HF Flight Model Arena

[colmbo]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

I fly in game the same way I fly real-life.  I use "cues" to keep the flight coordinated with an occasional peek at the ball to double-check.  It's much easier real life since your butt tells you if your slipping/skidding.

[Vinkman]

Pretty easy to be "cool"....just set mixture for auto-rich, put the prop control all the way to high RPM and jam the throttle forward. You're not going to be putzing around with prop RPM or mixture since there is no reason to change them during the fight. 

Guys tend to way over-think power management in these airplanes --- all the levers forward = go fast.....all the levers back = go slow....and it's almost that simple.

I'm sure the goal was to make it that way. But range and fuel consumption were important, so I think there were adjustments. I was sure spark advance was one, but I'm looking into it. Did you fly any of the WWII birds? 

[katanaso]

Not I ..... For certain situations/conditions I feel it to be appropriate to use/fly in a coordinated
flight manner... but more often then not when it comes to AH aerial combat, I find it not important
enough to be at the top of my list ... To "step on the ball" per say....

SA
E management
are much more important along with and including using uncoordinated flying

my 2 cents worth

TC

I tend to agree, TC.  I don't take notice if I'm coordinated when I'm dogfighting, but I do when I'm putzing along to and from the fights.  I've always wondered, even back to the early AW days, if somebody who was naturally making coordinated turns would have an advantage against somebody making uncoordinated turns, say in the same airplane, same gas.  In other words, a duel setting.

Thoughts guys, for those that fly that way?

Akak, with your CH stuff, do you scale or dampen the pedals?  I get a decent 'jump', for lack of a better word, when I give the slightest rudder, so it's very hard to make minute rudder inputs, even with scaling or dampening.

[hitech]

As colmbo said, real life coordinated flight is WAY easier. Especially if you fly lots of tail dragger where your feet get used to playing the happy feet dance on the occasional gusty landing.

I never even think about flying coordinated in the RV, because your feet and but sorta get tied together where you are automatically correct  rudder with out any thought. Infact I have the opposite problem, some days on cross country my feet will be getting sore, and I realize I have had them clamped to the rudders because of the fish tailing the RV likes to do in slight turbulence.

Oldman, did they say what the feet on floor reason was? Is it possible it was heals on floor?


HiTech

[doright]

Well not really getting much buy in on the arena idea so, for my part I think I'll drop it for now.

[Ack-Ack]

Akak, with your CH stuff, do you scale or dampen the pedals?  I get a decent 'jump', for lack of a better word, when I give the slightest rudder, so it's very hard to make minute rudder inputs, even with scaling or dampening.

I have the rudders slightly scaled, otherwise they're a tad sensative to minute rudder inputs.

ack-ack

[FLS]

Thank you. That is exactly the point of the whole topic.

You're confusing looking at the ball with needing and using rudder control. Your point was that the flight model
adjusts so you don't need full normal rudder control. That is false.

[Oldman731]

Oldman, did they say what the feet on floor reason was? Is it possible it was heals on floor?

Machado says:

"The “thinking” behind this technique is that a pilot is less likely to skid the airplane (and potentially induce a spin) if only aileron is used to make turns in the pattern. Yes, he or she will certainly slip during turns and slips are far less conducive to spinning. Believing this technique makes a pilot safer, however, is like believing that Washington, D.C., runs on batteries. The problem with this type of thinking is that there is actually very little thinking taking place."

And he continues:

"Think about this. Without compensating for the airplane’s power-induced left turning tendency on climbout, the nose yaws and the airplane begins a roll to the left. Adding right aileron (and no right rudder) to stop the left roll yaws the nose further left, initially inducing a skid, not a slip. It’s clear that some pilots are completely unaware that they’ve lost their stick-and-rudder skills when they must rely on the Coriolis force to keep their airplanes aligned with the runway centerline on climbout.

No, we should not keep our feet on the floorboard during pattern operations, or when maneuvering an airplane. Then again, unless we know what we’re missing, we simply won’t miss it when it’s gone..."


Heels-on-the-floor is something we all were taught to do on takeoff, so as not to accidentally hit one or both brakes as the plane accelerates.

- oldman

[muzik]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

Some accounts of WW2 pilots suggest they didn't. The work load and SA was already too much in the combat zone and as others have said, RL flying is much more seat of the pants.
 
I'll bet if ever asked, guys like Yeager and Hoover would tell you they only looked at the ball if they were flying instrument.

In game I rarely look at the ball unless I'm haulin ass, so that I know I'm not carrying any extra drag.

[FLS]

Some accounts of WW2 pilots suggest they didn't. The work load and SA was already too much in the combat zone and as others have said, RL flying is much more seat of the pants.
 
I'll bet if ever asked, guys like Yeager and Hoover would tell you they only looked at the ball if they were flying instrument.

In game I rarely look at the ball unless I'm haulin ass, so that I know I'm not carrying any extra drag.

With "seat of the pants" flying an experienced pilot knows if he's coordinated without looking at the ball. Even in AH where you can't feel a lack of coordination you can go by the movement of the nose of the aircraft as you start and finish a turn.

[colmbo]

I'm sure the goal was to make it that way. But range and fuel consumption were important, so I think there were adjustments. I was sure spark advance was one, but I'm looking into it. Did you fly any of the WWII birds? 

I'm type-rated (pilot in command) in the B-24 with a little over 300 hours in it, I flew co-pilot in the B-17 (a little over 300 hours).  I've got 1 hour in a Mustang and about 3 hours in the T-6.

Trust me, in a fight with the airplane it'll be done as I noted with throttle being the only adjustment during the fight.  Nothing to gain by messing with mixture and RPM.

Setting up for cruise it's just as easy -- throttle (manifold pressure) and RPM are adjusted to the appropriate cruise setting (something that is in the aircraft manual - not something you need to "tweak" and the mixture is set to "Auto Lean".  The pressure carbs used on the aircraft were pretty good at adjusting for altitude, certainly much better than light aircraft with simple induction systems where you have to manually lean using EGT or your ear.

Aviation was still pretty new during WWII, there was a lot they didn't know then that we know now. (The books for the B-17 and B-24 do not address minimum safe engine out speeds.  The B-24 book has the statement "This shouldn't happen to a dog" when talking about losing two engines on takeoff.)   The operating books for the aircraft left a lot of info out compared to what a modern POH has in it so there would be times (such as Lindberg helping the guys extend range in the Pacific) where some adjustments would be made to improve performance.


There is no spark advance adjustment on any aircraft I know of -- have never heard of it except on I think some WWI aircraft or other aircraft from the very early years of aviation.

[colmbo]

Some accounts of WW2 pilots suggest they didn't. The work load and SA was already too much in the combat zone and as others have said, RL flying is much more seat of the pants.
 
I'll bet if ever asked, guys like Yeager and Hoover would tell you they only looked at the ball if they were flying instrument.

In game I rarely look at the ball unless I'm haulin ass, so that I know I'm not carrying any extra drag.

Yeager and Hoover would tell you that they did fly coordinated and that they didn't need to look at the ball to keep it centered.  Real life flying as so many more cues than computer sim flying -- it is in many ways much easier real life than in a sim.

The term "seat of the pants" comes from the feeling you get in your butt when the ball is out of center -- it tries to slide you to one side or the other of your seat.  With experience it becomes automatic to adjust for it.  I flew some acro with a guy named Kevin Kegin in his SNJ (T-6).  He has a lot of time in a Texan and I was amazed to notice that the ball never moved when he was flying, it just stayed stuck between the lines...so much so that I actually tapped the gauge thinking it was stuck for real.  Once I started flying I confirmed the ball worked correctly because I was slapping it off the sides while rolling around the sky.  Kevin is one of those guys that is a natural stick, he is so friggen smooth it made me feel like a pre-solo student -- and I'm not a bad stick and rudder guy.

[colmbo]

With "seat of the pants" flying an experienced pilot knows if he's coordinated without looking at the ball. Even in AH where you can't feel a lack of coordination you can go by the movement of the nose of the aircraft as you start and finish a turn.

We have a winner!!

[doright]

... it just stayed stuck between the lines...so much so that I actually tapped the gauge thinking it was stuck for real.  Once I started flying I confirmed the ball worked correctly because I was slapping it off the sides while rolling around the sky.  Kevin is one of those guys that is a natural stick, he is so friggen smooth it made me feel like a pre-solo student -- and I'm not a bad stick and rudder guy.

I had a very similar experience with a old timer in a Stearman doing loops and rolls, that damn ball never moved.

But he didn't get to be an old timer with the ball glued in place by flying seat of his pants. The flying seat of his pants came from lots of training with coordination maneuvers and watching the point on the horizon and the ball until his stick and rudder movements became ingrained. (With constant reminders from his instructors)

It's a good feeling when you finally keep that point and ball steady. It's a great feeling when you realize you been keeping it coordinated without really concentrating on it.

[muzik]

With "seat of the pants" flying an experienced pilot knows if he's coordinated without looking at the ball. Even in AH where you can't feel a lack of coordination you can go by the movement of the nose of the aircraft as you start and finish a turn.

I didnt say otherwise. That's the point I was making.

Yeager and Hoover would tell you that they did fly coordinated and that they didn't need to look at the ball to keep it centered.  Real life flying as so many more cues than computer sim flying -- it is in many ways much easier real life than in a sim.

The term "seat of the pants" comes from the feeling you get in your butt when the ball is out of center -- it tries to slide you to one side or the other of your seat.  With experience it becomes automatic to adjust for it.  I flew some acro with a guy named Kevin Kegin in his SNJ (T-6).  He has a lot of time in a Texan and I was amazed to notice that the ball never moved when he was flying, it just stayed stuck between the lines...so much so that I actually tapped the gauge thinking it was stuck for real.  Once I started flying I confirmed the ball worked correctly because I was slapping it off the sides while rolling around the sky.  Kevin is one of those guys that is a natural stick, he is so friggen smooth it made me feel like a pre-solo student -- and I'm not a bad stick and rudder guy.

Again this was the point I was making. I'm familiar with the origin of the term. I've been there. Your body feels any motion that is in an unusual plane and develops an instinctive feel. It's actually not that hard to learn.

When I made the comment you were responding to I had the kind of dogfights when coordinated flight goes out the window in mind. Where it was the last thing on the minds of the pilots. Even what might be considered the poorer pilots had enough feel for it they didn't need to waste precious SA on the ball, though some might still habitually check it.