Van's Air Force

The definitive Van's Aircraft support community! Buying, building or flying an RV? Join our exclusive family of mentors and enthusiasts!

Fast, On-Speed, Slow: A Common Language for Aircraft Control

The trouble I keep coming back to with this notion is that for the last 45 year and some six thousand hours in around 55 different aircraft, I’ve always approached the problem the same way and that is to learn the envelope of the machine and correlate the feelings, to data…in an RV-4, or a sailplane, or a TwinTurbine Commander, a Rocket, or a SuperCub the practice is the same. The feelings and sights and sounds all equate to input at a sensory level that we respond to with a margin for error…I’ve made a practice out of margin exceedence for educational purposes in every craft I’ve owned. I’m sure most of us have.

Simply put…stall/spin in the pattern isn’t from poor instrumentation, it’s from poor piloting…ie…failure to prioritize, plan, execute, cascading failures, with overload scenarios….whatever….good pilots don’t stall and spin, when correctly trained.

The training of “incipient spin recognition” is inadequate…it’s akin to telling someone a loaded gun is dangerous, but not letting them see the damage, feel the recoil and complete the equation.

The same group of guys who screw up and stall/spin in the pattern or anywhere else, accidentally, will continue to do so with another light or horn or buzzer. There is simple a contingent of people who are above learning. And I have pissed off people here in This forum with the assertion that todays kit building is not the same educational process as it was 30 years ago. flight training is the same to me…it’s all focused on the airline pathway, with little emphasis on sport flying.

So…as much as I appreciate the advancement of the developing technologies, I think we taught better student back in Cubs and Champs than we do now…I fly helicopters, sailplanes and power planes and they are all building blocks of the feelings and interpretations of data, which I began learning day 1 in an old Champ with a crusty old instructors, who had little tolerance for fear or ignorance and even less for poor execution.

My contention would be, that you are solving the wrong issue, if stall/spin is your reduction goal, Teach people the correct way to fly, which is far from the airline fashion extended patterns…stop with making all the adjustments in the pattern and get the airplane configured for landing BEFORE it’s in the pattern and it’s enlightening how much easier it all gets…

I advocate going beyond the burbles and stick shakes and wobbles…stall the plane….feel it….and the squawk boxes can all disappear and go quiet along with the airspeed indicator…because none of that data is relevant to the feelings of your sense correlating what the aircraft is telling you.

I’ve been taking guys flying forever, covering over the airspeed indicator and saying now what? And the answer is fly.__ you can see the angle of attack, you can feel it and feel the mush, and the burble and the stick…and it DOES NOT ‘MATTER one bit the speed on a gauge…it does it when it does and if you know it…then you respond, now in a fighter jet, coming to a pitching deck…I totally get the thesis and I’m sure there’s plenty more scenarios…

but in my airplane, regardless of weight…against ANY other aircraft and pilot, equipped with any electronic device…I can land on the same strip with not a worry in the world with my airspeed indicator completely covered…so Why on earth would I want one more thing in the cockpit to beep, flash, talk or do anything…let alone to develop it as a crutch to pretend-rely on…?

Not that I am eschewing advanced electronics in the cockpit….in the sailplane, it is impossible to select the best thermals and escape the highest sink without an audio variometer, which I absolutely see and know the value of….but in my 6…in the pattern with 10 gallons in the tanks…my wife next to me and 30 lbs of baggage, coming in to land? Nope…I don’t need an optimal approach for every landing, just a conservative one, 80 indicated in the 6, bled off to 70 over the fence works right up to gross weight…but you have to know your plane.

If my airspeed indicator crapped out tonight on my way home, it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans for my landing. And that is my worry…those of you who fly thinking AoA indicators, lights, horns, beeps are going to make you safe….I disagree. And this works on my RV-6, Vagabond, old Waco, high performance sailplane….anything…

What will make you safe is realize that the requirement to know your airplane is an absolute. Those of you asking all these questions, to support your AoA theory such as…what about in a 4g turn…blah blah blah….guess what…4g stalls exactly like 1,2 or 3g…with the exception of the acceleration. the aircraft is still benign, as is the recovery…just the force of gravity adds a different feeling…learn those feelings and learn them well.

Ya wanna not stall and spin…??… Keep the ball centered, in fact in an RV….just keep your feet light and near centered and it’s pretty much dealt with.

To me, it’s ano’ther crutch, to allow those who take learning less seriously, to advance at a rate that exceeds their skill and understanding and it’s another mechanical thing that has a failure mode that just learning your machine and its aerodynamics and responses and feelings doesn’t require.

gadgets are neat and fun and I applaud those spending effort and time and money in the pursuit of their dreams, while being thankful that they are not my dreams. Above all…you HAVE to love experimental aviation in that all of us, get to choose what WE want for our own unique paths.

Respectfully…..me
 
This raises an obvious question, but maybe I have missed how you addressed it. Could it be that military fighters and airliners provide less seat of the pants feedback than the typical RV while approaching to land? That would explain why the military found such a large safety benefit in AOA, but it does not guarantee that the benefit would be as large for small planes. If you haven't addressed this issue seriously, doing so would give your arguments a lot more credibility (to me at least).
I would say that is definitely a "It Depends" answer. For instance in the Eagle, Despite its size and weight - it gives a surprising amount of aural and seat of the pants "feel". We teach students to fight using AOA numbers, but we also teach them to recognize where you are on the AOA range by feel - because you might be defensive and looking over your shoulder the entire time. Other fighters, I'm told, that have Fly by Wire controls are much more neutral as to feel. Whether that's true or not, I can't tell you as I've not flown a Hornet or other FBW fighter. So I don't think lack of seat of the pants feel was the reason the military went to AOA. I suspect its because Seat of the Pants feel can change based on weight, bank angle and such - i.e. it can lie to you.
 
The trouble I keep coming back to with this notion is that for the last 45 year and some six thousand hours in around 55 different aircraft, I’ve always approached the problem the same way and that is to learn the envelope of the machine and correlate the feelings, to data…in an RV-4, or a sailplane, or a TwinTurbine Commander, a Rocket, or a SuperCub the practice is the same. The feelings and sights and sounds all equate to input at a sensory level that we respond to with a margin for error…I’ve made a practice out of margin exceedence for educational purposes in every craft I’ve owned. I’m sure most of us have.

Simply put…stall/spin in the pattern isn’t from poor instrumentation, it’s from poor piloting…ie…failure to prioritize, plan, execute, cascading failures, with overload scenarios….whatever….good pilots don’t stall and spin, when correctly trained.

The training of “incipient spin recognition” is inadequate…it’s akin to telling someone a loaded gun is dangerous, but not letting them see the damage, feel the recoil and complete the equation.

The same group of guys who screw up and stall/spin in the pattern or anywhere else, accidentally, will continue to do so with another light or horn or buzzer. There is simple a contingent of people who are above learning. And I have pissed off people here in This forum with the assertion that todays kit building is not the same educational process as it was 30 years ago. flight training is the same to me…it’s all focused on the airline pathway, with little emphasis on sport flying.

So…as much as I appreciate the advancement of the developing technologies, I think we taught better student back in Cubs and Champs than we do now…I fly helicopters, sailplanes and power planes and they are all building blocks of the feelings and interpretations of data, which I began learning day 1 in an old Champ with a crusty old instructors, who had little tolerance for fear or ignorance and even less for poor execution.

My contention would be, that you are solving the wrong issue, if stall/spin is your reduction goal, Teach people the correct way to fly, which is far from the airline fashion extended patterns…stop with making all the adjustments in the pattern and get the airplane configured for landing BEFORE it’s in the pattern and it’s enlightening how much easier it all gets…

I advocate going beyond the burbles and stick shakes and wobbles…stall the plane….feel it….and the squawk boxes can all disappear and go quiet along with the airspeed indicator…because none of that data is relevant to the feelings of your sense correlating what the aircraft is telling you.

I’ve been taking guys flying forever, covering over the airspeed indicator and saying now what? And the answer is fly.__ you can see the angle of attack, you can feel it and feel the mush, and the burble and the stick…and it DOES NOT ‘MATTER one bit the speed on a gauge…it does it when it does and if you know it…then you respond, now in a fighter jet, coming to a pitching deck…I totally get the thesis and I’m sure there’s plenty more scenarios…

but in my airplane, regardless of weight…against ANY other aircraft and pilot, equipped with any electronic device…I can land on the same strip with not a worry in the world with my airspeed indicator completely covered…so Why on earth would I want one more thing in the cockpit to beep, flash, talk or do anything…let alone to develop it as a crutch to pretend-rely on…?

Not that I am eschewing advanced electronics in the cockpit….in the sailplane, it is impossible to select the best thermals and escape the highest sink without an audio variometer, which I absolutely see and know the value of….but in my 6…in the pattern with 10 gallons in the tanks…my wife next to me and 30 lbs of baggage, coming in to land? Nope…I don’t need an optimal approach for every landing, just a conservative one, 80 indicated in the 6, bled off to 70 over the fence works right up to gross weight…but you have to know your plane.

If my airspeed indicator crapped out tonight on my way home, it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans for my landing. And that is my worry…those of you who fly thinking AoA indicators, lights, horns, beeps are going to make you safe….I disagree. And this works on my RV-6, Vagabond, old Waco, high performance sailplane….anything…

What will make you safe is realize that the requirement to know your airplane is an absolute. Those of you asking all these questions, to support your AoA theory such as…what about in a 4g turn…blah blah blah….guess what…4g stalls exactly like 1,2 or 3g…with the exception of the acceleration. the aircraft is still benign, as is the recovery…just the force of gravity adds a different feeling…learn those feelings and learn them well.

Ya wanna not stall and spin…??… Keep the ball centered, in fact in an RV….just keep your feet light and near centered and it’s pretty much dealt with.

To me, it’s ano’ther crutch, to allow those who take learning less seriously, to advance at a rate that exceeds their skill and understanding and it’s another mechanical thing that has a failure mode that just learning your machine and its aerodynamics and responses and feelings doesn’t require.

gadgets are neat and fun and I applaud those spending effort and time and money in the pursuit of their dreams, while being thankful that they are not my dreams. Above all…you HAVE to love experimental aviation in that all of us, get to choose what WE want for our own unique paths.

Respectfully…..me
I agree with you.... to a point. You are 100% correct that any pilot SHOULD know their airplane inside and out and be one with the feel in all ranges of its envelope. And that current instruction in that regard is lacking. However, the reality is there is a gulf between what "SHOULD" be and what "IS". Lots of people fly infrequently. Lots of people rent airplanes and not all of them are exactly alike. Some people fly airplanes that are prohibited by the POH from spinning.

I don't think anyone here - especially VAC - is advocating that these fancy AOA gauges REPLACE good airmanship. But even the best airmen make mistakes and these technologies, when used properly, supplement and enhance good airmanship. They go hand in hand. Its not a one or the other proposition. And I don't see an AOA system being anymore of a "crutch" than having an airspeed indicator is.

If you believe it IS a crutch - why not remove your Airspeed, VVI, RPM, and other indicators from your RV-6? I mean surely can can fly just fine with out them strictly by feel, right?
 
I would love to have an AOA system that functions as more than just a progressive stall warning (which unfortunately seems all I can do with the built-in Dynon AOA).
 
I agree with you.... to a point. You are 100% correct that any pilot SHOULD know their airplane inside and out and be one with the feel in all ranges of its envelope. And that current instruction in that regard is lacking. However, the reality is there is a gulf between what "SHOULD" be and what "IS". Lots of people fly infrequently. Lots of people rent airplanes and not all of them are exactly alike. Some people fly airplanes that are prohibited by the POH from spinning.

I don't think anyone here - especially VAC - is advocating that these fancy AOA gauges REPLACE good airmanship. But even the best airmen make mistakes and these technologies, when used properly, supplement and enhance good airmanship. They go hand in hand. Its not a one or the other proposition. And I don't see an AOA system being anymore of a "crutch" than having an airspeed indicator is.

If you believe it IS a crutch - why not remove your Airspeed, VVI, RPM, and other indicators from your RV-6? I mean surely can can fly just fine with out them strictly by feel, right?
Why not remove them..? I’ll get to that in a moment, but…I applaud your response and wholeheartedly agree. Further, I appreciate the sentiment of wanting to make things safer. Perhaps the only disagreement would be even the best airmen make mistakes. EVERYONE makes mistakes. the best airmen recognize them, self analyze them and attempt to correct them…but mistakes will always be a part of aviation.

I am not picking on VAC….I don’t know who that is. I love that he’s doing something cool in aviation.

Why not remove my airspeed? Or any other indicator? Because so far, I haven’t seen a more effective tool for accomplishing the task flying the aircraft in a better way.
For many years, I ran off launches with a hang glider on my shoulders and went flying with no airspeed, no nothing…just a bar to push or pull on. Were my sense keener than? Maybe…variometers added more sophistication and made me more efficient…did it make me better? No. Developing the feel of the wing and the air did though.

Given that everyone learns differently…and the the airspeed indicator has served well for the last hundred years, I’d say it’s proven…maybe not perfect, but conservative.

AoA strikes me as necessary for jet fighters. You probably can’t feel the difference of a thousand pounds while cruising down final at 180 knots, trying to bleed altitude and speed…I can’t even imagine…but for flying an RV or Rocket, or 185…or any GA aircraft into a 2,000 foot strip do we need to be On Speed or is a 5 mph tolerance acceptable?

I’ll be honest….we are losing more people from mid-airs and flight into terrain than stall spin…we should have peoples heads out of the cockpit more, not one more distraction.

I’ve demonstrated hundreds of times….in RV’s and Rockets….80mph…on downwind, trimmed for speed, power and prop set for a comfortable descent ( 13-15”mp)
Cover the airspeed, fly the plane to the ground…if high, reduce power, if low…add power…it just works. Fly the attitude, by setting up the attitude correctly. Familiarity is the solution.
The 6 P’s
Prior planning prevents piss poor performance.

Works every time and the AoA is stick pressure and sight picture OUT the canopy.

Again…great conversation, the thesis fits lots of places, but in my world of GA…it’s just another gadget to spend time learning, installing, calibrating, figuring out why it doesn’t do what it’s suppposed to….etc…do I see it as mainstream for those of us who love looping and rolling our RV’s…? I don’t. My head is outside the cockpit all the time, when this things is suppposed to be doing something.

To all of the many instrument types, who use their RV’s for cross country….this just might be the best thing since the bread slicer…I have no idea about that…
 
I’ll be honest….we are losing more people from mid-airs and flight into terrain than stall spin…we should have peoples heads out of the cockpit more, not one more distraction.
OK, so everyone is entitled to their own opinion - but not to their own facts. This isn’t even remotely close. LOC is the PRIMARY cause of fatal accidents in experimental aviation (about 30%), and most of those end up in a stall/spin. (Mid-airs are 2-3% of fatals) So you’re arguing from a misconception of where the risk lies.

I know of two fatals in the past ten years where current, active military fighter pilots flying their personal E-AB on their own time attempted turnbacks after an engine failure, stalled, spun, and died. If guys THAT current and THAT steeped in a safety-oriented flight operation can screw up, we can ALL screw up. The first step to lower risk flying is to admit that to ourselves….
 
I’ll be honest….we are losing more people from mid-airs and flight into terrain than stall spin…we should have peoples heads out of the cockpit more, not one more distraction.
I don't have the data but I'm sure it is out there. Seems I read about a lot of GA airframes stall spin/impossible turn fatals. We lost a great advocate of safety and training to one last year that should have been survivable.
 
Is your thesis then….that AoA device…during an engine failure on takeoff, from someone attempting to turn back , which have all trained tirelessly on not doing….as the basis for this technology….cuz…sorry…but you lose me entirely if you think one more distraction will help there. ???

In the sailplanes, we practice rope breaks incessantly…and it pays off…go pick a tree, fence, anywhere, and anything…but for Pete’s sake don’t turn back below 200 feet agl. Helicopters and power planes the same….yet it still happens. I don’t see AoA changing that. Training yes….but only good training.

Iv’e also seen a few extremely avoidable accidents…most were from a distracted pilot, trying to deal with his first mistake and the ensuing melee’.

Watched a guy take off with an engine that you could hear running terribly from a mile away…ya can’t cure stupid and never will.
 
Perhaps the only disagreement would be even the best airmen make mistakes. EVERYONE makes mistakes. the best airmen recognize them, self analyze them and attempt to correct them…but mistakes will always be a part of aviation.
Sometimes the best airmen kill themselves too after making an unrecognized mistake.
 
Back
Top