Why are the yokes always turned?

Why does it seem that the control yokes of small aircraft are always
turned completely to one side or the other in photographs? Is there
some sort of convention about doing this? A safety reason? Why is it
so common?

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

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Why does it seem that the control yokes of small aircraft are always
turned completely to one side or the other in photographs? Is there
some sort of convention about doing this? A safety reason? Why is it
so common?

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

If it is during taxi operations... It is so that the wind doesn't get under
the wing and flip the plane over... Basically "Quartering headwind, turn
into it, quartering tailwind, turn away from it and elevator forward."

Wade Hasbrouck writes:

If it is during taxi operations... It is so that the wind doesn't get under
the wing and flip the plane over... Basically "Quartering headwind, turn
into it, quartering tailwind, turn away from it and elevator forward."

OK. I neglected to mention that the photos I've seen were normally of
aircraft that were parked. I'll make a note of the adjustments for
taxi.

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

It's for photo purposes. Usually to allow an unobstructed view of the
panel.
Jim

There is a standard practice of looping the pilot's seatbelt through
the yoke and latching it on non-cessna aircraft (or any plane that does
not have a built-in controll locking mechanism), this pulls the yoke
all the way back and over, and might be what you're describing.

It actually isn't the best practice, its hard on the yoke... There are
several after-market control locks for airplanes that don't have them
built in, but they can be hard to find.

A Control lock is a device which holds the controls of the aircraft so
they do not bang around if winds gusts. The practice above is
essentially using the seatbelt to do the same thing.

Cessna's have a hole in the pilot's side yoke shaft in which you put a
peg that bends around and covers the magneto switch (so you can't
accidentally start with the control lock in place). Its a very simple,
functional system... not sure why other aircraft makers didn't use it
too (I'm sure other AC makers use other systems as well I dont' know
about).


Mxsmanic wrote:
Why does it seem that the control yokes of small aircraft are always
turned completely to one side or the other in photographs? Is there
some sort of convention about doing this? A safety reason? Why is it
so common?

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

EridanMan wrote:
There is a standard practice of looping the pilot's seatbelt through
the yoke and latching it on non-cessna aircraft (or any plane that does
not have a built-in controll locking mechanism), this pulls the yoke
all the way back and over, and might be what you're describing.

It actually isn't the best practice, its hard on the yoke... There are
several after-market control locks for airplanes that don't have them
built in, but they can be hard to find.

A Control lock is a device which holds the controls of the aircraft so
they do not bang around if winds gusts. The practice above is
essentially using the seatbelt to do the same thing.

Cessna's have a hole in the pilot's side yoke shaft in which you put a
peg that bends around and covers the magneto switch (so you can't
accidentally start with the control lock in place). Its a very simple,
functional system... not sure why other aircraft makers didn't use it
too (I'm sure other AC makers use other systems as well I dont' know
about).


I know some manufactures no longer make control locks for liability
reasons. People would try to take off with the control lock still in
place and crash; then sue the manufacturer. Seems really stupid, but
thats what I heard.

[Note Followup-To reset.]

In rec.aviation.student buttman wrote:

I know some manufactures no longer make control locks for liability
reasons. People would try to take off with the control lock still in
place and crash; then sue the manufacturer. Seems really stupid, but
thats what I heard.

Of all the things to sue over, that seems lamer than most. And, if that's
the case, why do they still make, say, pitot covers? Or fuel gauges only
accurate at "Empty"? Or tow bars?

(Or, if not lamer to sue over, then lamer to stop manufacturing over.)

.... Alan

--
Alan Gerber
gerber AT panix DOT com

Alan Gerber wrote:

Of all the things to sue over, that seems lamer than most. And, if that's
the case, why do they still make, say, pitot covers? Or fuel gauges only
accurate at "Empty"? Or tow bars?

Fuel gauges aren't accurate anywhere. There's no accuracy requirement
in the FARs at all. All it says is the E mark is supposed to
correspond to the end of usable fuel (as opposed to bone dry).

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
...
Fuel gauges aren't accurate anywhere. There's no accuracy requirement
in the FARs at all. All it says is the E mark is supposed to
correspond to the end of usable fuel (as opposed to bone dry).

It's true that 23.1337b1 says "Each fuel quantity indicator must be
calibrated to read 'zero' during level flight when the quantity of fuel
remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply". As you point
out, that's merely clarifying that 'zero' should correspond to no *usable*
fuel rather than no *total* fuel (usable plus unusable). (Some people--not
you--misinterpret 23.1337b1 to mean that a fuel gauge only has to be
accurate when it says 'empty'.)

But I don't think it's quite true that there's no fuel-gauge accuracy
requirement in the FARs. According to 23.1337b, "There must be a means to
indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank
during flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly
marked to indicate those units must be used.".

Although there's no *quantitative* requirement as to how accurate the gauge
must be, 21.1337b says the gauge has to tell the crew how much fuel in fact
remains; so there's an implicit commonsense requirement that it be at least
roughly accurate (or else it's not telling the crew what it's required to be
telling them).

--Gary

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 07:03:12 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote:

Why does it seem that the control yokes of small aircraft are always
turned completely to one side or the other in photographs? Is there
some sort of convention about doing this? A safety reason? Why is it
so common?

I've never seen this. Can you post a link to some examples?

Ron Wanttaja