When is analytical just anal?

[pmccarthy]

there is lots of discussion, on this site and in magazines, about techniques for flying, crosswind landings, engine failures and so on. I wonder how much of the theory is really applied in practice. How many pilots are thinking about techniques and how many just fly the plane?

 

When we ride a push bike or a motorbike or drive a car, we don't think about technique, we just drive. It comes automatically from experience and we do it without really thinking. I find that I fly the same way. I can't really explain my technique for cross wind landings, I just do them. I find that the aircraft always lines up straight when I round out, as if there is no cross wind at ground level. I must be doing something right but would be hard pressed to explain what it is. I just fly the plane. And at take off, there is a speed where the plane starts flying, I don't really need to look at the ASI.

 

Thank Dog I have never had an EFATO but I think I would just fly the plane as circumstances allowed. I don't THINK I would do something silly, but will never know til it happens.

 

So how much of the endless analysis that we read is helpful? Is it only helpful to beginners? Are there two types of pilots? Perhaps there are the anal ones, who have all the performance charts in their heads, and the bike riders who just balance and go. I am sure that test pilots and fighter pilots need to be the anal type, but are they are rare breed? Which type ar you?

 

 

[Ultralights]

i use whatever technique in whatever it is i wish to do, that will do the job. there is no right or wrong way to do anything, just different ways.

 

 

[Marty_d]

It's an interesting point PM. For a newbie like me reading heaps of info on here, it can be very daunting. There's so much discussion and everything is dissected and mulled over to the point where you think only someone with the mind of Stephen Hawking and the reflexes of Jet Li can be trusted to fly an aeroplane.

 

In reality it's obvious that any relatively intelligent human being can become a safe pilot, but I guess just like the evening news being a concentrated barrage of bad things can get you down about the state of the world, concentrated discussion forums like this gives a somewhat overwhelming image of recreational aviation to someone who isn't actually flying yet.

 

 

[Pearo]

i use whatever technique in whatever it is i wish to do, that will do the job. there is no right or wrong way to do anything, just different ways.

Going to have to disagree, there is always a wrong way to do things.

 

In aviation, you need to be anal. Those who are not do not remain in aviation for very long.

 

 

[old man emu]

It's an interesting point PM. For a newbie like me reading heaps of info on here, it can be very daunting. There's so much discussion and everything is dissected and mulled over to the point where you think only someone with the mind of Stephen Hawking and the reflexes of Jet Li can be trusted to fly an aeroplane.

This thread: http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/safety-going-rediculous.144371 is discussing taking safety to absurdity. I think that flight training syllabi (syllabuses?) have always promoted the 1910 media spin that flying is inherently dangerous by making bogey men of rare circumstances. Statistically, how common are engine failures on take off? Again, how common are engine failures in cruise? How common are stall/spin incidents at either end of the circuit?

 

It should be sufficient to inform a student that these things can happen, and then to train them in preventative measures. How many EFATO incidents could have been prevented by dipping the tanks, or making sure the fuel shut-off c0ck is turned to the ON position before starting to roll? Same can be said for oil loss - check that the filler cap is closed tightly.

 

The next thing is to teach the student how NOT to get into situations where a stall could happen. When I was being trained to drive properly, I was shown how to drive around a skid pan without letting the car skid. Therefore, it should be possible to teach a student how to fly a plane without letting it stall. Note that I say "letting it stall". Teach a student that a plane is designed to fly and once it is flying the major cause of its stopping flying is the wingnut holding the column.

 

Very few people get adequate training on how to handle a ground vehicle, but even the most moronic can go through life using them safely. The same should apply to flying a plane, given the higher standard of instruction provided to a student.

 

Old Man Emu

 

Darn PC filter - rejected a perfectly good word "c*ck"!

 

 

[cscotthendry]

I've lost count of the number of times I've been asked questions like; What distance does it take you to get off the ground / land? or How fast are you going when you land / takeoff? How far out do you go before you turn base? etc etc.

 

I don't have specific answers for these questions, but the questioner is always looking for specifics. Maybe I'd be a better pilot if I knew the answers to the numbers around flying. But I know what my plane feels like when it's flying correctly and I know what it feels like when I start going near the boundaries. A friend said to me "Fly in the middle of the air, not near the edges." and that's what I do.

 

 

[RickH]

PM and Scott I think have pretty much summed it up, I like the advise on flying in the middle. I also have often been asked similar questions.

 

Although I always try to interpret them as coming from the point of view of some one trying to learn. After all we all do it see an unfamiliar machine that we like and usually the first question I ask is what will she cruise on? How much strip do you need etc, I don't expect precise answers but some times it's just interesting to know. And yeah there are many times when in hind sight I know that I have asked some awfully dumb ones. Embarrassing that!

 

 

[cscotthendry]

PM and Scott I think have pretty much summed it up, I like the advise on flying in the middle. I also have often been asked similar questions.Although I always try to interpret them as coming from the point of view of some one trying to learn. After all we all do it see an unfamiliar machine that we like and usually the first question I ask is what will she cruise on? How much strip do you need etc, I don't expect precise answers but some times it's just interesting to know. And yeah there are many times when in hind sight I know that I have asked some awfully dumb ones. Embarrassing that!

I really don't mind being asked these and other "dumb" questions. In fact I really enjoy talking about my flying (maybe a little too much) and I always assume the person is genuinely interested in how my plane works rather than checking to see whether I'd qualify as a test pilot.

RickH, I taught computer engineering for 15 years and I learned that there is no such thing as a "dumb" question, only ones that don't get asked.

 

 

[facthunter]

Someone explains what is going on when you do certain things. You gain an understanding . You practice it till you have mastered it and then keep on doing it. Isn't that how you learn just about everything? When someone says "I didn't know you could do "something", isn't that showing a lack of required skills, likely to result in an accident.? Nev

 

 

[SDQDI]

I think flying is a fair bit different to our other forms of transport, that extra dimension adds a totally different set of risks. Yes we can overanalyse but we can also be too slack which can be deadly.

 

Pm said "I don't think I would do something silly" which is basically how we all see ourselves and it can be a dangerous thing. Even with a good training and currency regime we don't really know how we will react when it all goes south but the more training and currency we have the better the chance that we will subconsciously do the right thing. Take stalls for example, they are one time where if we do what our subconscious wants us to do we could end up in deep do do. We see the nose fall or wing drop and our automatic response is to hold the nose up with the elevator or save the wing with the ailerons, that is one thing that we should be practicing regularly so that the automatic response is the correct one especially if we take into account that the most likely time to have an unintentional stall is when we are low and distracted (maybe with something like the unannounced EFATO).

 

So I guess in a way it is all well and good to say we fly by feel but just remember there are countless examples of pilots who had a lot more experience than us who definately could fly by feel but still stuffed up. We ignore that at our own peril. I think it is a good thing if we all sit back and tell ourselves before each flight "better pilots than me have made mistakes! I am not foolproof!"

 

I do enjoy flying to relax and i know I have to constantly remind myself to get "in the zone" or in the right frame of mind at least for takeoff and landing, if we aren't on the job our subconscious could catch us out.

 

 

[jetjr]

Sometimes those providing advice are relaying their perception of what they did, not actually what they did.

 

So often its little more than their opinion. Throw in a little wishful thinking, extrapolation and exaggeration and you have the perfect pilot after the fact.

 

For newcomers or those trying to learn this can be a dangerous discussion to take lessons from.

 

Important to learn from instructor or similar what feels right and be able to repeat it. You will quickly feel when something isnt how your used to and alarm bells should ring.

 

THEN it becomes second nature and what PM sai is quite correct.

 

 

[Ultralights]

Going to have to disagree, there is always a wrong way to do things.In aviation, you need to be anal. Those who are not do not remain in aviation for very long.

yes, there is always a wrong way, but there is almost always more than one way to do things, eg, crosswind landing... different aircraft have differing performance envelopes, some things tries in one aircraft wont work in another...

 

 

[cscotthendry]

In some airplanes, the numbers can be quite critical, for example, the stall angle of the wing of a replica Spitfire. The guy who tried to take off at Watts Bridge without lifting the tail wheel can verify this now. So yes, in some cases it's important to know numbers. However, in most instances with well designed sport aircraft, the pilot can tell by feel when it is wrong as something will be quite different to his usual flying experience. For example, the nose might be pointing way too high, or the controls feel way too light. Mostly it is near the stall that we recognise when things are wrong, but there are probably times when the very adventurous go to places they weren't taught, like doing aerobatics in a drifter, that a pilot may come to grief by not knowing "the numbers".

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I guess an example of flying in the middle of the air is how you turn during normal flight. I probably stick to rate 1 turns or thereabouts, only do steeper if I am deliberately out there to practice steep turns. So I am unlikely to ever steepen up a turn onto final or in a difficult situation because it will feel unfamiliar and wrong. Sometimes when I watch others flying I feel that I am too conservative but I guess it is what you are comfortable with. I have also ridden motorbikes for many years and don't lay it over too far!

 

 

[cscotthendry]

I guess an example of flying in the middle of the air is how you turn during normal flight. I probably stick to rate 1 turns or thereabouts, only do steeper if I am deliberately out there to practice steep turns. So I am unlikely to ever steepen up a turn onto final or in a difficult situation because it will feel unfamiliar and wrong. Sometimes when I watch others flying I feel that I am too conservative but I guess it is what you are comfortable with. I have also ridden motorbikes for many years and don't lay it over too far!

Your point is well made. But from what I read though, even gentle turns can get you into trouble if they're not coordinated. For example, using too much rudder to sharpen the base/final turn is said to be a killer for stalling a wing. Since I read that, I am super careful about my base / final turn. I have looked down a couple of times when turning final and see how little room there is for recovering from a wing stall. It scares me so I take extra care there. Flying-wise it is very close to the ground. Falling-wise, it is a looong way down.

 

 

[old man emu]

I think that for safe flight, if it looks right, it probably is. How many of us get all anal about avoiding the edges of the doorway when we are driving our cars into our garages? Sure, we take it carefully for the first few times, but after that we instinctively know if our approach has been good.

 

Same applies to flying a circuit. We do them ad nauseum before our first solo and up until our first flight test, so we should know by then the visual inputs that tell us that we are flying correctly. How hard can it be to fly a good circuit? After all, at how many hours' experience did you fly your first solo? The best advice for EFATO? Nose down and fly as far into the return to earth as possible. Preventing inadvertent stalls? This is what flying at the slow edge of the envelope looks like. Don't go there.

 

For Joe Average, flying at some distance from the edge of the flight boundary will ensure an incident-free life in aviation.

 

As for knowing the numbers - Who can say with any precision the speed from the left hand seat with the throttle to the wall, at what speed the plane actually began to fly on each and every occasion? You can only say that the speed was in the region of ...

 

OME

 

 

[Yenn]

pmccarthy pondered the question at the atsrt of this page. I tend to just fly the plane without thinking too much about it. The other day taking off in a gusting crosswind I actually thought about what I was doing an was surprised at the number of inputs I made, without really thinking. Just like riding a bike. When you ride do you think about what you are doing.

 

I saw recently that to turn a bike you had to push the handlebars in the opposite direction to which way you wabt to turn. What load of rubbish that idea is and no doubt some will believe it,

 

 

[Pearo]

I saw recently that to turn a bike you had to push the handlebars in the opposite direction to which way you wabt to turn. What load of rubbish that idea is and no doubt some will believe it,

Try it sometime, you will be surprised.

 

 

[Ungrounded]

I saw recently that to turn a bike you had to push the handlebars in the opposite direction to which way you wabt to turn. What load of rubbish that idea is and no doubt some will believe it,

Hi Yenn,

 

Actually it's quite true. Although it might best be said that a bicycle or motorbike turns because it is banked-over and that to bank the bicycle we *briefly* initiate a turn in the opposite direction to establish the desired bank angle in the desired direction.

 

Since this is an aviation forum then this then will seem appropriate. One person who did believe this would appear to have been none other than Wilbur Wright of "Wright Brothers" fame. Wilbur had this to say on the subject:-

 

I have asked dozens of bicycle riders how they turn to the left. I have never found a single person who stated all the facts correctly when first asked. They almost invariably said that to turn to the left' date=' they turned the handlebar to the left and as a result made a turn to the left. But on further questioning them, some would agree that they first turned the handlebar a little to the right, and then as the machine inclined to the left, they turned the handlebar to the left and as a result made the circle, inclining inward.[/quote']Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering

Another group of people who seem to believe it are the Motorcycle Council of New South Wales. They thought it important enough to make it the topic of one of the 'Rider Risk" video series:-

 

[DrZoos]

I try to keep a balance between keeping it really fun, which is the only reason why I choose to fly, and doing enough procedural stuff to keep me fresh in the event of an emergency...

 

I just completed my BFR no probs... sure there were a few tiny things i missed and will go study and refine, but at the end of the day, it worked out, i pulled off all my emergency procedures with no real problems and I knew most procedures well enough to get a safe landing and relevant calls, briefs and checks to avoid a big ball of flames...

 

I say keep a balance...if you stress so much you cant enjoy your flying, then why fly at all... and if your so focused on fun, you dont take safety seriously, then perhaps motorbikes or some other form of recreation might be better.

 

 

[old man emu]

When did you last do a driving review for your driver's licence?

 

OME

 

 

[Pearo]

Another group of people who seem to believe it are the Motorcycle Council of New South Wales. They thought it important enough to make it the topic of one of the 'Rider Risk" video series:-

Kieth Code did it better:

 

 

 

[Geoff13]

Countersteering involves basic gyroscopic theory.

 

Those wheels and tyres are simply gyroscopes.

 

 

[Litespeed]

Yes bikes do countersteer to turn- however it is not just about been a gyroscope.

 

The gyroscopic effect provides stability and is in fact anti the ability to turn.

 

It is the reduction in circumference of the wheel/tyre as we countersteer and the effect of trail/fork angle that actually does all the work in steering around a corner. ie the tyre size gets smaller on the edges and combined with fork rake this overcomes the gyroscopic effect enough to force a turn.

 

Motorcycles are due to the gyroscope effect inherently stable in motion and unstable when not moving- they fall over.

 

Cars are stable when not moving and inherently unstable at speed unless controlled by input.

 

That is why any numbskull can ride a bike at speed in a straight line- get him to ride slowly and corner and it actually needs skills and balance.

 

A lesson I learnt last century from my physics professor- she had a bike question in our final exam to catch us out. Fortunately I got full marks- I was the only one who rode a bike but it took a lot of thinking.

 

The whole thing about flight and bike riding is, yes it is important to have a technical knowledge and skill set- or death awaits you.

 

But it is also very important to have a feel for what you are doing- so it is second nature. You react instinctively because you skills are honed to a point that you can basically do it without too much thought. Yes we need to overcome the pull up when stalling thing- but that also comes with training our skill set and getting to the point of almost autonomic action.

 

The thought comes before flight or riding- getting the right mind set

 

Then you can concentrate on the higher order needs as they occur.

 

I can remember riding on a race track and barely thinking about the riding at all- just the enjoyment of chasing down the guys in front.

 

Once you start analyzing too much your brain tries to overcome your inherent skill set.And you become overwhelmed- a important human factor.

 

sportsmen call this choking- once they try and analyse their movements too much- they loose the plot. They start to doubt themselves on the basic stuff and the brain then sends the thoughts to the reptilian part of the brain- which is only good for fight/flight response and we choke.

 

This does not mean do not think- that is still critical but do not overthink the simple skill sets. Concentrate on the whats happening in the future ie never fly faster than your brain is- it should always be well ahead of your vehicle be it plane, bike or whatever.

 

The further ahead you are thinking, the better able to plan and execute for safe enjoyable flight/riding/driving.

 

Stay upright for the riders and stall free for flyers

 

Phil

 

 

[Yenn]

Is anyone saying that you have to turn the bike hndlebars to turn. If so how can I steer a bike without having my hands on the handlebars.

 

I have travelled miles riding one bike and pushing another alongside me with my hand on its saddle, so absolutely no ability to turn the handlebar.