Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Flight Testing
Reload this Page >

Artificial Horizon versus Turn Coordinator in very light VFR aircraft.

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Flight Testing A forum for test pilots, flight test engineers, observers, telemetry and instrumentation engineers and anybody else involved in the demanding and complex business of testing aeroplanes, helicopters and equipment.

Artificial Horizon versus Turn Coordinator in very light VFR aircraft.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 20th June 2018 | 09:44
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
So.. a question for the experts. If you have an Turn and Slip fitted in lets say a "highly capable" aerobatics plane, will the maneuvering destroy it? I know it sounds like an odd question to ask but I have reasons!
generalspecific is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd June 2018 | 14:50
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
From: Away from it all
Originally Posted by generalspecific
So.. a question for the experts. If you have an Turn and Slip fitted in lets say a "highly capable" aerobatics plane, will the maneuvering destroy it? I know it sounds like an odd question to ask but I have reasons!
Never gave any problem in a PItts - but then it was the 'ball' element that was the most important!
Philoctetes is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd June 2018 | 21:36
  #23 (permalink)  
Moderator
30 Countries Visited
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Reserves
 
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
The nature of the motion is more likely to cause long term damage, and may shorten the life of the components a little. Mechanical artificial horizons will "topple" in many aerobatic manoeuvres, although should self-cage within a minute or so of return to straight and level flight.

On the other hand, the more modern solid state electronic systems - I'd expect no problems at all, bar possibly a very short period of nonsense readings in conditions they weren't designed for (say, a spin or flick roll).

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Reply
Old 11th August 2018 | 13:12
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 386
Likes: 4
From: Here and there
partial panel in a simulator is much better and safer than in actual IMC.
In the flying school where I worked years ago a wealthy individual bought a Cirrus. He spent lots of time in a simulator now called a flight training device. Holding patterns and ILS stuff as he intended to fly IFR in his new Cirrus with its autopilot and EFIS. I suggested he should also practice limited panel instrument flying in the simulator just in case it ever happened. He scoffed at the suggestion and said it would never happen with EFIS. Maybe so. Except the simulator didn't have EFIS. Usual six pack which included a Turn and Slip indicator (Bat and Ball).

While he was smugly poling his way around a holding pattern I took the liberty of pulling the CB on the artificial horizon. Within 45 seconds he was in a spiral dive and would have eventually crashed. I thought he would have learned from this highly effective lesson that keeping up one's instrument flying skill on limited panel was just as important as full panel. No so. He got quite angry and blamed me (his instructor) for causing him to crash. It's called Loss of Face; a significant factor among certain cultures and the contributory cause of some accidents.
Judd is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.