 17th 08, 11:15 PM

"Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From:
>
>>Thanks for contributing so many lines to the noise level.
>>"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".
>
> So, you consider a correct answer to be "noise"?
> Get a life.
>
>
> /"\
> |\./|
> | |
> | |
> /''\| |/''\..
> /~\| | | | \
> | | | | | \
> | | | | | \
> | ~ ~ ~ ~ |
> | /
> \ /
> \ /
> \ ___ /
>
>

Nicely considered and intelligent rejoinder.

You have no class at all. None.

Jay Maynard

May 18th 08, 12:02 AM

On 2008-05-17, Mike Isaksen > wrote:
> "Jay Maynard" wrote ...
>> ... I consider inop electric trim (either elevator or
>> aileron) to be a no go condition in the Zodiac.
> Do Zodiacs come with aileron trim standard, or did you mean rudder trim?

Aileron trim isn't exactly standard, but it's a cheap ($750) and very common
option.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

Jay Maynard

May 18th 08, 12:03 AM

On 2008-05-17, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
> created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
> flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
> these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
> even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
> and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.

Who does this kind of work? If it's not too expensive, I wouldn't mind
having a MSFS replica of N55ZC.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

B A R R Y

May 18th 08, 12:08 AM

On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:22 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> wrote:

>Another good way of preventing excessive grip on the stick or yoke is to
>start the student from day one handling the airplane with their
>fingertips ONLY. Worked well for me for every student I taught to fly.

My instructor did the same.

One or two fingers and a thumb, trim to make it possible.

Trim, trim, and trim some more...

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 12:37 AM

B A R R Y wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:22 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> > wrote:
>
>> Another good way of preventing excessive grip on the stick or yoke is to
>> start the student from day one handling the airplane with their
>> fingertips ONLY. Worked well for me for every student I taught to fly.
>
>
> My instructor did the same.
>
> One or two fingers and a thumb, trim to make it possible.
>
> Trim, trim, and trim some more...

On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
feet of desired :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 12:42 AM

Jay Maynard wrote:
> On 2008-05-17, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
>> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
>> created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
>> flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
>> these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
>> even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
>> and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.
>
> Who does this kind of work? If it's not too expensive, I wouldn't mind
> having a MSFS replica of N55ZC.

I don't think these folks do it for money. These were done as special
favors for me by devs I worked with on their various projects. I never
charge these folks, and they have always been very appreciative of the
work I've done for them.
You might contact some of them via email and ask them. It wouldn't do
any harm I'm sure.

--
Dudley Henriques

B A R R Y

May 18th 08, 12:44 AM

On Sat, 17 May 2008 19:37:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> wrote:
>
>On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
>occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
>as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
>practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
>feet of desired :-)

I had the same guy for instrument training, and the trim training made
IFR with no AP far, far easier.

A well trimmed aircraft is a pleasure, and very little work, to fly.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 12:49 AM

B A R R Y wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 19:37:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> > wrote:
>> On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
>> occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
>> as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
>> practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
>> feet of desired :-)
>
>
> I had the same guy for instrument training, and the trim training made
> IFR with no AP far, far easier.
>
> A well trimmed aircraft is a pleasure, and very little work, to fly.

Very true.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 12:52 AM

Jay Maynard wrote:
> On 2008-05-17, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> In addition to the practical side of the sim , I have also been
>> fortunate in that some of the finest designers connected with MSFS have
>> created exact virtual replications for me of several aircraft I have
>> flown and been involved with personally during my career and I have
>> these aircraft appearing exactly as they existed and looked in real life
>> even to their tail numbers in the sim to enjoy, allowing both my family
>> and friends to experience a bit of my tenure in aviation.
>
> Who does this kind of work? If it's not too expensive, I wouldn't mind
> having a MSFS replica of N55ZC.

Jay, I should add that in both cases where this was done for me, each
aircraft involved was the type we were working on at the time; one a
P51D by Shockwave through an independent repainter and another, an F86
by an independent design team.

--
Dudley Henriques

Roy Smith

May 18th 08, 12:55 AM

In article >,
Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> B A R R Y wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 May 2008 19:37:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques
> > > wrote:
> >> On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
> >> occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
> >> as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
> >> practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
> >> feet of desired :-)
> >
> >
> > I had the same guy for instrument training, and the trim training made
> > IFR with no AP far, far easier.
> >
> > A well trimmed aircraft is a pleasure, and very little work, to fly.
>
> Very true.

A fun exercise is to take your hands off the yoke completely and fly with
just power, trim, and rudder. It really teaches you to make small
adjustments and to wait for the plane to settle down before making another
change.

On a calm day, and perhaps with a couple of attempts, a good student can
usually get the plane over the runway in a state where if they continued
that way, the landing would probably be survivable :-)

B A R R Y

May 18th 08, 01:02 AM

On Sat, 17 May 2008 19:55:58 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:

>
>A fun exercise is to take your hands off the yoke completely and fly with
>just power, trim, and rudder. It really teaches you to make small
>adjustments and to wait for the plane to settle down before making another
>change.
>

It is!

Once upon a time, folks learned to fly r/c in a similar manner. It
teaches loads about aerodynamics.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 01:11 AM

B A R R Y wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 19:55:58 -0400, Roy Smith > wrote:
>
>> A fun exercise is to take your hands off the yoke completely and fly with
>> just power, trim, and rudder. It really teaches you to make small
>> adjustments and to wait for the plane to settle down before making another
>> change.
>>
>
> It is!
>
> Once upon a time, folks learned to fly r/c in a similar manner. It
> teaches loads about aerodynamics.

True. Some of the greatest teaching moments you'll ever have as a CFI
are those you spend allowing a student to do interesting, safe, and fun
things with the airplane.

--
Dudley Henriques

Frank Stutzman[_2_]

May 18th 08, 01:34 AM

In rec.aviation.piloting Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
> occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
> as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
> practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
> feet of desired :-)

On long cross countries in rattle trap old Cessna 150s, I would set my trim
the best I could and then shift my flight bag slightly fore and aft until
the altimeter vaguely settled down. If it was really bad, I'd move my seat
forward or backward a notch. This seemed a lot more precise than moving the
trim wheel.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Boise, ID

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

May 18th 08, 01:43 AM

Frank Stutzman wrote:
> In rec.aviation.piloting Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
>> On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
>> occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
>> as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
>> practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
>> feet of desired :-)
>
> On long cross countries in rattle trap old Cessna 150s, I would set my trim
> the best I could and then shift my flight bag slightly fore and aft until
> the altimeter vaguely settled down. If it was really bad, I'd move my seat
> forward or backward a notch. This seemed a lot more precise than moving the
> trim wheel.
>

I believe the engineering term for this is "linear hi-jinks" :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Ken S. Tucker

May 18th 08, 02:32 AM

On May 17, 5:34 pm, Frank Stutzman > wrote:
> In rec.aviation.piloting Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
> > On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
> > occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
> > as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
> > practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
> > feet of desired :-)
>
> On long cross countries in rattle trap old Cessna 150s, I would set my trim
> the best I could and then shift my flight bag slightly fore and aft until
> the altimeter vaguely settled down. If it was really bad, I'd move my seat
> forward or backward a notch. This seemed a lot more precise than moving the
> trim wheel.

LOL. I thought that was just me. I'd be doing some
two handed navigation work, in a 150, and notice my
nose start to rise a bit, so I'd just lean forward.
Kens Rule, adjust trim when yoke is in your eye.
Ken

Michael Ash

May 18th 08, 03:04 AM

In rec.aviation.student Roy Smith > wrote:
> A fun exercise is to take your hands off the yoke completely and fly with
> just power, trim, and rudder. It really teaches you to make small
> adjustments and to wait for the plane to settle down before making another
> change.

A few weeks ago I was out soaring on a pretty decent thermal day. It was
hot, and I couldn't get high enough to cool off, so I was getting pretty
warm in the cockpit. I was switching off between my hands, holding one in
front of the vent while flying with the other for a few seconds, then
changing.

Finally I thought, I wonder how well I can do with just my feet. So I let
go of the stick, held both hands in front of the vent, cooled them off
nicely and tried to hold my circle with the rudder. A thermal is not
exactly calm air so it didn't work all that great, but I only needed
occasional corrections with my hands.

Of course I wouldn't do this at low altitude due to the risk of a
stall-spin if the rudder inputs are too aggressive, but I was at a
reasonably comfortable altitude for recovery if that had happened.

I had a much easier scenario this past winter flying in mountain wave.
Wave is perfectly smooth so it's a great opportunity for flying hands off.
Trim it up, keep it straight with minor rudder corrections, and ride the
elevator up. I felt like an airliner pilot on that trip. There was a solid
cloud deck ahead which made it look like I was flying above a solid
overcast (it broke up behind me so I was sure of being able to get down,
though), and it was perfectly smooth. The wind noise even sounded like the
front of an airliner. It was damn cold at 12,000ft... just like an
airliner! (Haven't these guys heard of heaters? I get annoyed freezing my
ass off on every international flight.)

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

More_Flaps

May 18th 08, 04:22 AM

On May 18, 1:32*pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
> On May 17, 5:34 pm, Frank Stutzman > wrote:
>
> > In rec.aviation.piloting Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
> > > On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we handled on
> > > occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the seat
> > > as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
> > > practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to within a few
> > > feet of desired :-)
>
> > On long cross countries in rattle trap old Cessna 150s, I would set my trim
> > the best I could and then shift my flight bag slightly fore and aft until
> > the altimeter vaguely settled down. *If it was really bad, I'd move my seat
> > forward or backward a notch. *This seemed a lot more precise than moving the
> > trim wheel.
>
> LOL. I thought that was just me. I'd be doing some
> two handed navigation work, in a 150, and notice my
> nose start to rise a bit, so I'd just lean forward.
> Kens Rule, adjust trim when yoke is in your eye.

Are you a midget?

Cheers

Gezellig[_2_]

May 18th 08, 06:09 AM

Nomen Nescio submitted this idea :
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> From: Mxsmanic >

>> If you don't have to ask someone how to trim a real plane, then it follows
>> that no training is required to do so

> Does anyone here really need further proof that MX is functionally retarded?

Thanks for adding more spam to the newsgroup.

Sheesh.

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A

> iQCVAwUBSC6UY5MoscYxZNI5AQEG7AP9GrN1QPVB3GLqch+V9a zYk6DucyeCT0Up
> 6PVFWmX5sgorTxWvaaOjrnt94kEL6JQQxSwB0onFLYeS3qCAEq k+1gQOBBFm+aim
> IieeGCH0s8iEJjozR9ATQUpXT3AVYdhwNASx1ES/8gwd77+5gpSXWMRtnyJSnWy4
> IW1149jAFF8=
> =RyYf
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Gezellig[_2_]

May 18th 08, 09:44 AM

Robert M. Gary laid this down on his screen :
> On May 16, 10:32 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>> You adjust pitch and hold that pitch, then trim. The general "rule" is
>>> nose attitude, adjust power, trim the airplane.
>>
>> OK, I will try that.

> I'm not sure how you can without a force feedback joy stick. You use
> the trim to remove pressure from the yoke.

> -Robert

I had hoped you would be better than this response, Robert. <sigh>

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 18th 08, 11:34 PM

More_Flaps > wrote in
:

> On May 18, 1:32*pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>> On May 17, 5:34 pm, Frank Stutzman >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In rec.aviation.piloting Dudley Henriques >
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > > On long cross countries in some of the WW2 prop fighters we
>> > > handled on
>
>> > > occasion, I would set up and trim out carefully then relax in the
>> > > seat
>
>> > > as comfortably as I could and fly the trim wheels. With a bit of
>> > > practice it became possible to hold the altimeter needle to
>> > > within a f
> ew
>> > > feet of desired :-)
>>
>> > On long cross countries in rattle trap old Cessna 150s, I would set
>> > my t
> rim
>> > the best I could and then shift my flight bag slightly fore and aft
>> > unti
> l
>> > the altimeter vaguely settled down. *If it was really bad, I'd move
>> > my
> seat
>> > forward or backward a notch. *This seemed a lot more precise than
>> > movi
> ng the
>> > trim wheel.
>>
>> LOL. I thought that was just me. I'd be doing some
>> two handed navigation work, in a 150, and notice my
>> nose start to rise a bit, so I'd just lean forward.
>> Kens Rule, adjust trim when yoke is in your eye.
>
> Are you a midget?
>
> Cheers
>

A mental one certainly.

Bertie

[email protected]

May 19th 08, 01:55 AM

On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:41:41 -0400, "Barry" > wrote:

>> Well, the use of it doesn't require any training. However, as CFIs we
>> bang our heads against the wall because students don't trim often
>> enough. This is especially true in the pattern. If you let them,
>> students will build up a sweat holding the yoke with a death grip.
>
>A good way to keep students from doing this is to have them fly with a pen or
>pencil interwoven between the fingers. If the student squeezes too hard, it
>hurts, which reminds the student to relax the grip.
>

It depends on whether you are trying to get a student to hold the yoke
properly or as was mentioned earlier of in another thread about a
student panicking. In the case of panic they'll bust the pencil and
bleed all over the carpet. In the case of slowly tightening their
grip as with increasing stress, they can "desensitize" the area and
leave one substantial crease in hand or fingers before they actually
feel it. In that case it usually doesn't hurt until they let go.<:-))
Kinda like falling asleep with your forearm over your forehead. Man,
but it hurts to put that arm back down.

I never had a problem with the "death grip" although it wasn't until
flying instruments I started using the "two finger" approach (no pun
intended). The rougher it'd get the lighter I'd hold the yoke to the
point of just bumping the yoke with the thumb or forefinger to get a
response.

>
Roger (K8RI) ARRL Life Member
N833R (World's oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Gig 601Xl Builder

May 19th 08, 03:19 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Nomen Nescio writes:
>
>> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?
>
> No, I discount them because (1) they are not important; (2) they vary
> considerably from one aircraft to another; and (3) they are unreliable and
> cannot be depended upon.
>
> Additionally, I get no pleasure from these sensations. Some people enjoy
> roller-coasters and midway rides; I don't. I do not have a thrill-seeking
> personality. My enjoyment comes from other aspects of aviation.

Pleasure has nothing to do with it. The FAA even requires it in REAL
aircraft.

Gig 601Xl Builder

May 19th 08, 03:21 PM

Mike Isaksen wrote:
> "Jay Maynard" wrote ...
>> ... I consider inop electric trim (either elevator or
>> aileron) to be a no go condition in the Zodiac.
>>
>
> Do Zodiacs come with aileron trim standard, or did you mean rudder trim?
>
>

I believe the S-LSA has it standard. It is an option in that you have to
pay extra for it in the kit but then almost every thing is an option in
EX-HB.

Gig 601Xl Builder

May 19th 08, 03:30 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> BDS writes:
>
>> First, it's generally more than a couple of springs and second, it costs
>> more than the $150 you probably spent on your toy yoke. That's why it's
>> more realistic.
>
> So how realistic does a simulation have to be before it counts, exactly?
>

It has to be realistic as needed for what you are using it for. In your
case you are using a sim as a complete replacement for actual flight so
in order for it to be realistic enough it would have to be perfect.

On the other end of the scale you have things like this.

http://www.visi.com/~mim/nav/

If you just want to show someone how to navigate using VORs

Steve Foley

May 19th 08, 03:58 PM

"Gig 601Xl Builder" > wrote in message
...

>
> It has to be realistic as needed for what you are using it for. In your
> case you are using a sim as a complete replacement for actual flight so
> in order for it to be realistic enough it would have to be perfect.
>
> On the other end of the scale you have things like this.
>
> http://www.visi.com/~mim/nav/
>
> If you just want to show someone how to navigate using VORs

I find the above link far superior to MSFS for the purposes of radio
navigation. I already know how to take off, trim the aircraft, turn, climb
and descend. All I really wanted was to see what the VOR indicator does in
certain instances. That task is virtually impossible with MSFS without
having to learn how Microsoft's programmers think you fly.

I also found this one particularly useful when I was trying to learn to
taxi:

http://www.ecodesignz.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/ED_02SideChair_F.jpg

gatt[_3_]

May 19th 08, 04:45 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Nomen Nescio writes:
>
>> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?
>
> No, I discount them because (1) they are not important;

We're telling you, as the FAA and other sources tell you, that they're
important.

> (3) they are unreliable and cannot be depended upon.

We're also telling you that they're reliable. Flying out of your seat is
a reliable indication of G-forces. It's not a physiological illusion.
What you're doing here is ignoring the information that doesn't suit
your argument.

> Additionally, I get no pleasure from these sensations.

Pilots don't enjoy severe turbulence or wing icing, but these too are
realities of aviation.

-c

gatt[_3_]

May 19th 08, 04:51 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> gatt writes:
>
>> I don't know how that compares to the Saitek Aviator which is what I
>> use, but I'm thinking of removing the springs and replacing them with
>> stiffer ones to make it a bit more realistic.
>
> I'm sure there's some lack of realism, but I don't fly to feel control
> pressures.

I don't either. That's like saying I don't fly to feel the carb heat or
landing gear switches, or to use checklists.

But it's part of real flying.

> If someone thinks that physical sensations are essential, I suggest he put on
> a blindfold and see how long he can remain in straight and level flight with
> those sensations alone.

That has nothing to do with it anything, and you're not qualified to
suggest to pilots what's what about flying because you have no
experience in it, anymore than I have combat experience because I played
Battlefield 1942.

-c

gatt[_3_]

May 19th 08, 05:09 PM

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Gatt,
>
>> He just marked it INOP to keep
>> people from using it.
>>
>
> How extremely dumb of him! I'd run, not walk out of that "flight
> school".

The problem is that it's an advanced trainer that they also use for
other types of Part 135 operations. He's had inexperienced pilots
forget to shut it off, etc.--or trying to to taxi with it on because
somehow it was activated on the ground--but if he or one of the senior
pilots is flying to Arizona or somewhere he wants to be able to use it,
which is probably why it's not disconnected outright.

It used to say "DO NOT USE!" but apparently some people did anyway,
fortunately with non-catastrophic results.

-c

Gezellig

May 19th 08, 10:07 PM

On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:10:05 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:

> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?
> Take your question to the sim group, then.
> This is about REAL flying, Dip****.

plonk

Benjamin Dover

May 19th 08, 10:49 PM

Gezellig > wrote in :

> On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:10:05 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
>> So you discount sensations because you're not interested?
>> Take your question to the sim group, then.
>> This is about REAL flying, Dip****.
>
> plonk
>

You're a ****ing moron who, like MXSmoron, doesn't know **** from shinola.

Mxsmanic

May 20th 08, 02:11 AM

gatt writes:

> We're telling you, as the FAA and other sources tell you, that they're
> important.

Not under IFR.

> We're also telling you that they're reliable.

Not under IFR.

> Pilots don't enjoy severe turbulence or wing icing, but these too are
> realities of aviation.

VFR pilots are often very much into the sensations of flying. If they cannot
tear themselves away from that, they should stay VFR and never attempt IFR in
IMC.

Mxsmanic

May 20th 08, 02:12 AM

gatt writes:

> I don't either. That's like saying I don't fly to feel the carb heat or
> landing gear switches, or to use checklists.

Some people clearly fly for the physical sensations.

> That has nothing to do with it anything, and you're not qualified to
> suggest to pilots what's what about flying because you have no
> experience in it, anymore than I have combat experience because I played
> Battlefield 1942.

I hope that your intense desire to contradict me doesn't turn you into an NTSB
statistic one day.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 20th 08, 02:31 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> gatt writes:
>
>> We're telling you, as the FAA and other sources tell you, that
>> they're important.
>
> Not under IFR.
>
>> We're also telling you that they're reliable.
>
> Not under IFR.
>
>> Pilots don't enjoy severe turbulence or wing icing, but these too are
>> realities of aviation.
>
> VFR pilots are often very much into the sensations of flying. If they
> cannot tear themselves away from that, they should stay VFR and never
> attempt IFR in IMC.
>

I'm an airline pilot and I stil use them. We all do, fjukktard.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 20th 08, 02:31 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> gatt writes:
>
>> I don't either. That's like saying I don't fly to feel the carb heat
>> or landing gear switches, or to use checklists.
>
> Some people clearly fly for the physical sensations.
>

You don;t fly at all, moron.

Bertie

gatt[_3_]

May 20th 08, 05:20 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> gatt writes:
>
>> We're telling you, as the FAA and other sources tell you, that they're
>> important.
>
> Not under IFR.

Sorry. You're not authoritative, you cite no sources, and you have no
experience or demonstrated proficiency. Your opinion on the matter is
empty.

Next...

-c

gatt[_3_]

May 20th 08, 05:22 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> gatt writes:

> I hope that your intense desire to contradict me doesn't turn you into an NTSB
> statistic one day.

LOL! What kind of ego must you have that you'd think somebody
contradicting you would cause them to be an NTSB statistic?

I'm not interested in what you "hope." You still haven't cited any
authoritative sources for any of your opinions and, as a system
administrator I can tell you, only a fool would believe something just
because Microsoft says it's so.

-c

Mxsmanic

May 20th 08, 08:36 PM

gatt writes:

> Sorry. You're not authoritative, you cite no sources, and you have no
> experience or demonstrated proficiency. Your opinion on the matter is
> empty.
>
> Next...

Next, ask Dudley.

Mxsmanic

May 20th 08, 08:37 PM

gatt writes:

> LOL! What kind of ego must you have that you'd think somebody
> contradicting you would cause them to be an NTSB statistic?

It doesn't require any ego. I've read the literature and I know what it says.
I don't make this up.

> I'm not interested in what you "hope."

You wouldn't be, if you fit the profile I have in mind.

It reminds me of some CRM studies I've read, in which it has been shown that
some people would rather die than give up an opinion or risk rejection from a
group.

[email protected]

May 20th 08, 11:55 PM

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:

> It reminds me of some CRM studies I've read, in which it has been shown that
> some people would rather die than give up an opinion or...

Hmmm.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

gatt[_3_]

May 21st 08, 12:03 AM

wrote:
> In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic > wrote:

>> It reminds me of some CRM studies I've read, in which it has been shown that
>> some people would rather die than give up an opinion or...
>
> Hmmm.

He should read it again, in front of a mirror.

-c

[email protected]

May 27th 08, 03:42 PM

On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:

> I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
> was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
> My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
> give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
> to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!

Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything but
sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that moves
about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.

As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and those
are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is well
back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring anchors
back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off
the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where it's
supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those cheap
things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is much
more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt the
stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they learned
on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need to
redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise and
slow flight.
And it has a collective for helicopter flight.

Dan

Ken S. Tucker

May 28th 08, 05:10 AM

On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
> On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
> > was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
> > My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
> > give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
> > to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>
> Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything but
> sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
> range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that moves
> about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.
>
> As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
> commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
> centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
> pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and those
> are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is well
> back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring anchors
> back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
> pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off
> the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
> that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where it's
> supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those cheap
> things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is much
> more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt the
> stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
> I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
> proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
> realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
> spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
> steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
> the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
> But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
> how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they learned
> on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
> more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need to
> redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
> Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise and
> slow flight.
> And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>
> Dan

IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
try that sim, how much do you charge?
Ken

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 28th 08, 12:44 PM

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in news:e7a17efd-66f3-
:

> On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
>> On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>>
>> > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
>> > was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
>> > My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
>> > give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
>> > to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>>
>> Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything
but
>> sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
>> range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that moves
>> about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.
>>
>> As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
>> commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
>> centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
>> pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and those
>> are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is well
>> back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring anchors
>> back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
>> pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off
>> the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
>> that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where it's
>> supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those cheap
>> things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is
much
>> more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt the
>> stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
>> I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
>> proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
>> realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
>> spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
>> steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
>> the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
>> But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
>> how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they
learned
>> on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
>> more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need to
>> redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
>> Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise
and
>> slow flight.
>> And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>>
>> Dan
>
> IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
> in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
> try that sim, how much do you charge?
> Ken
>

The dangers of using your real name.

Dan,if he comes do take pics of him and his camero.

Bertie

[email protected]

May 28th 08, 03:10 PM

On May 27, 10:10 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
> On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
> > > was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
> > > My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
> > > give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
> > > to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>
> > Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything but
> > sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
> > range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that moves
> > about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.
>
> > As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
> > commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
> > centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
> > pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and those
> > are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is well
> > back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring anchors
> > back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
> > pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off
> > the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
> > that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where it's
> > supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those cheap
> > things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is much
> > more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt the
> > stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
> > I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
> > proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
> > realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
> > spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
> > steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
> > the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
> > But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
> > how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they learned
> > on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
> > more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need to
> > redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
> > Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise and
> > slow flight.
> > And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>
> > Dan
>
> IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
> in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
> try that sim, how much do you charge?
> Ken

It's for our College students only.

Dan

Ken S. Tucker

May 28th 08, 08:03 PM

On May 28, 7:10 am, wrote:
> On May 27, 10:10 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
>
> > > On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > > > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
> > > > was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
> > > > My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
> > > > give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
> > > > to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>
> > > Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything but
> > > sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
> > > range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that moves
> > > about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.
>
> > > As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
> > > commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
> > > centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
> > > pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and those
> > > are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is well
> > > back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring anchors
> > > back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
> > > pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off
> > > the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
> > > that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where it's
> > > supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those cheap
> > > things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is much
> > > more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt the
> > > stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
> > > I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
> > > proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
> > > realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
> > > spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
> > > steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
> > > the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
> > > But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
> > > how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they learned
> > > on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
> > > more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need to
> > > redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
> > > Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise and
> > > slow flight.
> > > And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>
> > > Dan
>
> > IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
> > in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
> > try that sim, how much do you charge?
> > Ken
>
> It's for our College students only.

No problemo, I'll enroll...which college?
Ken

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 28th 08, 09:21 PM

wrote in news:989f5e7b-0af5-4484-9a9c-
:

> On May 27, 10:10 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>> On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>>
>> > > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the adjustment
>> > > was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy sissy.
>> > > My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not quite
>> > > give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables out
>> > > to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>>
>> > Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is anything
but
>> > sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the trim
>> > range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever that
moves
>> > about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much more twitchy.
>>
>> > As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
>> > commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control mechanism
>> > centered by some strong springs that supposedly simulate elevator
>> > pressures. The anchor points for those springs are movable, and
those
>> > are what the trim mechanism moves. So in slow flight the yoke is
well
>> > back, against the springs, so that the trim moves the spring
anchors
>> > back until the pressure disappears. The yoke does not move and the
>> > pilot, if he's "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims
off
>> > the pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically
so
>> > that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where
it's
>> > supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in those
cheap
>> > things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real airplane is
much
>> > more work. If you had realistic spring forces you'd have to bolt
the
>> > stick to the desk and anchor the chair to the floor.
>> > I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded up,
>> > proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
>> > realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete center
>> > spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic trim. Real
>> > steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the electronics out of
>> > the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
>> > But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for teaching
>> > how to fly. The students use it for free to practice what they
learned
>> > on our certified Elite sim or in the air under the hood. It's much
>> > more work to fly it, thanks to the big springs I put in it. I need
to
>> > redesign the mechanical trim to get more travel, though.
>> > Underestimated the degree of elevator movement between high cruise
and
>> > slow flight.
>> > And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>>
>> > Dan
>>
>> IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
>> in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
>> try that sim, how much do you charge?
>> Ken
>
> It's for our College students only.

Whew.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

May 28th 08, 09:22 PM

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 28, 7:10 am, wrote:
>> On May 27, 10:10 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 27, 7:42 am, wrote:
>>
>> > > On May 16, 1:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" >
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > I was ok with the location of the trim wheel, but the
>> > > > adjustment was too coarse for me, but I could be a bitchy
>> > > > sissy. My wheel was graduated, with a zero mark and did not
>> > > > quite give the fine adjustment I wanted. That could be cables
>> > > > out to the tail, I should have learned the mechanism!
>>
>> > > Nothing to do with the cables. Cessna's trim is
>> > > anything but
>> > > sensitive, having four or five full turns of the wheel for the
>> > > trim range. Try a Citabria sometime, where the trim is a lever
>> > > that moves about eight or ten inches for the full range. Much
>> > > more twitchy.
>>
>> > > As far as others have asked about sim trim, the good,
>> > > commercial training sims (Level II) have a pitch control
>> > > mechanism centered by some strong springs that supposedly
>> > > simulate elevator pressures. The anchor points for those springs
>> > > are movable, and those are what the trim mechanism moves. So in
>> > > slow flight the yoke is well back, against the springs, so that
>> > > the trim moves the spring anchors back until the pressure
>> > > disappears. The yoke does not move and the pilot, if he's
>> > > "flying" right, doesn't let it move. He just trims off the
>> > > pressure. Mx's stick, on the other hand, trims electronically so
>> > > that he has to gradually center the stick to keep the nose where
>> > > it's supposed to be. Not realistic at all. And the springs in
>> > > those cheap things are so feeble as to be a joke. Flying the real
>> > > airplane is much more work. If you had realistic spring forces
>> > > you'd have to bolt the stick to the desk and anchor the chair to
>> > > the floor.
>> > > I built our own procedures sim here. Proper frame welded
>> > > up,
>> > > proper adjustable seat, huge monitor, real rudder pedals with
>> > > realistic spring feel, real stick with a heavy non-discrete
>> > > center spring and an adjustable anchor to simulate a reaslistic
>> > > trim. Real steel throttle/prop/mixture quadrant. Robbed the
>> > > electronics out of the CH stick and pedals to drive it.
>> > > But still, it's used only as a procedures trainer, not for
>> > > teaching how to fly. The students use it for free to practice
>> > > what they learned on our certified Elite sim or in the air under
>> > > the hood. It's much more work to fly it, thanks to the big
>> > > springs I put in it. I need to redesign the mechanical trim to
>> > > get more travel, though. Underestimated the degree of elevator
>> > > movement between high cruise and slow flight.
>> > > And it has a collective for helicopter flight.
>>
>> > > Dan
>>
>> > IIRC you (Dan) are in Sask, I'm just over the hills
>> > in BC. If we're ever going by your place I'd love to
>> > try that sim, how much do you charge?
>> > Ken
>>
>> It's for our College students only.
>
> No problemo, I'll enroll...which college?

What if they don't have a course in sqwerl skinnin?

Bertie

Michael[_1_]

May 30th 08, 08:31 PM

On May 16, 2:55*pm, Tina > wrote:
> Your description of yoke pressure is vastly different from that we who
> fly ga aircraft experience, which explains why you do not understand
> ga trimming procedures.

> We feel the pressure on the yoke reducing as trim is corrected. You
> don't. We maintain the desired attitude (note - "attitude" ) with the
> yoke and trim away the pressure. You can't.

The primary difference is not that he does not feel feel the reduction
in pressure on the yoke/stick as trim is applied - he does, as long as
he relaxes the pressure on the stick and allows it to move closer to
center. The primary difference is what happens if he does it wrong -
if he keeps the stick where it is as he applies trim. In your
experience, that's the correct way to trim. In his experience, it
doesn't work - the stick pressure doesn't change but the pitch does.
So far so good.

You believe that this constitutes a fundamental difference between the
sim and the real airplane. That happens not to be the case. There
are many different trim systems out there, and some of them behave not
too differently from what MX is describing.

Many of the short wing Pipers (the TriPacer being the most popular
example) used an interesting arrangement where the trim was a crank
that moved the jack screw which controlled the position of the leading
edge of the horizontal stab. The elevator hinged on the trailing edge
of the horizontal stab (which did not move - it simply turned on its
axis) and was controlled through the yoke. It was equipped with
springs that would try to center it to be in trail with the horizontal
stab. The horizontal stab only had a few degrees of travel on the
leading edge (but it was large so the trim had enough authority) so
the neutral position of the yoke changed little. It had no trim tabs
of any sort.

Trimming procedure went something like this:

Establish the desired pitch attitude with the yoke. Crank the trim
handle to change the angle of attack of the horizontal stabilizer,
which took over some of the work of the yoke. This did NOT change the
aerodynamic loads on the elevator to any appreciable extent, nor did
it really change the spring tesion much. If you tried to keep the
yoke in the same place and trim off the pressure, you would quite
possibly never get there, and you would not hold your pitch attitude.
The yoke position had to change (a lot), because the elevator position
had to change (a lot) as the horizontal stabilizer moved.

What you actually would do was relax the pressure on the yoke, letting
it move towards the point where it would fly in trail with the
horizontal stab, in order to maintain the desired pitch attitude.
THAT would relax the pressure.

Now I know that's a bit confusing, so let me step through it in
specifics. Let's say you were flying level and transitioned into the
climb. You would pull back on the yoke to deflect the elevator
upwards, to generate extra down force on the tail. This would
establish the pitch attitude you wanted. You would then crank in nose
up trim, which would lower the leading edge of the horizontal stab.
That relieved the pressure on the yoke SLIGHTLY - at least in theory.
In practice the reduction was so flight you could hardly feel it. You
would need to crank the handle a few turns just to realize you were
going the wrong way - especially if there was any turbulence.

Also, if you insisted on holding the yoke where it was, you were going
to keep pitching up. That's because the horizontal stab would start
adding downward force, without appreciably affecting the amount of
downward force the elevator was producing. As you cranked in nose up
trim (lowering the leading edge of the stab) you would also need to
relax pressure on the yoke, allowing it to move forward and lower the
trailing edge of the elevator.

If you did it wrong, you would have almost exactly the same experience
as you would with MX's sim. Doing it right was also almost the same.

Eventually, you would return the elevator to the 'in-trail' position
with the stab (a position not too terribly different from where you
started in cruise) and the plane would be in trim.

Having a joystick with centering springs and a trim wheel you must
turn as you return the joystick to center is actually a pretty fair
simulation of that system - in fact a much closer simulation than
something like a C-150/172 which has a servo tab on the elevator and a
fixed stab. On a plane like that, you do indeed hold the yoke in
position to maintain pitch attitude while moving the trim - and thus
the tab - until it reaches the proper position to keep the elevator
where you originally put it without applying pressure. A plane with a
bungee/spring trim (I believe the Piper Tomahawk had this, but it's
been so many years since I've flown one that I'm no longer certain,
though I am quite certain the Schweitzer 2-33 had it) behaves the same
way - you put the yoke where it needs to be, and then adjust tension
on the bungee/spring with the trim control until the force is trimmed
off. There is a difference. In a trim tab system, the position of
the yoke will change slightly (almost imperceptibly) during the
trimming process, because the position of the trim tab itself affect
the amount of lift the elevator (including the trim tab) exerts. In a
bungee/spring system, the elevator does not move at all. However, the
difference is not noticeable because the movement is so slight.

When I purchased a TriPacer as my first airplane, I had something like
150 hours total time, all of it in C-150/152/172 and Tomahawks.
Making the transition to the different trim system was a non-event,
except at first I kept turning the handle the wrong way half the
time. I also know someone who got his private in a Piper Colt (same
trim system as the TriPacer) and then bought a C-172. He found the
transition a total non-event. Thus I have to say that what you
consider a major difference, I see as minor at most.

Michael

Mxsmanic

May 31st 08, 08:47 AM

Michael writes:

> When I purchased a TriPacer as my first airplane, I had something like
> 150 hours total time, all of it in C-150/152/172 and Tomahawks.
> Making the transition to the different trim system was a non-event,
> except at first I kept turning the handle the wrong way half the
> time. I also know someone who got his private in a Piper Colt (same
> trim system as the TriPacer) and then bought a C-172. He found the
> transition a total non-event. Thus I have to say that what you
> consider a major difference, I see as minor at most.

I believe the objective was originally to latch onto some difference--any
difference--as "proof" that a sim was completely unlike a real aircraft. I
haven't fretted over it for exactly the reasons you describe, despite claims
here, although I do like to know how it works in specific aircraft, just as a
point of information and comparison with the sim.

Differences like trim adjustment, and even more significant changes like going
from a yoke to a stick or vice versa, are typically no big deal for a
competent pilot. The difference between an automatic transmission in a car
and a manual transmission is much greater, and yet even that requires only a
few hours of adaptation, and only in one direction.

Tina

May 31st 08, 03:56 PM

On May 31, 3:47 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Michael writes:
> > When I purchased a TriPacer as my first airplane, I had something like
> > 150 hours total time, all of it in C-150/152/172 and Tomahawks.
> > Making the transition to the different trim system was a non-event,
> > except at first I kept turning the handle the wrong way half the
> > time. I also know someone who got his private in a Piper Colt (same
> > trim system as the TriPacer) and then bought a C-172. He found the
> > transition a total non-event. Thus I have to say that what you
> > consider a major difference, I see as minor at most.
>
> I believe the objective was originally to latch onto some difference--any
> difference--as "proof" that a sim was completely unlike a real aircraft. I
> haven't fretted over it for exactly the reasons you describe, despite claims
> here, although I do like to know how it works in specific aircraft, just as a
> point of information and comparison with the sim.
>
> Differences like trim adjustment, and even more significant changes like going
> from a yoke to a stick or vice versa, are typically no big deal for a
> competent pilot. The difference between an automatic transmission in a car
> and a manual transmission is much greater, and yet even that requires only a
> few hours of adaptation, and only in one direction.

The overlooked or ignored difference is if one turns the trim in the
wrong direction in a real airplane pressure on the yoke increases.
Pilots are trained to trim to reduce yoke pressure -- it is obvious
and becomes instinctive. Sims of the everyday variety do not provide
that feedback.

We trim to maintain attitude with minimal pressure on the yoke. If one
has the strength and endurance in most ga aircraft one need not trim
to maintain safe flight -- in the end it can probably be considered a
pilot comfort feature, not unlike power steering in a car.

Michael[_1_]

June 3rd 08, 12:53 PM

On May 31, 10:56*am, Tina > wrote:
> The overlooked or ignored difference is if one turns the trim in the
> wrong direction in a real airplane pressure on the yoke increases.

No, this is not universally true. I've flown airplanes where this is
not true, and clearly so has Robert Moore. These are certificated
airplanes ranging from light piston singles to transport category
multiengine jets.

Oh, if you keep doing it long enough, yes, you will eventually feel
something - but if you depend on this as your primary cue, you will
never get it right. You just need to know which way to adjust the
trim, and you need to keep moving the yoke to maintain pitch attitude.

> Pilots are trained to trim to reduce yoke pressure -- it is obvious
> and becomes instinctive. Sims of the everyday variety do not provide
> that feedback.

And neither do some airplanes. If you are trained to depend on that
cue, you are SOL in those planes.

We do not live in a single cue world.

Michael

Michael[_1_]

June 3rd 08, 12:57 PM

On May 30, 3:50*pm, Robert Moore > wrote:
> The Boeing 707, and perhaps others, trimmed in this same fashion.
> Trim...Relax....Trim some more...Relax...Do it again.......

I'm not familiar with the 707 systems, but a friend of mine flew the
DC-9 and told me it had the same jackscrew trim arrangement as the
short wing pipers (scaled up of course) so I would expect it might
behave the same way. Anyone who has actually flow the DC-9 care to
comment?

Michael

BDS[_2_]

June 3rd 08, 01:32 PM

"Michael" > wrote in message
...
On May 31, 10:56 am, Tina > wrote:
> The overlooked or ignored difference is if one turns the trim in the
> wrong direction in a real airplane pressure on the yoke increases.

No, this is not universally true. I've flown airplanes where this is
not true, and clearly so has Robert Moore. These are certificated
airplanes ranging from light piston singles to transport category
multiengine jets.

Oh, if you keep doing it long enough, yes, you will eventually feel
something - but if you depend on this as your primary cue, you will
never get it right. You just need to know which way to adjust the
trim, and you need to keep moving the yoke to maintain pitch attitude.

> Pilots are trained to trim to reduce yoke pressure -- it is obvious
> and becomes instinctive. Sims of the everyday variety do not provide
> that feedback.

And neither do some airplanes. If you are trained to depend on that
cue, you are SOL in those planes.

We do not live in a single cue world.

Michael

*******

Well then, once you get to the point of having no pressure on the yoke,
what's the point of trimming any further?

Michael[_1_]

June 3rd 08, 05:57 PM

On Jun 3, 8:32*am, "BDS" > wrote:
> Well then, once you get to the point of having no pressure on the yoke,
> what's the point of trimming any further?

The point is not that you get to where there is no pressure on the
yoke. The point is that moving the trim without moving the yoke will
never get you there. You have to move the yoke as you move the trim
to get to where the pitch is correct without applying pressure.

Michael

More_Flaps

June 3rd 08, 09:55 PM

On Jun 3, 11:53*pm, Michael > wrote:
> On May 31, 10:56*am, Tina > wrote:
>
> > The overlooked or ignored difference is if one turns the trim in the
> > wrong direction in a real airplane pressure on the yoke increases.
>
> No, this is not universally true. *I've flown airplanes where this is
> not true, and clearly so has Robert Moore. *These are certificated
> airplanes ranging from light piston singles to transport category
> multiengine jets.
>

Hi Michael,

Here's my understanding : If the yoke gives force feedback of the out
of trim condition (you hold attitude and then trim) then if you turn
the trim the wrong while then holding attitude yoke pressure will
increase -as Tina says. If it doesn't then you are not holding
attitude OR the stick is not connected directly to the elevator
surface (e.g. elevator is hydraulic or trim surface powered). I know
the latter is the case for big planes (where elevator forces are too
large for one armed man power) but what light piston single are you
thinking about?

Cheers

Michael[_1_]

June 4th 08, 06:02 PM

On Jun 3, 4:55*pm, More_Flaps > wrote:
> Here's my understanding : If the yoke gives force feedback of the out
> of trim condition (you hold attitude and then trim) then if you turn
> the trim the wrong while then holding attitude yoke pressure will
> increase -as Tina says.

In theory this is right - but in practice you will have to turn it a
long time before the increase is noticeable with certain trim systems.

> If it doesn't then you are not holding
> attitude OR the stick is not connected directly to the elevator
> surface (e.g. elevator is hydraulic or trim surface powered).

There is a third option - this is where the trim surface is not
connected to the elevator - which is indeed the case. The yoke forces
come from the elevator not being 'in trail' with the stabilizer in
such a system. Since the angle of the stabilizer changes very little
as trim is applied, the force on the yoke in a given position also
changes very little. If you move the yoke in the correct direction to
maintain the pitch attitude, the force on the yoke will change as it
should - but this is also the case in a primitive sim since the stick
has a spring return.

> I know
> the latter is the case for big planes (where elevator forces are too
> large for one armed man power) but what light piston single are you
> thinking about?

I'm thinking of the short wing Pipers - the most popular of which was
the TriPacer.

Michael