On Aug 11, 3:08*pm, Richard wrote:
On Aug 8, 10:05*am, a wrote:



On Aug 8, 9:25*am, " wrote:

On Aug 8, 7:05*am, a wrote:

The more I fly and the older I get the more I want to be gentle with
the flight controls. Remember, fellow aviators, there are demons
lurking near the edges of the envelope.

Which begs a question on runup process.

My brother in law "vigorously" checked controls free and clear to the
point they banged at the stops. *I was quite more gentle, taking them
to the stops on free and clear. *In some ways, I could see why he did
what he did, but since my normal flight regime didn't abruptly take
control inputs to the stops I elected my way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki79yX4bhJ4Runupstarts6 minutes into
the video.

I wonder how others did it?

As you, I move the controls to the limits, but gently. *You'll see
elsewhere recommendations that throttle advancement be slow as well,
and there's little reason to be abrupt with the prop for that matter.
If one pays for the repairs on a personal airplane, gentleness usually
equals lower bills as well as more comfortable passengers.

One wonders if in fly by wire airplanes pilots might assume the
software will *protect the mechanical parts. Speaking of that, if you
watch films of advanced jets landing (these airplanes are by design
unstable) you'll see very busy stabilizers, lots of flipping, but the
pilot will tell you he's just applying smooth back pressure to the
stick. The computers know the attitude the pilot wants and makes it
happen actively.

I did a test on our cars, in neutral or park full throttle will
accelerate the engine but it self limits well below redline. That and
the ABS mentioned in an earlier thread add a layer of protection. If
you extrapolate that sense of protection into taking a 1.1 g turn in
tires that can support only 0.9 gs you'll bend metal.

.

I've seen it done both ways too and as a jumper (non-pilot) I always
wondered if a more gentle approach might be more useful to detect a
subtle problem since (it seems to me) that a full force slam to the
stops would overcome any momentary resistance and could mask a problem
in a linkage. *Conversely, I suppose it could force a *break* in a
weak link while on the ground. *So then, YMMV.

On airplanes without 'augmented' controls, the feedback forces on the
yoke and rudder are significantly greater in flight than on the
ground during run up, so if there's going to be a failure it might
very well be aloft. The good news is, it's rare to the best of my
knowledge that moving the controls to the extremes,. either fast or
slow, will uncover a problem, or that they fail in flight.

With several thousand hours of SEL PIC, I can't remember once when
after leaving the ramp going back because the control excursions were
unusual. I have come back because RPM drop was not right, because VOR
tests showed failure, a DG that wasn't 'crisp'. etc etc. Have not yet
had the prop not cycle correctly. Did see someone in a 680 Commander
get out to take off a rudder clamp, that would have been found because
the excursions were not 'free'. That brings up an interesting topic
for aviators -- when and why did you last return to your tiedown
without taking off on a planned flight? Or, not left the tiedown or
hanger because the airplane was not, in your view, airworthy?