Chandelle question
- Thread starter gomntwins
- Start date
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Whatever makes it work, man!! I'm more of an instrument guy myself. I like to begin learning something like that by referencing instruments, and then fine tune it while looking out of the window.
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Whatever makes it work, man!! I'm more of an instrument guy myself. I like to begin learning something like that by referencing instruments, and then fine tune it while looking out of the window.
Procedures we follow call for approx. 11 degree nose pitch up by the 90 degree point. The problem is that if you have students do the maneuvers exactly by the numbers it will have a very robotic feel. When first teaching Chandelle's I usually would cover up the A/I to force the student to look outside and not fixate.
Alchemy
Well-Known Member
I usually had to pitch up somewhere between 15-18 degrees dring chandelles in the C182RG. This kept me within 5 knots of Vso at the 180 degree point. The Arrow has a smaller powerplant, an IO-360, right? So you may need to use a smaller Pitch Attitude in one of those.
Just experiment....try 12 degrees and see if you're within 5 knots of Vs1 when you roll out. If you're too fast, try 14, too slow and you stall, try 10.
Just experiment....try 12 degrees and see if you're within 5 knots of Vs1 when you roll out. If you're too fast, try 14, too slow and you stall, try 10.
gomntwins
Well-Known Member
I'm not looking for a set number of degrees pitch up, just an approximate number for reference. A lot of people can do this just visually-- personally, when I was doing my commercial, I struggled with that-- that's why I asked this question. Sounds like the average here is about 15 degrees-- thanks!
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like alot of people are able to determine degrees pitch up, eh??
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like alot of people are able to determine degrees pitch up, eh??
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
..the SIDE window!
[/ QUOTE ]
There you go!! Is that like "Setting your DG to match the mag compass" while you're under the hood shooting an approach??
..the SIDE window!
[/ QUOTE ]
There you go!! Is that like "Setting your DG to match the mag compass" while you're under the hood shooting an approach??
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like a lot of people are able to determine degrees pitch up, eh??
[/ QUOTE ] I guess. Go figure. All these people who need instrument references in order to fly a visual maneuver. What has flight training come come to?
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I've never thought of it in those terms. How do you determine degrees pitch up when looking out the window?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like a lot of people are able to determine degrees pitch up, eh??
[/ QUOTE ] I guess. Go figure. All these people who need instrument references in order to fly a visual maneuver. What has flight training come come to?
Pilot Hopeful
Well-Known Member
I use 12 degrees of pitch...and adjust as necessary (hardly ever) throughout the maneuver.
1960's Arrow, 200 hp, 2500 RPM, 25" MP
Results may vary slightly from plane to plane.
1960's Arrow, 200 hp, 2500 RPM, 25" MP
Results may vary slightly from plane to plane.
Alchemy
Well-Known Member
What's wrong with looking at the attitude indicator during a chandelle? If I need to maintain 30 degrees of bank, I'm gonna have a hard time holding that +/- 5 degrees without at least glancing at the AI every so often. I guess the stall warning harn is probably the best cue that you're at about the right angle of attack.... Maybe I need to take an aerobatics course
As long as the student doesn't fixate on it, I see no problem with including the instrument panel in the "maneuver scan". Same for steep turns and lazy eights, heck even eights on pylons. It's awfully easy to go un-coordinated during eights on pylons if you don't look at the inclinometer every so often.
I see your point about emphasizing looking outside the airplane during visual maneuvers, and I realize that 'in the old days' no one even had attitude indicators, but do you really cover the AI up for the entire duration of their training?
As long as the student doesn't fixate on it, I see no problem with including the instrument panel in the "maneuver scan". Same for steep turns and lazy eights, heck even eights on pylons. It's awfully easy to go un-coordinated during eights on pylons if you don't look at the inclinometer every so often.
I see your point about emphasizing looking outside the airplane during visual maneuvers, and I realize that 'in the old days' no one even had attitude indicators, but do you really cover the AI up for the entire duration of their training?
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
I think that a basic instrument scan is pretty important - especially if airspeed, altitude and attitude - along with coordination - are parts or the criteria.
Pilot Hopeful
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I use 12 degrees of pitch...and adjust as necessary (hardly ever) throughout the maneuver.
1960's Arrow, 200 hp, 2500 RPM, 25" MP
Results may vary slightly from plane to plane.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, yeah. Enter about 18" MP, 120 MPH.
Although I, too, oppose overuse of the instruments, the guidelines in the PTS almost make it necessary. Now, if you can't perform ANY kind of chandelle or lazy eight without instruments, then there's a problem. But to perform to FAA PTS standards, instruments are a must.
By the way, performing maneuvers as they should FEEL is a real blast. On the other hand, the FAA PTS stipulations build patience and exactness in the pilot, since the maneuvers proceed more slowly.
I use 12 degrees of pitch...and adjust as necessary (hardly ever) throughout the maneuver.
1960's Arrow, 200 hp, 2500 RPM, 25" MP
Results may vary slightly from plane to plane.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, yeah. Enter about 18" MP, 120 MPH.
Although I, too, oppose overuse of the instruments, the guidelines in the PTS almost make it necessary. Now, if you can't perform ANY kind of chandelle or lazy eight without instruments, then there's a problem. But to perform to FAA PTS standards, instruments are a must.
By the way, performing maneuvers as they should FEEL is a real blast. On the other hand, the FAA PTS stipulations build patience and exactness in the pilot, since the maneuvers proceed more slowly.
[ QUOTE ]
the first time my students look at the AI on a Chandelle, I cover that YOU-KNOW-WHAT for the remainder of their training.
[/ QUOTE ]
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
I think boiling the maneuver to pitch and bank attitudes keeps the student at the rote level on that maneuver. Put their heads outside for the ENTIRE chandelle, and I truly believe they will understand and improve their performance based on a better understanding of how it should look and work out.
Success with the lazy eight and chandelle is all about timing, and you cant guage your timing if your looking in the cockpit.
the first time my students look at the AI on a Chandelle, I cover that YOU-KNOW-WHAT for the remainder of their training.
[/ QUOTE ]
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
I think boiling the maneuver to pitch and bank attitudes keeps the student at the rote level on that maneuver. Put their heads outside for the ENTIRE chandelle, and I truly believe they will understand and improve their performance based on a better understanding of how it should look and work out.
Success with the lazy eight and chandelle is all about timing, and you cant guage your timing if your looking in the cockpit.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
[/ QUOTE ]I think that's probably the reason why the commercial is done after the instrument - to help the pilot get back the visual flying skills that were destroyed in the process of getting the instrument rating.
My favorite flight was a local checkout with a newly minted instrument pilot. He couldn't locate a 6 land divided interstate highway below us without taking a cross radial off a VOR.
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
[/ QUOTE ]I think that's probably the reason why the commercial is done after the instrument - to help the pilot get back the visual flying skills that were destroyed in the process of getting the instrument rating.
My favorite flight was a local checkout with a newly minted instrument pilot. He couldn't locate a 6 land divided interstate highway below us without taking a cross radial off a VOR.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
[/ QUOTE ]I think that's probably the reason why the commercial is done after the instrument - to help the pilot get back the visual flying skills that were destroyed in the process of getting the instrument rating.
My favorite flight was a local checkout with a newly minted instrument pilot. He couldn't locate a 6 land divided interstate highway below us without taking a cross radial off a VOR.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's the same thing I see with newly-minted A-10 pilots. The jet has advanced in capability since the time I started, so the new guys coming through the pipeline are heavily dependant on Enhanced GPS/INS (EGI) as well as the HUD for their target locating and attack assistance. During attack, the HUD continuously computes all your parameters (speed/dive angle, etc) and shows you where you need to make corrections for optimum accuracy.
It's interesting taking these guys to the range while having pre-briefed EGI off, HUD in manual (iron sight, no other info), first-run attack low-level. They now have to old-school navigate to the target area via clock/map/ground and good-ole terrain/threat/checkpoint/route study, compute the necessary corrections for a WWII-style manual bombing, and since it's a first-run attack, they only have about 4 seconds after popping-up (unmasking behind terrain) to acquire the specific target and roll-in. It's interesting to see sometimes where they end up just prior to the pop-up.....every now and then, miles from the intended target. Debrief is always the same: didn't have my distance/direction from target, steering cues, and other HUD magic.
They just don't make them like they used to.
[ QUOTE ]
ok, so not for the remainder of the training, but atleast until they stop trying to use it!! In my commercial trainng, and some I have trained, the instrument rating is still wet ink, so there is some unnecessary focus on instruments.
[/ QUOTE ]I think that's probably the reason why the commercial is done after the instrument - to help the pilot get back the visual flying skills that were destroyed in the process of getting the instrument rating.
My favorite flight was a local checkout with a newly minted instrument pilot. He couldn't locate a 6 land divided interstate highway below us without taking a cross radial off a VOR.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's the same thing I see with newly-minted A-10 pilots. The jet has advanced in capability since the time I started, so the new guys coming through the pipeline are heavily dependant on Enhanced GPS/INS (EGI) as well as the HUD for their target locating and attack assistance. During attack, the HUD continuously computes all your parameters (speed/dive angle, etc) and shows you where you need to make corrections for optimum accuracy.
It's interesting taking these guys to the range while having pre-briefed EGI off, HUD in manual (iron sight, no other info), first-run attack low-level. They now have to old-school navigate to the target area via clock/map/ground and good-ole terrain/threat/checkpoint/route study, compute the necessary corrections for a WWII-style manual bombing, and since it's a first-run attack, they only have about 4 seconds after popping-up (unmasking behind terrain) to acquire the specific target and roll-in. It's interesting to see sometimes where they end up just prior to the pop-up.....every now and then, miles from the intended target. Debrief is always the same: didn't have my distance/direction from target, steering cues, and other HUD magic.
They just don't make them like they used to.