Cessna rudder input
Mxsmanic
rudder input is necessary to maintain coordinated turns, compared to more
complex aircraft. I can just keep the tips of my feet on the rudder and, for
all but fairly aggressive bank angles, I can stay coordinated with just a tiny
bit of rudder, or none at all.
I have a 172 from one payware developer and a 182 from another, and they are
both this way. Do the real aircraft also behave like this, with only small
amounts of rudder necessary?
Stealth Pilot
wrote:
no.
that's one area where simulators get it wrong.
Stealth Pilot
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
No.
The old original MSFS was about correct but since the 2004 version the
simulated rudder and nose wheel have much more authority than a real Cessna.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
Steve Foley
news:o0t084h88pnsgeuuk...@4ax.com...
> very little rudder ...
> all but fairly aggressive bank angles...
> tiny bit of rudder...
> only small amounts of rudder...
Sorry I cannot answer, based on the vagueness of the statements.
Benjamin Dover
Dudley Henriques
Believe it or not, Microsoft actually had the rudder aileron couple
backwards on the DC3 before we corrected it during the beta. :-) In
other words, if you applied right or left yaw alone (rudder) what you
should be getting in a real airplane is a complimentary yaw/roll couple
that starts banking the airplane (turn) in the direction of the applied
rudder. We discovered during the beta that the DC3 was actually coupling
in the opposite direction :-) It turned out to be a sign transposition
(+- to -+) and it was fixed. This was in FS9, so the DC3 should now be
correct in FSX. I don't have FSX installed so I haven't actually checked
the bug to confirm it made the release.
On your rudder question;
The rudder in the real airplane is dynamic pressure sensitive as are the
other controls in a non boosted system such as a 172 or 182. The faster
you go, the more sensitive the controls are to specific pressure input.
Generally speaking, the rudder is WAY too sensitive in the sim as
compared to the real airplane. This will vary of course with different
controllers and how each controllers is set up.
Just watch the nose on the horizon as you enter and exit a turn. If you
are coordinated in the sim, you will see a no yaw generated as you roll
into and out of the turn....just like the real airplane :-)
--
Dudley Henriques
Mxsmanic
> The old original MSFS was about correct but since the 2004 version the
> simulated rudder and nose wheel have much more authority than a real Cessna.
I'm not using the default Cessnas. The 182 is from Carenado, the 172 is from
Flight 1.
Mxsmanic
> Sorry I cannot answer, based on the vagueness of the statements.
So why post?
Dallas
> Do the real aircraft also behave like this, with only small
> amounts of rudder necessary?
Yup... pretty much.
--
Dallas
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
BFD.
The statement stands.
Benjamin Dover
news:0mr2849d18g0o10lu...@4ax.com:
If you weren't such an asshole, the answer would have been given to you by
now. But you are, so many of us won't help you ever.
Now go fuck off, moron.
Benjamin Dover
news:4nr284dvr8et8h2bh...@4ax.com:
> Steve Foley writes:
>
>> Sorry I cannot answer, based on the vagueness of the statements.
>
> So why post?
>
We post to document to the world that you, Anthony, are a fucking asshole.
Go fuck off.
Mxsmanic
> BFD.
>
> The statement stands.
Well, no. Add-on aircraft are often vastly more accurate than the default
aircraft. MSFS users who have never tried an add-on aircraft won't know this.
Anyway, my question wasn't "is MSFS accurate," it was "does this behavior
match real life," which isn't the same thing.
Mxsmanic
> Just watch the nose on the horizon as you enter and exit a turn. If you
> are coordinated in the sim, you will see a no yaw generated as you roll
> into and out of the turn....just like the real airplane :-)
I will try that. I've been watching the turn coordinator mostly because I'm
not sure if or how to check turn coordination by looking out the window.
By "no yaw generated," do you mean that the nose stays at the same level
relative to the horizon, or what? In coordinated turns (as shown by the turn
indicator) I notice that the horizon through the window is a diagonal that
doesn't seem to move; the landscape "slides" along a fixed diagonal line in
the turn. If the turn is uncoordinated, the diagonal line formed by the
horizon will move left or right. Does that make sense, or am I imagining a
link between horizon and coordinated turns that doesn't exist?
I also have some concerns about climb rates. With just me in the 182, plus
some ballast (about half my weight in the copilot's seat, and about 1/4 my
weight in the right rear seat), taking off at full power at sea level with
trim set to the take-off notch and no flaps, the aircraft climbs very briskly
after take-off, speeding up to just below the yellow zone and climbing at
better than 2000 fpm according to the VSI, with about eight degrees nose-up.
As it passes through 800 feet or so, the airspeed drops and the nose drops and
the climb rate drops, but I wonder if this very brisk climb is like the real
thing.
I also note that with full power and the other conditions described above, I
need substantial nose down trim to maintain level flight. Is this realistic?
Michael Ash
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Just watch the nose on the horizon as you enter and exit a turn. If you
>> are coordinated in the sim, you will see a no yaw generated as you roll
>> into and out of the turn....just like the real airplane :-)
>
> I will try that. I've been watching the turn coordinator mostly because I'm
> not sure if or how to check turn coordination by looking out the window.
>
> By "no yaw generated," do you mean that the nose stays at the same level
> relative to the horizon, or what? In coordinated turns (as shown by the turn
> indicator) I notice that the horizon through the window is a diagonal that
> doesn't seem to move; the landscape "slides" along a fixed diagonal line in
> the turn. If the turn is uncoordinated, the diagonal line formed by the
> horizon will move left or right. Does that make sense, or am I imagining a
> link between horizon and coordinated turns that doesn't exist?
I gather you missed the part where he said "as you roll into and out of
the turn". You're imagining the link you describe; an uncoordinated turn
looks the same as a coordinated one, except that you'll have a different
bank angle for your turn rate (and of course you won't be moving in the
direction you're pointed, but that's very tough to discern). What Dudley
is describing is while you're starting or finishing the turn. Before you
start the turn, look at what your nose is pointing at. As you roll into
the turn, the nose should continue to point at that object if you're using
the rudders properly. If you're giving too much rudder then you'll start
moving in the direction of the turn early. If you give too little, the
nose will swing in the opposite direction.
Being coordinated is mainly a matter of entry and exit. To a first
approximation, proper coordination during the turn is achieved by leaving
the rudder straight.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Blanche
Actually, the real question is why does anyone respond to the well-known
collection of destructive personalities here?
Mxsmanic
> What Dudley
> is describing is while you're starting or finishing the turn. Before you
> start the turn, look at what your nose is pointing at. As you roll into
> the turn, the nose should continue to point at that object if you're using
> the rudders properly.
But shouldn't the aircraft start to turn as soon as the bank angle is other
than zero? Meaning that the nose will immediately turn away from the object
as soon as you start to bank?
Dudley Henriques
You're right. This is exactly what happens. You'll get the visual read
good or bad on the nose immediately as you start a coordinated roll into
and out of a turn. The read on correct rudder use for the amount of
aileron you're using will be instantaneous as you reference the horizon.
If you are right on with the correct amount of rudder, the nose will
appear pinned for about the first 5 degrees of the roll in or roll out.
The nose will track the horizon normally as the lift vectors split and
the turn commences. In the actual airplane, you will "feel" pinned in
the seat with no yaw sensed as a secondary cue. Your body will be
"rotating" centered in the seat with the airplane if coordination is
correct.
Getting this visual read on the horizon going into and out of turns is
one of the basic skills learned early on. Once you get to the point
where you reference these cues automatically, you will probably never
use a ball to reference a turn entry or exit again.
Remember, the first 5 degrees will tell you if you are coordinated or
not. ANY yaw excessive or inadequate will show as a yaw rate on the
horizon either putting the nose ahead of you or behind you as you apply
pro turn inputs. As you roll into the turn, adjust for ANY tendency of
the nose to get ahead or behind you and you'll have it down pat.
--
Dudley Henriques
Steve Foley
> So why post?
For the same reasons you post.
Dudley Henriques
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Just watch the nose on the horizon as you enter and exit a turn. If you
>> are coordinated in the sim, you will see a no yaw generated as you roll
>> into and out of the turn....just like the real airplane :-)
>
> I will try that. I've been watching the turn coordinator mostly because I'm
> not sure if or how to check turn coordination by looking out the window.
>
> By "no yaw generated," do you mean that the nose stays at the same level
> relative to the horizon, or what? In coordinated turns (as shown by the turn
> indicator) I notice that the horizon through the window is a diagonal that
> doesn't seem to move; the landscape "slides" along a fixed diagonal line in
> the turn. If the turn is uncoordinated, the diagonal line formed by the
> horizon will move left or right. Does that make sense, or am I imagining a
> link between horizon and coordinated turns that doesn't exist?
You're just about on it. See the post below this one.
>
> I also have some concerns about climb rates. With just me in the 182, plus
> some ballast (about half my weight in the copilot's seat, and about 1/4 my
> weight in the right rear seat), taking off at full power at sea level with
> trim set to the take-off notch and no flaps, the aircraft climbs very briskly
> after take-off, speeding up to just below the yellow zone and climbing at
> better than 2000 fpm according to the VSI, with about eight degrees nose-up.
> As it passes through 800 feet or so, the airspeed drops and the nose drops and
> the climb rate drops, but I wonder if this very brisk climb is like the real
> thing.
Adjust your climb rate to the Vy airspeed for the airplane you're flying
unless you have an obstacle to clear, then use Vx, clear, then go to Vy.
Immediately after rotation, find the NOSE ATTITUDE that gives you Vy and
pin the nose there visually. Don't "search" for it, and don't over
rotate the airplane.
It sounds like you might be trying to do this by instrument reference
only. This can be done, and indeed is done on every instrument takeoff,
but it's much better and much easier for a pilot to use instruments on
takeoff if the pilot already knows the nose attitude that will
approximate the Vy IAS. Because both the ASI and the VSI are
pitot/static instruments, they have a lag that will really mess you up
if you search for a climb rate after rotation. The proper way to use
these instruments would be to rotate to a pre-known angle of climb on
the ADI, then fine tune the climb angle using a complete scan to acheive Vy.
If the airplane has a constant speed prop such as the 182, make the
initial power reduction, set the prop for climb while you PIN the
airplane at a lower nose attitude than you are using now, then adjust
the nose attitude for Vy airspeed. In the 182, this shouldn't be an
initial nose attitude higher than about 20 degrees above the horizon
line. Try 20 degrees. If you need a bit more, adjust. If less, adjust that.
The trick is to rotate to a nose attitude you know is at or below Vy and
hold that attitude as you fine tune to your climb profile to nail Vy
airspeed.
>
> I also note that with full power and the other conditions described above, I
> need substantial nose down trim to maintain level flight. Is this realistic?
The exact amount of trim you need for level flight is dependant on
several factors and will change as you burn fuel. As a general rule,
just PIN (we always come back to this term don't we :-) the nose for
level flight, adjust the power and prop, then trim the airplane.
NOSE/POWER/TRIM
--
Dudley Henriques
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
> > BFD.
> >
> > The statement stands.
I gave you the answer pontificating jerk, the answer is no.
Benjamin Dover
news:ocj384121ntjqg95e...@4ax.com:
You don't have a real life, so why do you care?
Mxsmanic
> You're right. This is exactly what happens. You'll get the visual read
> good or bad on the nose immediately as you start a coordinated roll into
> and out of a turn. The read on correct rudder use for the amount of
> aileron you're using will be instantaneous as you reference the horizon.
> If you are right on with the correct amount of rudder, the nose will
> appear pinned for about the first 5 degrees of the roll in or roll out.
> The nose will track the horizon normally as the lift vectors split and
> the turn commences. In the actual airplane, you will "feel" pinned in
> the seat with no yaw sensed as a secondary cue. Your body will be
> "rotating" centered in the seat with the airplane if coordination is
> correct.
> Getting this visual read on the horizon going into and out of turns is
> one of the basic skills learned early on. Once you get to the point
> where you reference these cues automatically, you will probably never
> use a ball to reference a turn entry or exit again.
> Remember, the first 5 degrees will tell you if you are coordinated or
> not. ANY yaw excessive or inadequate will show as a yaw rate on the
> horizon either putting the nose ahead of you or behind you as you apply
> pro turn inputs. As you roll into the turn, adjust for ANY tendency of
> the nose to get ahead or behind you and you'll have it down pat.
Excellent, thanks. I will watch for this the next time I practice in the C182
and follow your suggestions. If nose is motionless for the first 5 degrees of
roll, I'm coordinated.
Mxsmanic
> Adjust your climb rate to the Vy airspeed for the airplane you're flying
> unless you have an obstacle to clear, then use Vx, clear, then go to Vy.
> Immediately after rotation, find the NOSE ATTITUDE that gives you Vy and
> pin the nose there visually. Don't "search" for it, and don't over
> rotate the airplane.
I don't always have documentation for the V speeds of the aircraft, but I can
try. I think I've been doing something similar thus far. After reading about
it and experimenting, I've tried to force myself to forego a rapid climb and
try to get more airspeed instead. For example, if there are hills ahead
beyond the runway, I aim straight for them after take-off (more or less),
instead of letting the aircraft climb at the rate it wants to. I keep
checking the airspeed and when I'm going at a reasonable rate--one that is
probably close to Vy, although I don't always have the exact number--I ease
the yoke back and climb over the hills. My reasoning is that a climb at a
higher speed will be easier to sustain to get over those hills, whereas if I
just tried to zoom up to an altitude that would clear them immediately, I
might run short of speed and end up stalling or unable to maintain a rate that
would keep me clear. This sounds like what you're saying about Vy and Vx, if
I understand correctly (?).
> It sounds like you might be trying to do this by instrument reference
> only. This can be done, and indeed is done on every instrument takeoff,
> but it's much better and much easier for a pilot to use instruments on
> takeoff if the pilot already knows the nose attitude that will
> approximate the Vy IAS.
Unfortunately, I've not been hugely successful at figuring out the ideal nose
attitude, although I recall what you've said before about maintaining the
desired attitude instead of constantly staring at the other instrumnents.
When I try to stabilize my altitude I do try to use the AI or horizon to keep
a constant attitude. I pick an attitude that I think is close to what's
required to maintain altitude, and I go back and forth with the yoke to make
sure that the attitude doesn't change. This seems to dampen any phugoid
faster than trying to do it with other instruments. It would help if I could
feel what the aircraft is doing, but that's not possible in the sim; however,
I figure that if I can do it without the sensations, it would only be that
much easier if the sensations were there.
> Because both the ASI and the VSI are
> pitot/static instruments, they have a lag that will really mess you up
> if you search for a climb rate after rotation. The proper way to use
> these instruments would be to rotate to a pre-known angle of climb on
> the ADI, then fine tune the climb angle using a complete scan to acheive Vy.
Is the angle normally documented in the POH, or should I find it by
experiment? I've seen V speeds but I don't recall angles (keeping in mind
that sim aircraft don't always have the same POH that a real aircraft would
have).
I like the idea of using attitude to achieve stable flight but I'm not very
good at it so far.
> If the airplane has a constant speed prop such as the 182, make the
> initial power reduction, set the prop for climb while you PIN the
> airplane at a lower nose attitude than you are using now, then adjust
> the nose attitude for Vy airspeed.
Currently I'm not making a power reduction; perhaps that is part of the
problem. I've been assuming that small aircraft need all the power they can
get while climbing, but perhaps that is an exaggeration (on large airliners, I
do reduce power shortly after take-off).
I have been pushing the yoke forward to bring the nose down, at least, in
order to gain speed instead of altitude. But I haven't been reducing power
prior to reaching my cruise altitude (at which point I reduce RPM and throttle
and make a finer adjustment of mixture).
> In the 182, this shouldn't be an
> initial nose attitude higher than about 20 degrees above the horizon
> line. Try 20 degrees. If you need a bit more, adjust. If less, adjust that.
> The trick is to rotate to a nose attitude you know is at or below Vy and
> hold that attitude as you fine tune to your climb profile to nail Vy
> airspeed.
OK. I'll try to find documentation of the speeds somewhere and then do as you
suggest.
> The exact amount of trim you need for level flight is dependant on
> several factors and will change as you burn fuel. As a general rule,
> just PIN (we always come back to this term don't we :-) the nose for
> level flight, adjust the power and prop, then trim the airplane.
> NOSE/POWER/TRIM
OK. I've been doing mostly NOSE/TRIM/(POWER), I guess I should use the
throttle more to help adjust.
Viperdoc
know the V-speeds, it is obvious that you don't have a clue about how to
even begin flying a plane, let alone with the limitations of playing on a
home computer.
How can you remotely lecture us (the real pilots) on safety when you think
you could actually fly an airplane with the descriptions from your previous
posts? They demonstrate how little you actually know about even the most
basic aspects of flying.
You were doing a lot better on the breast feeding group.
Dudley Henriques
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Adjust your climb rate to the Vy airspeed for the airplane you're flying
>> unless you have an obstacle to clear, then use Vx, clear, then go to Vy.
>> Immediately after rotation, find the NOSE ATTITUDE that gives you Vy and
>> pin the nose there visually. Don't "search" for it, and don't over
>> rotate the airplane.
>
> I don't always have documentation for the V speeds of the aircraft, but I can
> try.
For a 182, (its been a long time) try Vx at 63 and Vy at around 80 at
sea level. Should be close enough for government work :-)
I think I've been doing something similar thus far. After reading about
> it and experimenting, I've tried to force myself to forego a rapid climb and
> try to get more airspeed instead. For example, if there are hills ahead
> beyond the runway, I aim straight for them after take-off (more or less),
> instead of letting the aircraft climb at the rate it wants to. I keep
> checking the airspeed and when I'm going at a reasonable rate--one that is
> probably close to Vy, although I don't always have the exact number--I ease
> the yoke back and climb over the hills. My reasoning is that a climb at a
> higher speed will be easier to sustain to get over those hills, whereas if I
> just tried to zoom up to an altitude that would clear them immediately, I
> might run short of speed and end up stalling or unable to maintain a rate that
> would keep me clear. This sounds like what you're saying about Vy and Vx, if
> I understand correctly (?).
Vx will get you the highest altitude in the shortest horizontal distance
traveled. Vy will get you the most altitude in the least amount of time.
Any airspeed both above and below these two specific airspeeds will
result in less than the performance realized by using the correct
airspeed. Vx and Vy change due to various factors. A VERY good
explanation on how these two airspeeds are derived is a piece done by
Rod Machado. Google (Rod Machado Vx Vy) You should come up with it.
Worth reading.
>
>> It sounds like you might be trying to do this by instrument reference
>> only. This can be done, and indeed is done on every instrument takeoff,
>> but it's much better and much easier for a pilot to use instruments on
>> takeoff if the pilot already knows the nose attitude that will
>> approximate the Vy IAS.
>
> Unfortunately, I've not been hugely successful at figuring out the ideal nose
> attitude, although I recall what you've said before about maintaining the
> desired attitude instead of constantly staring at the other instrumnents.
The sim (the computer screen actually) doesn't make it as easy for you
to estimate a rotation climb angle as you get from the real airplane
with peripheral vision in play. This is partially why many sim pilots
start relying heavily on instruments when flying. In the sim, as you
rotate on takeoff, the world disappears under the panel in forward view
especially using a 2D panel. The VC might be a bit better for some but
still not as easy as the instant and constantly changing peripheral cues
you get in the actual airplane.
Probably the best way to get things down pat is in first realizing that
you can't chase the pitot static instruments on rotation to find Vy. You
can however, use the instruments to help you if you are aware of a few
things and scan carefully.
Try rotating the 182 to a pre-determined amount of bar width spread (say
about 3 dot widths..aircraft dot index in the center of the ADI above
the horizon line) and PIN the nose there letting it go no higher. Now
set up for climb power and pitch then check the ASI. Note the IAS with
the dot held at the 3 dot width point. If the airspeed is lower or
higher than Vy for the airplane...say 80 for the 182, adjust the ADI to
a new dot spread and recheck the airspeed again while holding the new
spread. Do this in a straight climb until you have the airplane
stabilized at the required airspeed for a Vy climb at 80. When you have
this, NOTE the dot spread on the ADI and REMEMBER IT!
Next takeoff, use that dot spread on the ADI to establish your Vy climb,
then fine tune the airplane.
There's a lot more to understanding Vy and Vx than we're dealing with
here, but this might help you get started. The Machado article will
explain a lot more.
>
> When I try to stabilize my altitude I do try to use the AI or horizon to keep
> a constant attitude. I pick an attitude that I think is close to what's
> required to maintain altitude, and I go back and forth with the yoke to make
> sure that the attitude doesn't change. This seems to dampen any phugoid
> faster than trying to do it with other instruments. It would help if I could
> feel what the aircraft is doing, but that's not possible in the sim; however,
> I figure that if I can do it without the sensations, it would only be that
> much easier if the sensations were there.
Leveling off from a climb can of course be done either visually or on
instruments. Visually you use the instruments to verify what you are
correcting. VFR, just level off by leading the required altitude a bit
estimating the curve the aircraft will make instead of visualizing a
square corner :-) Put the nose below the horizon where you believe it
should be for level flight, then verify with the altimeter and VSI.
DON'T trim out the airplane yet. The reason for this is that the trim
will change as you reduce the power to cruise setting and you'll just
have to trim it out again. PIN the nose on the exact spot where the
altimeter is telling you there is no tendency to climb or descend. You
should be noticing by now that the airspeed has been rising due to you
leaving the power set at climb setting as you leveled off. AFTER you
have pinned the nose at level flight, NOW bring back the power to cruise
and adjust the RPM.
NOW is when you trim the aircraft for level flight!! Done!! :-)
>
>> Because both the ASI and the VSI are
>> pitot/static instruments, they have a lag that will really mess you up
>> if you search for a climb rate after rotation. The proper way to use
>> these instruments would be to rotate to a pre-known angle of climb on
>> the ADI, then fine tune the climb angle using a complete scan to acheive Vy.
>
> Is the angle normally documented in the POH, or should I find it by
> experiment? I've seen V speeds but I don't recall angles (keeping in mind
> that sim aircraft don't always have the same POH that a real aircraft would
> have).
Vx and Vy are fairly specific for any aircraft. It's really best to know
what they are and where to find them.
There are several sources on the internet where you can download a copy
of a POH for a 182 or 172 or at least the numbers you need to fly it in
the sim. As a matter of fact, I believe the numbers might even be in the
sim help section for each aircraft if I remember right, or at least in
the various books on MSFS.
>
> I like the idea of using attitude to achieve stable flight but I'm not very
> good at it so far.
It just takes a bit of practice. You'll get it I'm sure.
>
>> If the airplane has a constant speed prop such as the 182, make the
>> initial power reduction, set the prop for climb while you PIN the
>> airplane at a lower nose attitude than you are using now, then adjust
>> the nose attitude for Vy airspeed.
>
> Currently I'm not making a power reduction; perhaps that is part of the
> problem. I've been assuming that small aircraft need all the power they can
> get while climbing, but perhaps that is an exaggeration (on large airliners, I
> do reduce power shortly after take-off).
I'm searching my memory here a bit. Perhaps someone with a 182 will
chime in with the exact numbers....I believe the 182 is a MP reduction
to about 23" if the takeoff MP available is higher (low density
altitude) and the prop back to 2400RPM, but check me on this as I'm
guessing a bit here, but I think this is close.
>
> I have been pushing the yoke forward to bring the nose down, at least, in
> order to gain speed instead of altitude. But I haven't been reducing power
> prior to reaching my cruise altitude (at which point I reduce RPM and throttle
> and make a finer adjustment of mixture).
Nose first....then power...then prop....then trim......you're level!
>
>> In the 182, this shouldn't be an
>> initial nose attitude higher than about 20 degrees above the horizon
>> line. Try 20 degrees. If you need a bit more, adjust. If less, adjust that.
>> The trick is to rotate to a nose attitude you know is at or below Vy and
>> hold that attitude as you fine tune to your climb profile to nail Vy
>> airspeed.
>
> OK. I'll try to find documentation of the speeds somewhere and then do as you
> suggest.
>
>> The exact amount of trim you need for level flight is dependant on
>> several factors and will change as you burn fuel. As a general rule,
>> just PIN (we always come back to this term don't we :-) the nose for
>> level flight, adjust the power and prop, then trim the airplane.
>> NOSE/POWER/TRIM
>
> OK. I've been doing mostly NOSE/TRIM/(POWER), I guess I should use the
> throttle more to help adjust.
Nose/power/trim....always in that order.
Sounds like you're on the right track :-)
--
Dudley Henriques
Mxsmanic
> For a 182, (its been a long time) try Vx at 63 and Vy at around 80 at
> sea level. Should be close enough for government work :-)
OK. I was able to find recommended rate of climb speeds in the manual (which
appear to have been copied directly from the real-life POH) of about 88 for
Vy. I didn't find anything for Vx but there's a take-off chart that
recommends 55 KIAS at 50 feet, which I assume might be Vx (?).
These speeds are way lower than I've been using after take-off. I've been at
about 120 KIAS or so, and I've been rotating at 80. I'll have to go slower.
In the BE58 I rotate at the blue line (100 KIAS) but apparently that's much
too fast for a C182.
> Vx will get you the highest altitude in the shortest horizontal distance
> traveled. Vy will get you the most altitude in the least amount of time.
> Any airspeed both above and below these two specific airspeeds will
> result in less than the performance realized by using the correct
> airspeed. Vx and Vy change due to various factors. A VERY good
> explanation on how these two airspeeds are derived is a piece done by
> Rod Machado. Google (Rod Machado Vx Vy) You should come up with it.
> Worth reading.
Found it and read it, and bookmarked it.
> The sim (the computer screen actually) doesn't make it as easy for you
> to estimate a rotation climb angle as you get from the real airplane
> with peripheral vision in play. This is partially why many sim pilots
> start relying heavily on instruments when flying. In the sim, as you
> rotate on takeoff, the world disappears under the panel in forward view
> especially using a 2D panel. The VC might be a bit better for some but
> still not as easy as the instant and constantly changing peripheral cues
> you get in the actual airplane.
My workaround (if the add-on permits it) is to remove the panel and use
"pop-up" instruments (instruments that you can separate from the panel and
place where you wish on the screen). This gives me an unobstructed view of
what's ahead, and I arrange the individual instruments around the periphery of
the screen, trying to approximate their usual positions. It makes take-off
and landing way easier.
In theory, I should be able to move the eyepoint in the sim to anywhere I want
in the virtual cockpit. However, doing that while taking off or landing is
extremely awkward (unless you spend the money for TrackIR). I do use the
twist axis on the stick to "turn my head" left and right, which helps a lot
for landing especially.
> Probably the best way to get things down pat is in first realizing that
> you can't chase the pitot static instruments on rotation to find Vy. You
> can however, use the instruments to help you if you are aware of a few
> things and scan carefully.
> Try rotating the 182 to a pre-determined amount of bar width spread (say
> about 3 dot widths..aircraft dot index in the center of the ADI above
> the horizon line) and PIN the nose there letting it go no higher. Now
> set up for climb power and pitch then check the ASI. Note the IAS with
> the dot held at the 3 dot width point. If the airspeed is lower or
> higher than Vy for the airplane...say 80 for the 182, adjust the ADI to
> a new dot spread and recheck the airspeed again while holding the new
> spread. Do this in a straight climb until you have the airplane
> stabilized at the required airspeed for a Vy climb at 80. When you have
> this, NOTE the dot spread on the ADI and REMEMBER IT!
> Next takeoff, use that dot spread on the ADI to establish your Vy climb,
> then fine tune the airplane.
OK, I will try that.
I tried watching the nose in turns, using the optional crosshairs that you can
enable with MSFS to represent the nose, but the C182 requires so little rudder
that it wasn't very instructive. I'll try it with a Baron or something, which
requires more positive rudder adjustment in turns.
> Leveling off from a climb can of course be done either visually or on
> instruments. Visually you use the instruments to verify what you are
> correcting. VFR, just level off by leading the required altitude a bit
> estimating the curve the aircraft will make instead of visualizing a
> square corner :-) Put the nose below the horizon where you believe it
> should be for level flight, then verify with the altimeter and VSI.
> DON'T trim out the airplane yet. The reason for this is that the trim
> will change as you reduce the power to cruise setting and you'll just
> have to trim it out again. PIN the nose on the exact spot where the
> altimeter is telling you there is no tendency to climb or descend. You
> should be noticing by now that the airspeed has been rising due to you
> leaving the power set at climb setting as you leveled off. AFTER you
> have pinned the nose at level flight, NOW bring back the power to cruise
> and adjust the RPM.
> NOW is when you trim the aircraft for level flight!! Done!! :-)
OK, I will do this. I've been pretty close, in that I hold the yoke for a
while after leveling out to see if the "pressure" goes away as I maintain
attitude. After a bit, I start letting off on the yoke and trimming at the
same time until it stays where I put it. However, I haven't been rigorous
enough about adjusting power as well.
If I understand correctly, for a given power setting, adjusting pitch will
allow me to increase altitude and slow down, or decrease altitude and speed
up, but I cannot pin a specific altitude at a specific speed unless I also
adjust power (or I happen to get lucky). Correct?
> There are several sources on the internet where you can download a copy
> of a POH for a 182 or 172 or at least the numbers you need to fly it in
> the sim. As a matter of fact, I believe the numbers might even be in the
> sim help section for each aircraft if I remember right, or at least in
> the various books on MSFS.
I've been googling for POHs for the C182, but haven't found one yet, except
for sale. I'll look again at the kneeboard inside the sim.
> I'm searching my memory here a bit. Perhaps someone with a 182 will
> chime in with the exact numbers....I believe the 182 is a MP reduction
> to about 23" if the takeoff MP available is higher (low density
> altitude) and the prop back to 2400RPM, but check me on this as I'm
> guessing a bit here, but I think this is close.
OK.
> Nose first....then power...then prop....then trim......you're level!
I've written it on a piece of paper in the "cockpit."
Aviation seems awash in all sorts of acronyms and mnemonics but I find them
just as hard to remember as what they stand for (except maybe CRAFT and PARE,
which I finally managed to memorize).
> Sounds like you're on the right track :-)
OK. Back to the "airfield" for more experiments. The Cessna is parked at
Blythe right now. I made the mistake of navigating directly to the BLH VOR,
forgetting that it's several miles from the airport. I had to circle for a
while to find the field, and finally I "cheated" and looked at the small GPS
to see which direction I should look, and then I saw the runway lights off in
the distance. Not very disciplined, but fortunately there was no nearby
traffic.
Viperdoc
rotating, you really are pretty clueless. Try reading the POH- please don't
post anything about the safety of flying until you get a better idea of what
you're trying to do.
It's a good thing for the general public that you don't fly- your posts
really demonstrate your ignorance.
Dudley Henriques
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> For a 182, (its been a long time) try Vx at 63 and Vy at around 80 at
>> sea level. Should be close enough for government work :-)
>
> OK. I was able to find recommended rate of climb speeds in the manual (which
> appear to have been copied directly from the real-life POH) of about 88 for
> Vy. I didn't find anything for Vx but there's a take-off chart that
> recommends 55 KIAS at 50 feet, which I assume might be Vx (?).
Sounds a bit low but if the source is reliable, its been a long time
since I flew the airplane.
>
> These speeds are way lower than I've been using after take-off. I've been at
> about 120 KIAS or so, and I've been rotating at 80. I'll have to go slower.
> In the BE58 I rotate at the blue line (100 KIAS) but apparently that's much
> too fast for a C182.
Yes, that's too fast. 80 is fine for the 182. Actually, depending on
your GW, if you just relax the back pressure on the yoke during the
takeoff run the airplane should rotate itself at about 80 anyway as lift
increases with airspeed.
>
>> Vx will get you the highest altitude in the shortest horizontal distance
>> traveled. Vy will get you the most altitude in the least amount of time.
>> Any airspeed both above and below these two specific airspeeds will
>> result in less than the performance realized by using the correct
>> airspeed. Vx and Vy change due to various factors. A VERY good
>> explanation on how these two airspeeds are derived is a piece done by
>> Rod Machado. Google (Rod Machado Vx Vy) You should come up with it.
>> Worth reading.
>
> Found it and read it, and bookmarked it.
Rod is one of the finest CFI's I know. He sent me his latest book to
review and I consider it one of the finest books available to new
pilots. If you ever get a chance to read it by all means do.
>
>> The sim (the computer screen actually) doesn't make it as easy for you
>> to estimate a rotation climb angle as you get from the real airplane
>> with peripheral vision in play. This is partially why many sim pilots
>> start relying heavily on instruments when flying. In the sim, as you
>> rotate on takeoff, the world disappears under the panel in forward view
>> especially using a 2D panel. The VC might be a bit better for some but
>> still not as easy as the instant and constantly changing peripheral cues
>> you get in the actual airplane.
>
> My workaround (if the add-on permits it) is to remove the panel and use
> "pop-up" instruments (instruments that you can separate from the panel and
> place where you wish on the screen). This gives me an unobstructed view of
> what's ahead, and I arrange the individual instruments around the periphery of
> the screen, trying to approximate their usual positions. It makes take-off
> and landing way easier.
Sounds like a plan.
>
> In theory, I should be able to move the eyepoint in the sim to anywhere I want
> in the virtual cockpit. However, doing that while taking off or landing is
> extremely awkward (unless you spend the money for TrackIR). I do use the
> twist axis on the stick to "turn my head" left and right, which helps a lot
> for landing especially.
Sounds like you are making use of available resources which will work
just fine.
A specific power setting coupled with level flight will produce a
specific airspeed at a specific angle of attack.
Hang in Anthony. You're doing fine.
--
Dudley Henriques
Mxsmanic
> Rod is one of the finest CFI's I know. He sent me his latest book to
> review and I consider it one of the finest books available to new
> pilots. If you ever get a chance to read it by all means do.
It is probably already on my wish list, but I'll look.
It's good that he's a fine CFI, because he wouldn't make a good comedian, if
the patter he provides in the sim lessons was written by him. A lot of the
jokes in the lessons make me wince.
> A specific power setting coupled with level flight will produce a
> specific airspeed at a specific angle of attack.
What if you trim to force a specific angle of attack? Based on what I've
read, adding nose-up trim should produce a slightly higher altitude at a
slightly lower speed, and adding nose-down trim should do the opposite. It
seems to work this way in the sim.
I've been doing that especially during approaches, wherein I reduce power to
start a descent and then gradually add nose-up trim to slow down. Originally
I just reduced power to produce my descent, and I would indeed get the descent
rate I wanted but I always seemed to come in too fast. So after reading up a
bit I started reducing power further than before _and_ raising the nose a bit;
the result seems to be the same descent path and rate, but at a slower speed.
I've been trying to go as slow as possible in the Cessna for approaches; I've
managed to get the aircraft down to about 55 KIAS or so at touchdown, with the
trim set about 1/4-1/3 of the way from the take-off notch to the end of its
travel, and full flaps.
Dudley Henriques
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Rod is one of the finest CFI's I know. He sent me his latest book to
>> review and I consider it one of the finest books available to new
>> pilots. If you ever get a chance to read it by all means do.
>
> It is probably already on my wish list, but I'll look.
>
> It's good that he's a fine CFI, because he wouldn't make a good comedian, if
> the patter he provides in the sim lessons was written by him. A lot of the
> jokes in the lessons make me wince.
You're not alone on that score. His jokes could use a little dual for
sure :-)
>
>> A specific power setting coupled with level flight will produce a
>> specific airspeed at a specific angle of attack.
>
> What if you trim to force a specific angle of attack? Based on what I've
> read, adding nose-up trim should produce a slightly higher altitude at a
> slightly lower speed, and adding nose-down trim should do the opposite. It
> seems to work this way in the sim.
>
> I've been doing that especially during approaches, wherein I reduce power to
> start a descent and then gradually add nose-up trim to slow down. Originally
> I just reduced power to produce my descent, and I would indeed get the descent
> rate I wanted but I always seemed to come in too fast. So after reading up a
> bit I started reducing power further than before _and_ raising the nose a bit;
> the result seems to be the same descent path and rate, but at a slower speed.
>
> I've been trying to go as slow as possible in the Cessna for approaches; I've
> managed to get the aircraft down to about 55 KIAS or so at touchdown, with the
> trim set about 1/4-1/3 of the way from the take-off notch to the end of its
> travel, and full flaps.
Sim pilots have a tendency to fly using trim. This is something good
CFI's deal with early on along the learning curve. It's ok on long
stretches of level flight to "cheat" a bit by using trim in maintaining
level flight and a lot of pilots, especially those with electric trim
will do just that.
But when flying doing anything else but level flight, it's a VERY bad
habit flying by using trim. The old rules still applies today. The
throttle controls the altitude and you control airspeed with pitch.
Where this becomes confusing to some pilots is that within a certain
envelope, these two things interplay and for narrow excursions, you can
play pitch against power and visa versa by trading energy.
The energy approach to flying and how it relates to the strict
power/pitch rule is one of the most misunderstood and mis-taught
concepts in all of aviation.
For a VERY good look at how it SHOULD be understood, I always steer
pilots to John Deakin's excellent article on Avweb in his Pelican's
Perch series called Pitch, Power, Pink Elephants.
Here's the link.
http://www.warmkessel.com/jr/flying/td/jd/54.jsp
--
Dudley Henriques
Mxsmanic
> For a VERY good look at how it SHOULD be understood, I always steer
> pilots to John Deakin's excellent article on Avweb in his Pelican's
> Perch series called Pitch, Power, Pink Elephants.
> Here's the link.
> http://www.warmkessel.com/jr/flying/td/jd/54.jsp
I'll read it, thanks.
Highflyer
As usual, Mxsmanic makes more sense than most of his detractors. The amount
of rudder pedal travel and/or rudder pressure with a given aileron
deflection varies greatly between aircraft and aircraft types. Generally
older aircraft and gliders require quite substantial rudder inputs, while
many more modern general aviation types do not.
I have actually had people on this forum tell me that you are better off to
NOT use rudders on Cessna's when flying with non-pilots because the airplane
will coordinate better if you don't try to use the rudder. That may have
even been true for the pilot who suggested that! :-)
Actually the Cessna's, 120, 140, 150, 152, 170, 172, 175, 180, 182, 185,
206, 208, 210, etc. require relatively small rudder inputs to remain
coordinated compared to many older aircraft. For example, with the Red
Lady, cranking in a potful of left aileron with no rudder will result in an
immediate 20 degree right turn followed by it slowly wallowing back to the
left as the innate directional stability begins to work for you. However,
with significant and appropriate rudder input th e airplane will bank nicely
and then immediately start turning to the left. :-)
Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )
f-newguy
"Highflyer" <jo...@siu.edu> wrote in message
news:22fqm0....@news.alt.net...
Hey, John.
Nice to see you again Saturday, if only for a moment. I was the guy in the
182 you sent to Sparta for fuel.
Good recommendation: it was $4.99/gal.