"If you want to go up, pull back on the stick. If you want to down, pull back a little more. If you want to go down real fast, pull back harder..." -an old aviation proverb.
Nothing makes a pilot's eye's glaze over faster than an energy management discussion; but ultimately it's failing to manage energy that brings many pilots to grief. There are pilots with extensive experience and a well calibrated “seat of the pants” feel for their airplanes. They can safely and masterfully fly the wing throughout the flight envelope, extracting maximum performance when required, and maintaining positive aircraft control. There are also pilots that lose control of their airplanes, kill themselves and their passengers during normal pattern operations. Surprisingly, more during the takeoff and initial climb phase than during approach and landing. What’s the difference? The first pilot has an intuitive feel for “flying the wing,” while the second does not. Sometimes, they are the same pilot. Pilots that experience loss of control aren’t restricted to any age, experience, or proficiency level. No pilot intentionally spins an airplane into the ground. They get into trouble due to misunderstanding or lack of information, or become distracted and miss a cue. This is understandable, because the two fundamental skills required to fly an airplane are controlling angle of attack to make lift and power to counter drag and make speed and altitude. There is no way to see angle of attack, and we don’t have a power required gauge in the cockpit if the airplane, so there is no direct feedback for the two most critical tasks a pilot must perform. Learning to fly is a complicated process of using surrogate information provided by flight and power instruments and visual cues to control the flight path of the airplane.
What if we could simply see and hear how hard the wing is working and how that work is trending? What if we automate “seat of the pants” feedback using modern technology and provide it to the pilot in a simple, intuitive manner? What if an ergonomic cue allowed the pilot to adjust both angle of attack and power to achieve key performance parameters, maintain positive aircraft control and avoid stalling when maneuvering? Not nearly as glamorous as wearing leather flying kit and listening to the wind in the wires, or as effective as fully automatic flight controls, but certainly better than what we have now.
To reduce loss of control mishaps and improve flying precision, the US military was an early adaptor of angle of attack (AOA) technology. These systems reached their maximum effectiveness with 3rd generation fighters when combined with energy maneuverability training as dog fighting re-emerged as a requirement during the Vietnam war. As fighters have advanced, AOA has been incorporated in automatic flight controls, in essence making the airplane smarter than the hairless ape flying it. Until GA flight controls are automated in a similar manner, we are much like the old 3rd generation fighters with manual flight controls, and could benefit from adapting some of the technology and teaching techniques that lowered military attrition rates and improved combat effectiveness over a half century ago.
Fly safe,
Vac
Last edited:
