Okay, shouldn't have been drawn in, total troll, or idiot, or both
Sad to say I have to agree with you. EGKB figures he has it all figured out with a whole 6 hours of flying experience
I have had to deal with a few flight simmers over the years. The only way to break them of the habit of staring at the instruments and never looking outside, was to cover them up.
The general consensus from my students that at the end of the day their flight simming did not help them with the core flying skills.
I had one very opinionated student who was convinced like EGKB, that he already had all the skills he needed courtesy of a large ego and 1000 hours on MSFS. I got him passed on to me as a "problem student" with about 8 hours of dual logged. On the first flight I gave him a challenge.
I would start straight and level at cruise speed cover all the instruments and then reduce power and let the airplane settle down announcing what the new airspeed was and noting that the altitude had not changed uncovering the instruments to prove I was right and then recovering them. I would then resume cruise power and again uncover the instruments to show the same altitude and the predicted airspeed.
I then promised that if he could do the same thing he would get all their instruments back and I wouldn't comment on where to look
Not surprisingly he didn't do very well. At that point I told him the deal. If he wanted to continue with me we were going to start over with attitudes and movements done totally visually and progress through all the foundation exercises with the instruments only uncovered when appropriate.
There was no second lesson He went to another instructor and finally soloed after 22 hours in the circuit because despite his best efforts he found it impossible to land only by looking at the instruments and practice landing the aircraft on MSFS didn't really help him when it came to landing a real airplane
Ghengis - as a former karate-ka I found that martial artists made the best lovers, so maybe there is a connection between martial and marital arts after all?
mad_jock - I can only speak from carrying passengers but I've generally found that when I offer "control" to passengers (followed through, and usually yoke only), women are much more gentle and try to feel what happens, while men tend to be more aggressive and shove without waiting to see what the effects are. Not always the case, but it supports what you're saying.
Pilot-DAR - I have my own (non-t.p.) thoughts regarding your charts, but I'll wait for your explanation to see if I'm even remotely close!
Ref the OP, bear in mind that he's still only 17. It's obvious that he is still quite immature so cut him some slack. He will learn and grow both as a pilot and as a human being. He's had a reasonable roasting already, but his learning, both in aviation and in life, will take more than a few threads and a few weeks on PPRuNe.
As far as women pilots go, I usually find they are either excellent or rubbish, very rarely average. IMHO this is because they either have the ability and try extra hard because of feminism or they are rubbish and never will be any good (a few men manage this as well).
Women are definately better students, they pay better attention at the brief, and as said in an ealier post they tend to suffer from under confidence, so their flying ability is far better than they think it is, much safer having it that way round. On a trial lesson I've only every had women say "so what can this plane really do?" and then keep asking me to pull more and more G
I've had 3 or 4 flight sim addict teenagers as students, one of whom presented me with a log book of all the real time sim journeys he'd done. I just laughed, he was actually trying to impress me with this!?!
I'm sure EGKB will look back on this thread in years to come, and realise how little he knows right now. Just hope he makes it out of the danger zone of 150-200+ hours before his confidence really overpowers his ability.
One of my instructors always said you start with an empty bucket of knowledge and a full bucket of luck, the trick is to fill the bucket with knowledge before the other bucket runs out of luck. Unfortunaltely, EGKB seems to think he's got two full buckets
He will learn and grow both as a pilot and as a human being.
Yes, I see your point. However, regardless of age, if one wants the privilage of freedom in the sky, one must rise to a minimum maturity to earn it. Like many here I'm sure, I was out and about on my own in planes when I was 16, and before I learned to drive. One has to meet the mark for the privilage. I have to hope that the provider of the aircraft will keep that under control. I remeber one winter day, off on a solo cross country (I used to make them up, while I was waiting to be old enough to take the flight test). I reminded myself that out over the fozen lake in central Ontario, I was probably 30 miles from the nearest other person. No help for me if I got myself in trouble, so better not. It matures you up quick! EGKB has yet to show that they are there - in my opinion. As long as he/she begins to get a hint that there is so much to be learned.
How do I communicate to EGKB that with well more than a thousand times his/her flying time, I still have occasions where I worry about what's happening during a flight, and remind myself to sharpen up, and pay attention. My challenge is that I really have no excuse for a stupid beginner type accident any more, so if I mess up, I'm going to have to have a really good reason, or I'll look like a fool! (and deserve it!).
Pilot-DAR - I have my own (non-t.p.) thoughts regarding your charts, but I'll wait for your explanation to see if I'm even remotely close!
Yeah, I have not forgotten. I'm trying to give EGKB every opportunity to rise to my challenge - perhaps it's taking time to program this into MSFS to have the simulator model it - to figure out what it is! When EGKB declares their intentions I'll come back to it!
By the way Genghis, Happily the SM1019 is not type approved in Canada - they fly on a flight permit here. I was required to gather post modification flight test results and data for a flight authority reissue, but not an approval, so previous non conformances could be left as is. The mod was not suspected as having any effect on pitch stability at all, so I was not expected to investigate this characteristic - I just found it anyway!
In the mean time, here's a hint photo. I was in the back seat this flight, training the company pilot with what I had found during my testing. Conditions: Completely stable, level, unaccelerated flight, 60 degrees of flap, mid C of G range, mid weight, trimmed for 60 knots, and 70% power. The company pilot was very surprized! (EGKB - he had run out of something he needed!)
I have great flight sim experience, I was flying on VATSIM online with a microphone when I was 11, using SIDS/STARS and chart reading and cold starts in PMDG 747 and so on....
Cold starts in a PMDG 747 in FS are of F all use in a real Cessna. And if you think you can do instrument approaches with no issues - get an instructor to take you on a REAL one (an NDB/DME would be fun), under the hood, in real convective IMC, while doing the radio, flying the procedure.
And watch as you're instantly overloaded.
You really need to listen to your instructor, it's a prerequisite of becoming a pilot. Those who don't listen don't get there, or at least, not for long. Remember - it's a licence to learn - don't start questioning it after a measily 6 hours!
Well, I was hoping that EGKB would accept my challenge, but it seems not...
DAR that's a very cool picture, of course you have to understand the context of what you're looking at.
Yes, some of my projects offer me facinating lessons - I still have so much to learn!
This project was the testing of the modified SM1019, which carried wingtip booms I had previously tested on a Cessna 206. They are used for magnetic survey of underground material.
Sorry about the super sized photo - I could not get Photobucket to resize this one....
I had no prior experience flying this type. I do admit that since I was 11 (decades before MSFS!) I dreamed of flying one of these - the photo in Jane's all the world's aircraft of it taking off on its tailwheel wound me right up!
During my checkout, I was expecting it to fly like a Cessna - nope, its pretty different! Totally different controls, extreme power to weight ratio for this type of aircraft, no stall warning system at all, 60 degrees of flap available,
and it is so cool to be able to back up on the ramp! (it already sits on its tail!)
The fact that this aircraft does not have a Canadian Type Certificate means that my test flying was not to support an STC, but rather a flight permit, which has a lower "bar". Add to that that the mod is not expected to affect pitch control much, so there was not much delving into that aspect planned.
As I got used to the plane, I would employ ever increasing performance takeoffs - in accordance with Flight Manual procedures (30 flaps). Once I put the survey operator in the back, and started wringin the plane out - it bit me hard.
I was going out of a very familiar grass runway, and just as I got airborne the nose pitched way up, the pull to get airborne was suddenly not at all what was needed. With no stall warning system, and the airspeed indicator barely indicating, this is not where I want to be decellerating! It took full nose down control, held for many moments to maintain the desired pitch attitude. As the plane acellerated, the pitch control could be moved toward nose up again, though was still a "push", rather than a "pull". This is the ideal set up for pilot indiced oscillation - nearly zero control force, through a wide control displacement exactly in the range you need to have the controls. There was no flying this plane by feel at slow speed, this was by recognizing the pitch attitude visually below 70 KIAS. Most helicopters I have flown have more pitch "feel" than this did!
After exploring this more, and discussing this characterisitc with two test pilot mentors, I set out to document this characteristic. The result was the previoulsy posted graphs of control force. 30 Flap will get you zero or negative control force below certain speeds. Also, retracting the flaps from full to none, will pass you through this range, and you've got to be ready for lots of control force change! This is a non certifiable characterisitc. I had the aircraft checked for conformity in the controls, and everything was as it should be. I am hardly an expert with this type, but no one could offer any advice to suggest that I had it wrong. I was just flight testing it in accordance with the accepted techniques.
I ended up writing advisory material for pilot training on this aircraft, and rode back seat to train the company chief pilot in what I had found. He confirmed all of it. My training material for this read:
"11.2.7 Pitch Control Forces
During flight testing, with flap settings from 30 to 60 degrees, and in particular at a more aft C of G, pitch forces were found to reverse in some cases. This was more pronounced with high power. This was most noticeable, and startling, right after becoming airborne on takeoff, when the pull force to break ground, might suddenly need to reverse to a push force to prevent the nose rising too sharply. Be aware that with the very low pitch control forces in the "null" spot between nose up, and nose down, the control forces are very low, so a pilot induced oscillation, or over controlling could easily result. It is particularly important for the pilot to recognize that with no stall warning system, and very light pitch control forces approaching the stall, that an accidental stall is very possible. "
I never did get to the point where I could not lower the nose with pitch control, but there were many occasions where prolonged application of full down pitch control was required to maintain control at all. As a new pilot, doing freedom of control checks before takeoff, I use to wonder how one would ever use the full nose down control available. Well, I have learned! I've needed, and held in, full nose down pitch control in the Cessna 185 amphibian, 206, 207, Grand Caravan and Twin Otter.
This goes to show that there is lots to learn, even for experienced pilots. The very experienced ag pilot who initially checked me out, ended up taking type training from me! And I had less time flying it than he did. I had just been doing a whole bunch of differing types of flying that he had not got to yet.
Normally EGKB, I would be apologizing for hijaking or drifting your thread. Not this time! You have yet to earn that much of my respect. Not that my respect is hard to earn - just about everyone else on PPRuNe has it, but you're a ways back yet....
Back before computers, when many of us were mentored into being good pilots, it was in person. We neophites were privilaged to breath the same air as the sky gods, when on poor weather days, pilots would chat in the club house. If we newbies were particularly inoffensive, we would receive the occasional invitation to the back seat, or with extreme luck, right seat. Our personality became a key element in success with this - act like an arrogant jerk, and you're probably not even in the club house again, much less the aircraft. I spent a lot of teenage time filthy on my back, scrubbing the belly of a plane, for the privilage of a ride in it...
Now, apparently, personality is much less a factor, anyone who can log on has a chance of being taken seriously and finding wisdom for nothing. And, some of us are putting it there for nothing. EGKB, have you any idea the cost of what I have written, were it to be a flight test report?
So EGKB, don't think I have written all of this to respond to you, so far, you are peripheral. However, I know that a lot of really worthy new pilots read all of this, and they win, because you stirred the pot, and made a specticle of yourself. There have been others of you before, and there will be more later. The PM's fly in the background, with us amusing ourselves about specticle posts.
I remember when I had six hours, how proud I was! I remember going first solo (first person in Canada to first solo a C 152, 'cause my club had the first) how proud I was - I thought I knew it all! After a few hundred hours, I began to question how much I knew... After a few thousand I started to go for more training, to fill in blanks, and grow my skills. Now, I regularly exchange thoughts and ask advice of pilots who are sky gods to me - some here.
Six hours... Just put your hand over your mouth, and listen, read and obey lots!
But at least he did encourage discussion inadvertently on an interesting subject which has been argued over for decades. Pitch for speed or power for speed. I would be interested to hear Pilot Dars take on this one in more detail from his test flying abilities (Great pics btw)
As an aside, I remember being startled (aged about 14) to learn that pitch/trim should be used to control speed and power to control rate of climb/descent. It took me a few days to come to terms with it.
Funnily enough I learned it from Microsoft Flight Simulator which has (or at least had) some simulated 'flying lessons' where it was explained.
I don't know if it's right but I've always had it in my mind that pitch controls speed and power altitude. I mentioned in another thread (might have been this one actually) that being a glider jock primarily it takes a lot of unlearning that pitch=speed.