'Turn Smart' new vid for ag pilots (and interested others).

[Garfly]

 

 

 

[rgmwa]

This one has been around for a while but always worth another look.

 

 

 

[Garfly]

Yeah, that one's probably more comprehensive and instructive. Always a good one to review.

[rgmwa]

He's got an interesting biography as a pilot and builder with over 27,000 hours in his logbook plus various records.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Handley

[old man emu]

They might have been aiming this instruction at Ag pilots, but I found it very good for a puddle-jumper pilot. What better way to learn than to be given the experience of the blokes who have been there, done that and bought the T-shirt.

 

And how great s it to be told about "Normalization of Deviance".  

[Student Pilot]

I found it tedious but I have a short attention span. I think like the first one it is aimed at American (Ag) pilots who think they can turn quicker using lots of rudder and out of balance. 

[old man emu]

9 hours ago, Student Pilot said:

I found it tedious 

It is like a traditional Christmas pudding - you have to consume a lot to be rewarded with the silver sixpences.

 

I agree that its main purpose was to inform Ag pilots, but what was said applied equally well to the operation of all aircraft. What I got from it was the need to be aware of risk taking on the edge of the envelope. I especially liked the statement "Risk has no memory." As for flying, I thought they provided a great explanation of the turning forces acting on an aeroplane. After hearing that, one wonders how the Wright Brothers, without the knowledge gained in the succeeding century, ever managed to make it to the 1910s.

[Student Pilot]

4 hours ago, old man emu said:

After hearing that, one wonders how the Wright Brothers, without the knowledge gained in the succeeding century, ever managed to make it to the 1910s.

By using everybody else's information and research, patenting that same information as their own. Then litigating to keep others out of the air, the case against Glenn Curtis being and example.

 

[facthunter]

I am afraid there was nothing different in the Vid to what any pilot should know.. People without a good basics in Newtonian Physics would be compromised.   They'd have to learn it some other way. "P" factors  with high powered and large props  is still not appreciated by a lot but it doesn't affect "Normal" planes so significantly. Unbalanced flight and trying to lift a dropped wing with aileron would rate as common errors. A poorly rigged plane will predispose to dropping One side. Nev

[Garfly]

17 minutes ago, Student Pilot said:

By using everybody else's information and research, patenting that same information as their own. Then litigating to keep others out of the air, the case against Glenn Curtis being and example.

 

Yeah, Capt. Google turns up heaps of interesting versions of that story:

 

https://www.forbes.com/2003/11/19/1119aviation.html?sh=fff90901bda6

 

How The Wright Brothers Blew It

 

In 1905 the Wright brothers enjoyed a complete monopoly on heavier-than-air aviation. They had the world's only working airplane, were the only two pilots able to fly it, and had applied for a formidable patent that would cover any plane with three-axis control. Yet within five years they would regularly be surpassed by competitors at home and abroad, and before what was remembered as the Golden Age of Aviation arrived in the 1920s, they would be out of the aircraft business entirely. What happened? // ... The layoff was caused by the brothers' obsession with secrecy. They had a patent pending on the airplane's control technique, which enabled it to climb, dive and turn, but even after the patent was granted in May 1906, they were unwilling to show the machine to anyone who might steal its design, since enforcing their patent rights could be a long, laborious, and very expensive process. Having conquered flight, they wanted to cash out before going any further.

 

 

 

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/62555/why-not-use-the-yoke-to-control-yaw-as-well-as-pitch-and-roll

 

After inventing aileron control (the Wrights were still using wing warping at the time -- this was before 1910), Curtiss needed a way to control movement of the ailerons, and subsequently of the rudder. The original 1903 Wright Flyer had the wing warp controlled by sliding the pilot's platform (a flat surface, on which the pilot lay prone) right and left, and coupled the rudder, so that roll and yaw were inseparable. Curtiss decoupled them, and needed to add a third control -- and since he was also sitting upright, even in his first airplane, his feet were available.

Running the elevators and ailerons on the control stick was obvious, and it was equally simple to put one's feet on a bar that directly operated the rudder -- and this layout became the standard almost instantly. Even the Wrights adopted it before they demonstrated their Flier to the Army.

 

https://aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0103.shtml

 

The first recognizable example of the modern aileron ... was designed by no less than the aforementioned Henri Farman. His biplane, the Farman III, was equipped with four flap-like ailerons fitted at the outboard trailing edges of both the upper and lower wings. Farman's primary innovation was that he was the first to make ailerons an integral part of the wing, in the same manner we still use today, instead of the separate movable surfaces that had been used previously. These ailerons can be seen deflected downward in the picture below.

 

Henri Farman and the Farman III

Farman's innovation was considerably more effective and less complicated than wing warping and was quickly adopted by virtually all the aircraft builders of the time. Only Orville Wright held out, but even his stubbornness gave way in 1915 when he finally converted to the aileron.

Yet the story still isn't over! A group of American aviation enthusiasts had formed the Aerial Experiment Association to build and fly new aircraft designs. They had realized the need for roll control, but were keenly aware that the Wrights had patented wing warping. Looking for an alternative, Alexander Graham Bell conceived of a device similar to the French aileron. A patent on the AEA's aircraft developments, including Bell's ailerons, was granted in 1911. Following the dissolution of the AEA, one of its leading members Glenn Curtiss continued to use the aileron on his new designs, which greatly angered the Wrights. Though the Wrights had patented wing warping, the patent was vague enough that it could be construed to cover any form of lateral control.

In response, the Wrights sued Curtiss for patent infringement and eventually won the case. Europeans like Henri Farman became quite alarmed by this development and were concerned that they too would be forced to pay the Wrights royalties for the use of ailerons. When French aviator Louis Paulhan came to the US to demonstrate his designs, three of his aircraft were impounded on the grounds of patent infringement.

[facthunter]

The Duigan Plane had ailerons. They all operated in a down wards  direction and probably slipstreamed when not actuated., . Nev.

[Garfly]

16 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I am afraid there was nothing different in the Vid to what any pilot should know.. 

That's what I thought, and why I posted it. As you say, much about flying is still not appreciated by a lot.

 

21 minutes ago, facthunter said:

People without a good basics in Newtonian Physics would be compromised.   

 

IMHO by the time they've learned to walk all children have Newtonian physics sussed out, at least to the level they'll need when they learn to fly.  Actually as they try to copy birds they'll need to unlearn a lot of it, otherwise they're likely to pull-back to save their 'fall'.  It's not that Newton was wrong (on that score, anyway) it's just that 'book learning' and instinct are not team players.

[facthunter]

I've sometimes felt I had an unfair advantage with a love of Physics.  It's impossible for me to approach this in any other way. When I Instruct I have to know what the student doesn't know as a start point. Everyone's different, but you only stay up there by successfully  pushing air around.  Nev

[IBob]

17 hours ago, old man emu said:

They might have been aiming this instruction at Ag pilots, but I found it very good for a puddle-jumper pilot. What better way to learn than to be given the experience of the blokes who have been there, done that and bought the T-shirt.

 

And how great s it to be told about "Normalization of Deviance".  

The standout Normalisation of Deviance has to be Lt Col Bud Holland's behaviour, which finally led to the B52 crash at Fairchild AFB, costing him his life and killing his 3 other crew members:

 

The man had a whole history of pushing the limits..........

[old man emu]

QED - Quid erat demonstradum.

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, Garfly said:

The layoff was caused by the brothers' obsession with secrecy.

That is utterly incorrect. The Wrights were swapping information all over the world. Yes, they did patent their method for 3-axis control. But they sold the patent to a company set up by the Big Business tycoons of the day. The Wrights held shares in the company and so were the front guys for any litigation brought on by the  company.  So check the fact before continuing to spread false news. I have posted a video about the patent business either her or on the sister forum.

[Student Pilot]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

That is utterly incorrect. The Wrights were swapping information all over the world. Yes, they did patent their method for 3-axis control. But they sold the patent to a company set up by the Big Business tycoons of the day. The Wrights held shares in the company and so were the front guys for any litigation brought on by the  company.  So check the fact before continuing to spread false news. I have posted a video about the patent business either her or on the sister forum.

Did they take information from early pioneers like Otto Lilienthal and the Australian Hargraves and then patent that?

[Student Pilot]

I can understand why that vid was made and pitched at Ag pilots. Some have done a quite a bit of flying and learned some bad habits. Some also think they know better and have worked out other ways of turning than balanced flight. Every year there are stall spin and loss of control with aerial applicators, some are getting cheaper insurance if their pilots have done a course and watched these type vids.

[facthunter]

Pilots are like most people insomuch as if they can find an easier way they will deviate to it. They then cut corners and push limits and do things to ease the boredom. Get a bit tired at the end of the day and Just where was that Powerline?:  Nev

[Garfly]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

That is utterly incorrect. The Wrights were swapping information all over the world. Yes, they did patent their method for 3-axis control. But they sold the patent to a company set up by the Big Business tycoons of the day. The Wrights held shares in the company and so were the front guys for any litigation brought on by the  company.  So check the fact before continuing to spread false news.

 

What fact am I to check?  That a Forbes journalist - in fact - once wrote that the Wrights were, at a certain time, "obsessed with secrecy".

You want me to check that fact?   FACT CHECK: It's online. I supplied the link. It's there. Go read it.

 

Or do you want me to personally research and "check" whether there was any justification for that journalist to publish such an opinion in their article in the first place? 

 

Well, that writer - and that journal -  has no need of any defence from me; but if they did, I could offer nothing better than continuing their quote from where I left off:

 

"Chanute urged the brothers to try for some of the aviation prizes that were being offered for flights of specified times and distances, which would have established their dominance in the public's mind. They refused. "We would have to expose our machine more or less, and that might interfere with the sale of our secrets," they wrote to a friend in January 1906. "We appreciate the honor and the prestige that would come with the winning of a prize...but we can hardly afford at the present time to jeopardize our other interests in doing it."  

 

In my opinion, that is fact enough on which anyone might reasonably base such an opinion.  Anyway, it's hardly even a criticism of the Wrights. The article universalises their dilemma (which is what makes it a good piece of writing); anyone in the Wrights' shoes would have had to decide whether it was better to reveal or to hide their experiments during that delicate phase of development.  It was clear to all that a lot was at stake. 

 

And finally, I would remind you that my links to those 3 articles was prefaced with:

 

  "Yeah, Capt. Google turns up heaps of interesting versions of that story"  

 

Truth be told, I don't really care who is credited with inventing the aeroplane.  But being accused of spreading false news, that's something I care about. 

 

 

[facthunter]

One really creditable part of their performance was their becoming skilled at FLYING it. Nev

[old man emu]

13 hours ago, Garfly said:

  that might interfere with the sale of our secrets .... but we can hardly afford at the present time to jeopardize our other interests in doing it."  

MY OPINION:

 

Written to their friend. I think that by January 1906 they had sold the patent to the company formed to make use of it. The comment to Chanute seems to me to be, "We could, but we have 'commercial in confidence' considerations to address. Once they sold their patent, I think that they realised that they were trapped in the corporate world, which they had not understood when the entered it. Basically, they lost control of their freedom of expression. Since they were the celebrities, it is only natural that the Company would push them forward into the limelight while that movers and shakers hid in the (theatrical) wings.

 

Garfly, I didn't mean to make a personal attack. On reflection I think I didn't read your post fully. Sorry.