Stick and Rudder

[MayorQuimby]

Currently reading this peach of a book. One thing though, before I make a fool of myself in polite company: can someone tell me how 'Langewiesche' is pronounced? :O

MQ.

[FNG]

"lann-ger-vissher"

A very fine book indeed. The author's son has produced a book of essays, "Inside the Sky", which is worth a look.

[Miserlou]

I have discovered that I can't write it phonetically.

I'd also add that it is a classic. One of, if not the, best technical flying texts.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

S & R is excellent! Another interesting read, if a tad more specialised, is 'The Concorde Stick & Rudder Book'. Some of the flying characteristics of this magnificent machine were quite unconventional. An oft-repeated mantra is "remember; you are not flying an aeroplane. You are flying a Concorde".

SSD

[MayorQuimby]

Thanks!

Yes, it's amazing how a book written 60 odd years ago can still be so relevant. Thoroughly enjoying it, and learning something from every page.

MQ

[Flyin'Dutch']

FNG wrote:
"lann-ger-vissher"

Been on Babelfish again!?!

;)

FD

[FNG]

Niet schuldige, mijn beste Arts. Babelfish geeft u niet de fonetica.

(PS: I don't believe Babelfish on its suggested translation of "My dear Doctor").

[stiknruda]

You called Mr Mayor?


Stik!

[J.A.F.O.]

You sound like Larry the Lamb, no relation to Shaggy Sheep Driver, are you?

[MayorQuimby]

Pleased to meet you, Stik! :D

[paulo]

It's a lovely book, but we rarely say why.

For me it's the simplicity. Too many books start off ok for about a paragraph, before you're suddenly buried in deep tech stuff without having a chance to assimilate the fundamentals.

I think sometimes authors of flying manuals (and posters on prrune!) over complicate flying, perhaps to make a stamp of 'authority'.

So people, why do you like Stick and Rudder?

[FNG]

A good question, paulo. I used to dip into the book frequently but haven't looked at it for a while. There is an inspirational quality to the writing, although that quality is difficult to define. On the more technical level, I really like the explanation of how and why an aircraft turns in the air, and the description of the approach towards "the spot that does not improve" is pretty helpful too.

Langewiesche would have preferred aircraft to take off with tailwheel gear and land with nosewheel gear (now there's an engineering problem for Genghis), and was a big fan of the allegedly un-spinnable Aercoupe (I like the one in the hangar at Goodwood), but auto-ruddered light aircraft did not catch on.

[MayorQuimby]

Well, I'm only half way through it - I'm a slow reader - and I haven't read that many texts to compare it with. But certainly the way he presents the subject is clear, layman-like and humorous.

For me, the constant reminder that AoA is the most important thing a pilot should be aware of, and the idea that if you used a cheap bit of cable to prevent the stick from coming back beyond a certain point you'd prevent yourself getting into a lot of trouble situations was worth reinforcing.

I'm fascinated by the fact that the book was written 60 years ago and is so relevant now (obviously the laws of physics haven't changed that much since!). It's interesting to see, also, how widespread the idea seemed to be then that rudder was the main turning control and aileron was to make the 'turn comfortable'. He felt so strongly about this, as FNG says, that he thought it would be better if the rudder coordination were just made automatic.

MQ.

[FNG]

If you read instructional texts on flying from the 1920s and 1930s, it is apparent that the mechanism of turning was not yet fully understood, or at least not by Captain Blitherington, RFC (retd), flying instructor to the gentry, who wrote most of the books.