When is analytical just anal?

[Nightmare]

There was research done some years ago with driver training. They took two groups of novices. One was put into a classroom environment while the other was put directly into vehicles in a flat paddock and told to drive. The first group took an average (if I remember correctly) of about 12 hours to learn to drive while the second took two. In other words, practical experience is absolutely critical to learning. It makes sense of the theory which is cumbersome and convoluted in aviation. Interesting that some medical schools also inverted their courses so that the early years were more focussed on clinical work with more of the theoretical occurring in later years.

I found I had an awesome time flying for the very first time on my TIF. Then I started reading up on my upcoming lessons, and found they were very interesting, and made me more hungry for why the plane handled like it did, then how different parts on the plane worked and how weather affected things, and so it went.... IMHO, I think RA Aus has the training almost spot on, a good mix of practical and theory.

 

 

[facthunter]

Tech can be "disconnected " from the practical, often .. People who train others should know enough to do the job properly. ie the material a nd being able to "teach". "the blind can't lead the blind". and theory and practice should be related all the way through. The flying training situation does this well , but most of the talking should be before and after the flight.

 

.... Terminology is a problem, and people doing things "their way" can be at least unconventional, quaint or downright misinformed, and harder to change schools. Bad training methods have killed a lot of aviators, and may well continue to do so as pilots tend to regard themselves as more individualistic than most. At the beginning of the U/L movement many trained themselves of necessity but with unpleasant consequences for a lot. The training part of the organisation is relatively safe statistically so that means something. Bear in mind that you have much to learn after you gain your certificate. Advanced driving/riding courses are valuable, so why wouldn't flying be a similar situation?. In the commercial area a move to another aircraft may take some months and is a review of your whole performance, plus some. Try to make your biennial? checks achieve something of the same outcome, by an arrangement with someone suitable. Never stop learning. If you do you are likely to become dangerous, but get your info from a reliable source, always. That's not always easy. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Most type courses I've done, I've done after spending a couple of weeks getting to know the airframe. I've only done one where I hadn't spent any time getting familiar, it was the most difficult to date.

 

 

[RickH]

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,

You obviously don't know much about riding bikes and have never tried it. the statement about pulling on the opposite bar is true think about Gyroscopic procession, a force in one direction will cause a gyro to tilt in the plane of 90 degrees later this is why pilots of tail draggers learn to tap dance on the rudder pedals when raising the tail on take off. ie Both props and bike wheels are effectively gyro's.

 

 

[Oscar]

You obviously don't know much about riding bikes and have never tried it. the statement about pulling on the opposite bar is true think about Gyroscopic procession, a force in one direction will cause a gyro to tilt in the plane of 90 degrees later this is why pilots of tail draggers learn to tap dance on the rudder pedals when raising the tail on take off. ie Both props and bike wheels are effectively gyro's.

With respect, 'out-turning' is not connected to gyroscopic precession.

 

Yenn is completely wrong about it being a load of rubbish - it is THE way you ride fast on a motorcycle.

 

In balanced conditions, (straight line or cornering) for a motorcycle, it has the c.g mass of the vehicle ( bike plus rider in the position he or she is using) passing through the line between the contact patches - which are the centres of lateral resistance - between the front and rear wheels. In cornering, one balances the angle of lean against the speed and radius of the turn - exactly as in an aircraft.

 

The effect of 'out-turning', is to make the line of resistance between the front wheel contact patch and the rear wheel contact patch move to the opposite side to the turn desired - thus the c/g of the bike is now 'inside' the line of resistance between the front and rear wheels and the bike 'falls' into the turn - literally. That is NOT due to gyroscopic effect, it is quite simply the action of gravity between the c.g of the bike mass and the line of resistance.

 

Once you have the bike leaned, the contact patches of both the front and rear tyre roll around the circumference of both tyres - tending to cause the bike to actually sit up vertical. You use out-turning to get the bike to START the turn and throttle to balance the lean vs. the effect of a c.g. moving in an arc vs. the resistance of the tyre contact patches.

 

MotoGp and dirt-bike stunt riders DO use gyroscopic precession in their riding - for bike control when there is NO line of resistance because the front wheel ( at least) is off the deck: for corner exit wioth the front wheel in the air or directional change when doing aerial stunts. But - for fast normal riding - out-turning is simply the ONLY way we use to change direction at any speed.

 

And yes, Yenn, I believe in out-turning because I've used it for more than 40 years of riding.

 

 

[facthunter]

You are completely correct. The bike is leaned over( falls) as you describe and the grip of the tyres on the road provides the force to allow the bike to track on a radius that balances the bike at the correct lean (bank) angle. Minor changes to the steering maintain the balance and power on the rear and braking on either wheel and tyre slip angles play a part also.. Rotational inertia plays a big part in what happens when you are airborne. If you speed up the rear wheel the front will rise and if you hit the brakes it will fall. Same with changing engine revs, unless you engine runs backwards, where it's opposite acting or is side aligned as in the BMW where rev changes will make the bike roll right or left. Nev

 

 

[RickH]

With respect, 'out-turning' is not connected to gyroscopic precession.Yenn is completely wrong about it being a load of rubbish - it is THE way you ride fast on a motorcycle.

 

In balanced conditions, (straight line or cornering) for a motorcycle, it has the c.g mass of the vehicle ( bike plus rider in the position he or she is using) passing through the line between the contact patches - which are the centres of lateral resistance - between the front and rear wheels. In cornering, one balances the angle of lean against the speed and radius of the turn - exactly as in an aircraft.

 

The effect of 'out-turning', is to make the line of resistance between the front wheel contact patch and the rear wheel contact patch move to the opposite side to the turn desired - thus the c/g of the bike is now 'inside' the line of resistance between the front and rear wheels and the bike 'falls' into the turn - literally. That is NOT due to gyroscopic effect, it is quite simply the action of gravity between the c.g of the bike mass and the line of resistance.

 

Once you have the bike leaned, the contact patches of both the front and rear tyre roll around the circumference of both tyres - tending to cause the bike to actually sit up vertical. You use out-turning to get the bike to START the turn and throttle to balance the lean vs. the effect of a c.g. moving in an arc vs. the resistance of the tyre contact patches.

 

MotoGp and dirt-bike stunt riders DO use gyroscopic precession in their riding - for bike control when there is NO line of resistance because the front wheel ( at least) is off the deck: for corner exit wioth the front wheel in the air or directional change when doing aerial stunts. But - for fast normal riding - out-turning is simply the ONLY way we use to change direction at any speed.

 

And yes, Yenn, I believe in out-turning because I've used it for more than 40 years of riding.

A load of twaddle

 

 

[Yenn]

So I am completely wrong? I never mentioned motor bikes, I was referring to bikes ie pushbikes and if you have to push the handlebars against the ditection you want to turn, how come I can ride a bike around a corner without my hands touching the handlebars?

 

Please don't make wild assumptions without thinking them through. I will admit that my original post was set up to promote someone to make those asumptions. If I am still completely wrong, can you explain why?

 

 

[Ungrounded]

Motorbikes and bicycles both steer the same. They are both two-wheeled. They both require counter-steering. When you ride a bicycle (or motorbike) and steer without holding the handle bars you weight-shift the handle bars in the correct direction(s) as required. Counter steering is still happening. The second "Kieth Code" video about counter-steering posted above by Pearo shows a clear demonstration of this happening.

 

 

[Soleair]

Yenn, please try the simple experiment I suggested in post #26. It will take only a few seconds to convince yourself. I was an unbeliever like you, until I tried this. Honest.

 

Bruce

 

 

[Oscar]

Perhaps we should close the debate on counter-steering. There are quite a number of experienced motorcyclists who contribute to this forum, and 100% of them will endorse the fact that counter-steering is how you turn a motorcycle at anything more than walking speed. I seriously don't think there is value in non-motorcyclists telling us that we are wrong.

 

 

[facthunter]

If you ride a trike you don't counter steer as you don't have to get it to lean. Same with an outfit. (side car) you just turn the steering with both of them. When people start to learn on a two wheeler they wobble a lot till they get the hang of it and then steady up. You can't turn a two wheeler without leaning it any more than you turn an aeroplane without banking it. Nev

 

 

[Oscar]

HA! - actually, Nev, you're wrong for trikes - for the about 0.05% of humans who have the skills.

 

I watched the Bates twins, Neil and Rick, fanging around their backyard track when they were about 8 - 10 years old, on trikes. ( Neil was Australian Rallye champion something like four times, I think; Rick was a journeyman driver for companies like Porsche, and maybe still leads the Holden Driver stunt team if it still exists). They used to flick the things into the turns, lift the inside wheel, and power-slide around the corner markers with the inside wheel hanging maybe two feet in the air.

 

Maybe there are genetics involved - some people have the ability to manage the man-machine interface without any apparent formal understanding of the physics. Both their parents, Dick and Carol, were and remain superb drivers. Some people can do things in airplanes that seem to defy the physics involved - but it is impossible to defy the physics, they are just micro-managing the changing situation at a rate of reaction the rest of us cannot manage.

 

Just because most of us cannot do the same level of micro-management, doesn't mean it is a false premise.

 

Witness Sidney Cotton, experiencing an engine-out in his Lockheed 12A at something like 600 feet above the deck on climb-out: pulled it vertical, used the offset thrust of the working engine to execute the turn, leaving him with only an exaggerated round-out for a successful reciprocal-heading landing.. all the physics involved is completely explicable, but only a very, very few people can get the dots all joined up.

 

 

[Jabba jenny]

Hey, being thought of as anal seems to go with being a pilot.

 

Hubby wanted me to check the plane out the day before I went flying as it would save time the next morning. Nothing will change in 24 hours, already done my fuel test, already checked under the cowl, see how simple things can be??? I re checked everything anyway but had to put up with a few comments on "time wasting", "female", etc. Ha ha

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I get that all the time. Know whtat you mean.

 

 

[cherk]

Hey, being thought of as anal seems to go with being a pilot.Hubby wanted me to check the plane out the day before I went flying as it would save time the next morning. Nothing will change in 24 hours, already done my fuel test, already checked under the cowl, see how simple things can be??? I re checked everything anyway but had to put up with a few comments on "time wasting", "female", etc. Ha ha

 

 

[Aldo]

So I am completely wrong? I never mentioned motor bikes, I was referring to bikes ie pushbikes and if you have to push the handlebars against the ditection you want to turn, how come I can ride a bike around a corner without my hands touching the handlebars?Please don't make wild assumptions without thinking them through. I will admit that my original post was set up to promote someone to make those asumptions. If I am still completely wrong, can you explain why?

Yenn

 

If you watch the handle bar as you lean into the turn with no hands you will see that the front wheel turns slightly in the opposite direction.

 

Aldo

 

 

[facthunter]

Oscar, speedway bikes do the same in corners. You flick the rear out and keep the power on and the drive helps it turn, and you are going sideways, but that's not really the nature of what we are discussing here. Nev