Originally Posted by
NGjockey
@ BraceBrace:
True. Also true is that part of being rated on an aircraft includes for example being able to perform crosswind takeoffs and landings on slippery runways. If you read the FCOM or FCTM you won't find any information about how many inches of rudder or control wheel input you will need exactly for a particular crosswind or a particular mass. You will apply inputs as needed according to your experience, and that is what I wanted to state with my argument about being able to judge the amount of control input required as highly trained pilots, in any phase of flight.
Yes, but that is training. I sometimes allow people who are scared of crosswind landings in line training to go (established on the ILS with runway in sight) low wing and out again on the approach. It gives them a sense of how much rudder input is required (but it is REALLY important to state that rudder input is gentle & singular and then you hold the rudder in that deflection - never "play" with it) AND how it effects your aileron requirement. The secondary roll effect due to rudder is always there, always, and you have to give it time to show up.
I don't know if it is a common thing on turboprops, but when people come in with turboprop experience they will often "fiddle with the rudder" on final. Some of the aircraft I fly are old classics with not too symmetrical thrust and some rudder trim requirements, and that's always been an excuse for them for the negligence of the secondary roll. It shouldn't be if the thrust is equalized and the trim was set properly. They will hardly ever be able to stabilise the aircraft with the rudder tickling because they end up correcting secondary roll all the way down.
Rudder is "designed" to cope with engine failures and therefore very powerful for "normal" steering. Which is why once the flight controls become more effective (flaps up) or engines less powerfull (high up), the rudder force is generally reduced to more acceptable levels. If you look even look at non-normals, Boeing is very cautious in advertising the use of rudder. Even in manual reversion on the 737, Boeing doesn't stop you from using rudders, but it emphasises not to overcontrol it and be really gentle. Because you always create secondary effect you don't want. Even in an approach to stall - or stall recovery or upset recovery, Boeing says not a single word about use of rudder. The reason is easy: DON'T, as the secondary effect is the nastiest backstabber you can find.
Boeing designed an aircraft where you don't need to use rudder except in a certain set of situations and that is trained for. And I'e never felt uncoordinated in a turn (within the limits of course, but heck I don't even like 30° bank to be honest, 25° in manual flight should get you everywhere as the maneuvering speeds allow you)
BTW: it's one of the hardest things to "de-learn" for the turboprop guys, because there have been many cases where I said "but you were steering with your feet" and they said "no". I truly believe them as there have been too many. They do it without even knowing. Which is why I emphasize "no rudder unless a very specific situation" so hard in this discussion, and the idea you really have to put an effort in "learning the aircraft you fly".
I know the document that started this thread. The background is not about good or bad pilots, it even discusses people with plenty of military background who are very capable pilots. They have used rudder on carrier landings, to pinpoint the nose in dogfights, etc etc... but the main goal here is: learn to use your aircraft as the guys who designed it tell you to.
Tapping the rudder to coordinate a turn "more" does not make you a better pilot (which is also a statement that was posted in the thread starter), as subconciously you might be learning yourself dangerous stuff. Don't tap the rudder in a turn. Learn yourself the right way to fly the aircraft, don't go out and tell the other guy he's not flying correctly as he IS doing it the correct & safest way.