I'm with you on the value of AOA. For every optimum airspeed there's an AOA
for that airspeed. In my opinion,it's the WAY to fly.
I know a lot of the old guard had big issues with the glass cockpits as they
began to interface into the systems and cockpit management program.
I guess it's that way most of the time really. Some pilots transition with
no problems at all, and some hang on to the old ways like their fingers were
inches away from letting go of the edge of a cliff :-)
I always liked technology and adapted to it fairly easily. Of course in the
old military fast props I was pushing around most of the time I was lucky if
even the steam gauges were all working at one time :-)
We had a twin Beech with a Collins FD109 in it. I think that was about your
period of director too.
I loved that damn thing!!! :-)
Were you in P3's down at Pax per chance? I did some flying down there at TPS
and Strike when Tex Birdwell was the CO at the school and Tom Flannery was
there. Admiral Brown was the base CO back then. The P3's were something to
dodge in the pattern :-))))
Great people at Pax; some of the most talented people I ever met in
aviation.
Dudley Henriques


"Bob Moore" wrote in message
. 121...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote
My understanding on AOA for you heavy drivers is that you actually
have preferred using a calculated approach speed for the GW rather
than AOA because the configurations and the weights vary so much.

That was the beauty of the AOA system that I flew for two years in
the Navy P-3. Each flap setting was fed into the AOA computer and
the GW is automatically acounted for as a function of AOA.
No thought or computation required for the flightcrew. AOA *IS*
airspeed properly adjusted for all of the variables, or I should say
that airspeedd is a not very good approximation of the AOA that one
should be flying.

Those "old farts" would not relenquish ANY of their authority to a
copilot or a machine. Thank god for CRM, GPWS and TCAS.

Bob Moore