Hands Off Steep Turns

SG
For one, the 8 doesn't need any trim in a steep turn save a quick click of the pickles but that is more for the total effectiveness of that barn door of an elavator, but yes that thing has the worse load feel ever designed, my right bicep is way stronger than my left, but my left tricep is way stronger than the right because of the power levers!

There is no muddling here, I see you, and nothing personal, trying to reinvent the wheel for no reason other than to sound like you have discovered something new. We all are standing on the shoulders of giants and can claim nothing more than understanding what is being taught.

The lift theories, yup bogus, but I believe those theories came from ways of explaining a complex system that most no PhD types cannot understand, and they have morphed into fact, doesn't make them right, but doesn't dictate the need to call GA training muddled. There is a huge difference between practical knowledge and application and hanger chest thumping knowledge.

I had a great aerodynamics instructor in college (Naval Academy Engineering grad). Whenever someone mentions the wrong theories I don't assume they are bad pilots and call them dingbats and then belittle their training, I ask them to explain the lift equation, then how those other theories apply to it. They actually know what is going on, just confusing Newton and Bernouli mathematics because they don't have engineering or math backgrounds, completely normal. After that is over, they don't magically become better pilots.

My point is this, I don't care how an AC generator works, I care how I work it, sure I personnally love to dig into the guts of things and know how they really work, but that doesn't change how I operate. But insulting people because they may not have the same level of detailed knowledge about something is just being a bully.
 
Yes, the PTS has a LOT of problems with it. FAA Air Carrier Training Directorate is also full of problems (sorry Hop, if you are reading this, but I'm sure you'd agree, maybe we should give you some more work to do and take away some more of your employees!), but at least those don't seem to filter down as much. GA training just needs overhaul.

As for the rest of the remarks, well, when I started out as a CFI I was pretty protective of the way I was taught and was teaching, but my background now affords me 20/20 hindsight and I can see a lot of problems with the way things are being done.

Don't confuse what FAA has written in guidance, particularly to GA, with what is actually correct, and don't assume that what your CFI (or any other teacher, for that matter) is telling you is actually correct either.

These things may seem trivial to you, but they can have consequences that are larger than you might think. Juvenile responses don't say much for your arguments, incidentally. It reminds me of some dingbat trying to tell me that you should use rudder to correct for dutch roll in a Lear. Incredibly, some places are actually teaching that, just as there are still some schools teaching that rudder should be used for primary roll control in upset recovery!

The best real world example that is similar to trimming in a steep turn is someone trimming during flare. Surely you don't think that's a good idea, do you?

Why is this some sort of sacred cow for everyone? GA training CAN be top notch, but not if everyone is fighting to maintain the status quo just because they are comfortable with it!
 
seagull said:
Yes, the PTS has a LOT of problems with it. FAA Air Carrier Training Directorate is also full of problems (sorry Hop, if you are reading this, but I'm sure you'd agree, maybe we should give you some more work to do and take away some more of your employees!), but at least those don't seem to filter down as much. GA training just needs overhaul.

As for the rest of the remarks, well, when I started out as a CFI I was pretty protective of the way I was taught and was teaching, but my background now affords me 20/20 hindsight and I can see a lot of problems with the way things are being done.

Don't confuse what FAA has written in guidance, particularly to GA, with what is actually correct, and don't assume that what your CFI (or any other teacher, for that matter) is telling you is actually correct either.

These things may seem trivial to you, but they can have consequences that are larger than you might think. Juvenile responses don't say much for your arguments, incidentally. It reminds me of some dingbat trying to tell me that you should use rudder to correct for dutch roll in a Lear. Incredibly, some places are actually teaching that, just as there are still some schools teaching that rudder should be used for primary roll control in upset recovery!

The best real world example that is similar to trimming in a steep turn is someone trimming during flare. Surely you don't think that's a good idea, do you?

Why is this some sort of sacred cow for everyone? GA training CAN be top notch, but not if everyone is fighting to maintain the status quo just because they are comfortable with it!
Click to expand...
I trim during a flare, I use rudder for roll control in stalls and unusual attitudes.

Yeah ok, the FAA is full of it.
 
Dugie,

I have no intent on insulting anyone. I am attacking the technique, not those who are using it or have been taught it. Big difference.

I disagree with you that aerodynamics is as complex as that. I think that it is made complex by those who either, one, don't understand it themselves, or two, want to make it seem more complex than it is.

As for standing on the shoulders of giants, what giants are those, exactly? I have stood in meetings full of a literal who's who in this field more than once and told them they were wrong, and I would do it again. It's not about who's right, it's about WHAT is right. I don't care who is saying it. I am also open to new ideas, and have changed my concepts of how things work quite often in those same meetings, including many of these that I am now advocating.

I have had opportunities that few people will ever get, and I do feel an obligation to share that knowledge. It is unfortunate that so many want to maintain that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe!
 
Now we are comparing apples to oranges, IMO. Trimming to relieve the pressure in a steep turn does not translate into in a dutch roll situation (by the way, dutch roll recover in the 8 is hands off, turn on the YD, but that thing wont dutch roll unless you really REALLY try :) ).

There is a huge difference between someone not understanding life saving recovery techniques and using secondary flight controls to fly the airplane. And name calling, dingbat for example, is just as juvenile. I truly believe no intentionally presents bad information for the sake of presenting bad information, they present what they know and more specifically what they think they fully understand, so name calling only serves to put those on the defensive and be less receptive to learning the right way, but of course it is just easier to call people names and live on the high horse.

Champ
Be very careful with how much trim you use for the flare. Too much, and you are asking for a handful of airplane if you have to go around in the flare. I try to trim so I have to hold slight backpressure. It adds a little more feel to the landing as well.
 
Dugie8 said:
Champ
Be very careful with how much trim you use for the flare. Too much, and you are asking for a handful of airplane if you have to go around in the flare. I try to trim so I have to hold slight backpressure. It adds a little more feel to the landing as well.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I know. I hit a quick click on the hat switch or a quick spin on the wheel.
 
SG
If you truly understand fluid dynamics to the point of thinking aerodynamics is simple, my hat is off to you. I spent 3 years studying just that, and still don't have it down, even after flying for almost 10 years. It is one thing to recite the lift equation and Bernouilli and Newton (the true giants, if you can prove them wrong I buy the beer) it is a completely other thing to understand the mathematics is such detail you can explain what happens to the fluidity of the air at the boundery layers, in front of the wing, etc etc.

Nothing personal here either, just the principle. I am all for improving training, but debating the finer points of steep turn technique isn't it, either is reinventing the lift equation. CRM, stick skills and technique, systems management, etc are the new frontiers. The basics are covered in enough detail without splitting hairs on semantics and laymen understanding of higher mathmatics.

The BA 747 that had the engine failure out of LAX and continued across the pond is a prime example. These guys didn't understand the systems or how to use them, nevermind continuing for 4000 miles with a dead motor, I doubt their knowledge of lift or how to use trim was a contributing factor, but I bet they understood those better than the fuel system on the machine they were flying 7 miles above the earth at .80 mach.
 
Dugie

First off, I didn't call anybody on this forum a dingbat, and, when in the debate a couple of years ago, I didnt call that person a dingbat either. However, the person clearly WAS a dingbat to be advocating that technique!

On the aerodynamics front, this is nothing about explaining the lift equation. I would say I agree with Chris Carpenter, when he says that most aero majors can crunch the numbers, but really don't truly understand the concepts that they are crunching. You can explain just about all of it without using math at all, with some minor exceptions here and there. I am not challenging Newton or Bernoulli, at least here, back to that in a moment!

On the trim, as you said, you best be very careful about trim in the flare. The danger is that trim can fail, and those couple of clicks of trim on the go around could end up being a very bad thing. This is also an issue with using it in a steep turn or any other transient maneuver. How long does it take to do that 180 or 360 degree turn?

Now, back to your challenge. I can easily challenge both Newton and Bernoulli. First, as you know, Bernoulli was all based on Newton's equations, so all we need to do it concentrate on Newton. Now, let me introduce you to a man named Einstien. Assuming you took physics, need I say more? ;-)
 
Can take quite a bit to do a 360 turn to the left, then roll into a 360 turn to the right (PTS) in the C-172. Takes no time in the CRJ, but I tend to like to use the trim in the CRJ b/c it's so damn pitch sensitive. Sneeze wrong and you launch the pax in the back. :)
 
kellwolf said:
I also feel that if you DON'T trim the airplane (in all phases of flight, turn, straight, sideway, upside down, etc), you're fighting against what the airplane wants to do, which is not good form.
Click to expand...

I agree. When I was a primary student and I was muscling the airplane around, my instructor let me do it for a while, and then he said, do you want to learn a little trick?

There's something called trim. Use it. It's so much easier to fly when you do.

It's about reducing your workload and making the airplane easier to fly. I can't imagine that would be a bad thing regardless of whether you're tooling around at 100 knots in a Cessna or flying the heavy metal.
 
tonyw said:
I agree. When I was a primary student and I was muscling the airplane around, my instructor let me do it for a while, and then he said, do you want to learn a little trick?

There's something called trim. Use it. It's so much easier to fly when you do.

It's about reducing your workload and making the airplane easier to fly. I can't imagine that would be a bad thing regardless of whether you're tooling around at 100 knots in a Cessna or flying the heavy metal.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:
Well I guess then you, the FAA, Newton, and Bernouli are all wrong:)

I still find the fact the some are argueing this is just nuts.
 
Champcar said:
:yeahthat:
Well I guess then you, the FAA, Newton, and Bernouli are all wrong:)

I still find the fact the some are argueing this is just nuts.
Click to expand...

Pretty much true. FAA, in the GA arena, is full of problems. There are a lot of problems in terms of disconnects, such as between Air Traffic and the Charting folks. FAA also has some very good areas. Overall, the Air Carrier Training Directorate folks are pretty sharp. Powerplant Directorate, good. AEG is great, Aircraft Cert and flight test folks, top notch. There are a lot of sharp people throughout, however, the GA side is really weak. Not sure entirely why, maybe the people with more technical expertise are attracted to other areas of FAA, or perhaps some other reason. I don't know why it is, but I do see the problem.

For Newton, and, therefore, Bernoulli, everyone knows their calcs are a bit off due to not accounting for relativistic effects, so it is not inaccurate to say they are wrong, but using Newton's equations are a heck of a lot simpler and accurate enough for anything we do in aviation!

Would you find the fact that some argue that rudder should not be primary for roll control in unusual attitude recovery also "nuts"? It would appear so from your post above where you said you use rudder for roll control for unusual attitudes.

If so, you are arguing against the concensus of ALL the flight test community, ALL the aircraft manufacturers, NASA, FAA, ATA, ALPA, DOD, JAA and a few others.

Of course, what do I know, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top