Leading Turns With Rudder

"sisu1a" wrote in message
...
I feel compelled at this point to add that this guy does not promote
stomping the rudder or other outwardly unsafe flying habits and is
absolutely fanatical about keeping the string straight, to the point
of obnoxiousness. He would not accept my explanation of mildly
slipping during thermaling ala' Holighaus/Johnson on a flight last
year, outright rejecting it on principal (he was sure I read the
article wrong or remembered it incorrectly).

I also want to add that my concern is geared toward what ab-initio
students should or should not be taught, as it is very hard to unlearn
something, no matter how wrong. As far as I understand the human
brain, it will most likely revert to these early lessons when/if a
'situation' arises and stress levels are very high.

I certainly don't think he should have his ticket yanked by any means,
I just have my own reservations about the soundness of *possibly*
instilling reflexes into people that can potentially be dangerous if
reverted to at an inopportune moment. This forum seems like a good
place for this discussion, to see how others more qualified than I
weigh in on the subject before making it a campaign and I thank
everyone thus far for their thoughtful responses.

-Paul

I'm uncomfortable with teaching "lead with rudder" to primary students. In
fact, aerodynamically, there is no need for rudder until adverse yaw
manifests itself so both rudder and aileron should be applied
simultaneously.

Where this idea comes from, I think, is that it often FEELS like rudder
input needs to come first. This is because most people move their feet
slower than their hands. If your brain tells your hands and feet to move at
the same time, the hands will move first. If you consiously try to move
your feet a fraction of a second before your hands, it's likely they will
move at nearly the same time.

The problem with "institutionalizing" the rudder-first idea is that as
pilots gain experience, their hands and feet will start moving in
synchronization leading to real rudder first action and inadvertant skidding
turn entries.

I tell students to move the rudder and ailerons at the same time but to
expect that, at first, their sluggish feet reactions will make it feel as if
they need to use the rudder first. Later, when they have more experience,
it will feel like they are moving them at the same time.

So much for inadvertant skiding turn entries. It is actually an advantage
to deliberately skid turn entries with some gliders. If the glider has a
lot of dihedral, there will be a strong yaw-to-roll coupling effect which
adds to the roll effect from the ailerons. Slightly skidding the turn
entries with my Nimbus 2C will cut a second off the 45 degree right bank to
45 degree left bank turn reversal which is significant in a 20m glider.

BTW, the effect of the Holinghaus/Johnson slipping turn is not to achieve
"fuselage lift" but to use the dihedral yaw to roll coupling to hold off
overbanking while keeping the ailerons centered. Centered ailerons keeps
the wing profile intact tip to tip resulting in a greater rate of climb. It
also has the added safety benefit that if the glider stalls it is likely to
drop the high wing giving the pilot an additional second or so to recover
wings level.

Bill D

At 02:56 22 July 2008, Bill Daniels wrote: (Snip)

I'm uncomfortable with teaching "lead with rudder" to primary
students.
In
fact, aerodynamically, there is no need for rudder until adverse yaw
manifests itself so both rudder and aileron should be applied
simultaneously.


Bill D


So am I and I personally have never done that. I have pointed out to post
solo pilots that the technique of leading with the rudder on some gliders
(Grob103 in particular) will clean up the entry to a turn where it is
intended to use large aileron input, it seems prevent the adverse yaw
starting. It is not necessary for "normal" turn entry. I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:53:24 -0700, sisu1a wrote:

I'm not an instructor, but here's my take.

For my taste the earlier G103s, the Acro II and Twin Astir flavours are
rather under ruddered. I find that, when flying these, my turn entries and
exits are cleaner if I very slightly lead with the rudder. This is a
matter of just a few milliseconds: a tenth of a second at most.

Those are the only gliders where I think its needed. The G103C Acro III,
the version with Schuemann wing planform, handles a lot better than the
earlier ones and doesn't need this treatment.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

On Jul 21, 9:08 pm, sisu1a wrote:
I feel compelled at this point to add that this guy does not promote
stomping the rudder or other outwardly unsafe flying habits and is
absolutely fanatical about keeping the string straight, to the point
of obnoxiousness. He would not accept my explanation of mildly
slipping during thermaling ala' Holighaus/Johnson on a flight last
year, outright rejecting it on principal (he was sure I read the
article wrong or remembered it incorrectly).

I also want to add that my concern is geared toward what ab-initio
students should or should not be taught, as it is very hard to unlearn
something, no matter how wrong. As far as I understand the human
brain, it will most likely revert to these early lessons when/if a
'situation' arises and stress levels are very high.

I certainly don't think he should have his ticket yanked by any means,
I just have my own reservations about the soundness of *possibly*
instilling reflexes into people that can potentially be dangerous if
reverted to at an inopportune moment. This forum seems like a good
place for this discussion, to see how others more qualified than I
weigh in on the subject before making it a campaign and I thank
everyone thus far for their thoughtful responses.

-Paul

Paul -- I can't reconcile these statements and your OP. How does one
teach applying rudder "first, as it's own control movement" and yet be
absolutely fanatical about keeping the yaw string centered?

PMSC Member wrote:
We all know there are certain gliders that, under certain
circumstances, are best flown with leading rudder. Typically, we're
talking about a glass ship with heavy wings (esp. with water) and
thermal entry at thermaling speed, at altitude.

Not trainers.

Not students.

Not if the spoilers are open.

Not in the pattern.

Not at low agl altitude under any circumstance.


Is is REALLY necessary to review the stats on stall/spin accidents,
AGAIN?

I have never in 20 odd years met an instructor that teaches students
this way, and have great difficulty believing this is as common as you
suggest.

This doesn't worry you? You don't understand the problem. And you
aren't going to figure it out reading usenet :-). See a good CFIG.

The idea that any CFIG would teach this way frankly astounds me. I
regard it as malpractice of the very worst sort. The fact that various
people on this group report this as a not uncommon practice troubles
me. To the extent that this is true, it supports the allegation that
many pilots simply don't have the knowledge to fly safely.


Add me to the list of people who have been instructed by their first
instructor to turn mostly with rudder. This guy was routinely flying
at small distance from ridges using this method (it was at Pic Saint
Loup, France http://cvvm.free.fr/index/index.php), and he was the chief
instructor. One of his other sayings was "there are no good pilots,
there are old ones". I don't know how he lived to this principle,
because, indeed i fully agree with "PMSC Member". Especially when
all this was on an ASK 13, which does very nice spins. Of course
this junk was rationalized with a large infusion of crappy theories
about adverse yaw or whatever, when it is very clear that flying
perfectly symmetrical is always the optimum aerodynamically, and,
more important, the safest.

--

Michel TALON

Those are the only gliders where I think its needed.


Never flown a Jantar-1?

Horribly under-ruddered, as I recall, needing lots of boot to
coordinate a turn and preferring it applied a tad before aileron.

Mike

On Jul 22, 5:44*am, (Michel Talon) wrote:
PMSC Member wrote:
We all know there are certain gliders that, under certain
circumstances, are best flown with leading rudder. *Typically, we're
talking about a glass ship with heavy wings (esp. with water) and
thermal entry at thermaling speed, at altitude.

Not trainers.

Not students.

Not if the spoilers are open.

Not in the pattern.

Not at low agl altitude under any circumstance.

Is is REALLY necessary to review the stats on stall/spin accidents,
AGAIN?

I have never in 20 odd years met an instructor that teaches students
this way, and have great difficulty believing this is as common as you
suggest.

This doesn't worry you? *You don't understand the problem. *And you
aren't going to figure it out reading usenet :-). *See a good CFIG.

The idea that any CFIG would teach this way frankly astounds me. *I
regard it as malpractice of the very worst sort. The fact that various
people on this group report this as a not uncommon practice troubles
me. *To the extent that this is true, it supports the allegation that
many pilots simply don't have the knowledge to fly safely.

Add me to the list of people who have been instructed by their first
instructor to turn mostly with rudder. This guy was routinely flying
at small distance from ridges using this method (it was at Pic Saint
Loup, Francehttp://cvvm.free.fr/index/index.php), and he was the chief
instructor. One of his other sayings was "there are no good pilots,
there are old ones". I don't know how he lived to this principle,
because, indeed i fully agree with "PMSC Member". Especially when
all this was on an ASK 13, which does very nice spins. Of course
this junk was rationalized with a large infusion of crappy theories
about adverse yaw or whatever, when it is very clear that flying
perfectly symmetrical is always the optimum aerodynamically, and,
more important, the safest.

--

Michel TALON

It is not clear the original post was "turn mostly wth rudder" - if so
that would be strange advice. I read this as "number 1 thing" is the
instructor is suggesting doing this first. Other instructors would
commonly state this as "lead with rudder" (which I think will be
fairly common advice or at least discussed by many instructors). Here
is a case where use of language could be confusing to students if not
properly explained, but again I hope there was a lot more explanation,
demonstration, practice etc. involved.

Darryl

On Jul 22, 6:55*am, Mike the Strike wrote:
Those are the only gliders where I think its needed.

Never flown a Jantar-1?

Horribly under-ruddered, as I recall, needing lots of boot to
coordinate a turn and preferring it applied a tad before aileron.

Mike

ASH-25, and I'd assume a Nimbus, etc. (yes not much training done in
those).

Darryl

On Jul 22, 4:44 am, wrote:
On Jul 21, 9:08 pm, sisu1a wrote:



I feel compelled at this point to add that this guy does not promote
stomping the rudder or other outwardly unsafe flying habits and is
absolutely fanatical about keeping the string straight, to the point
of obnoxiousness. He would not accept my explanation of mildly
slipping during thermaling ala' Holighaus/Johnson on a flight last
year, outright rejecting it on principal (he was sure I read the
article wrong or remembered it incorrectly).

I also want to add that my concern is geared toward what ab-initio
students should or should not be taught, as it is very hard to unlearn
something, no matter how wrong. As far as I understand the human
brain, it will most likely revert to these early lessons when/if a
'situation' arises and stress levels are very high.

I certainly don't think he should have his ticket yanked by any means,
I just have my own reservations about the soundness of *possibly*
instilling reflexes into people that can potentially be dangerous if
reverted to at an inopportune moment. This forum seems like a good
place for this discussion, to see how others more qualified than I
weigh in on the subject before making it a campaign and I thank
everyone thus far for their thoughtful responses.

-Paul

Paul -- I can't reconcile these statements and your OP. How does one
teach applying rudder "first, as it's own control movement" and yet be
absolutely fanatical about keeping the yaw string centered?


Well, it makes instruction with him about as much fun as it sounds
(assuming your not a hapless student that doesn't know better and
would never stand up to his authority which BTW is very authoritative,
complete w/yelling tendencies but I digress...). It should be noted
that he is using a 2-33 (our other trainer is an L-13 Blanik, which he
is convinced it is awful for instruction compared to the wonderful
2-33...) to push this technique, which is not exactly snappy in ANY
responses so I doubt the string is getting too far in most of the
time. 95% of the instruction he does is with newbies who won't talk
back, so your point is probably never brought up (the rest of the
folks just grit their teeth, bite their tongue and finish their BFR
ASAP).
Recapping, my real concern of this does not come from how the 2-33
specifically likes/dislikes it. My concern comes from building this
technique by rote as a reflex in students because it translates poorly
to most other gliders, and seems like it could potentially lead to
disaster down the road, from my limited perspective. Honest, this
stuff actually gets written on a board and drilled into students
heads, I'm not making this up.

-Paul
(trying to keep descriptions as generic as possible because I DON'T
want to call him out)

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:52:43 -0700, Darryl Ramm wrote:

On Jul 22, 6:55*am, Mike the Strike wrote:
Those are the only gliders where I think its needed.

Never flown a Jantar-1?

Horribly under-ruddered, as I recall, needing lots of boot to
coordinate a turn and preferring it applied a tad before aileron.

Mike

ASH-25, and I'd assume a Nimbus, etc. (yes not much training done in
those).

The only one of those I've handled was a Nimbus 3, which seemed to
handle OK apart from the rudder forces and the (to me anyway) large
amounts of inertia about all three axes. Mind you, that was on a really
difficult day - little drift but solid overcast at 3000 ft and only wide
diameter, weak lift under it, so anything other than gentle turns would
have lost more than they gained. We stayed up 3 hours to get some value
from the tow and never got higher than 2800 ft or more than 10 miles from
home.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot