Methods for altitude changes

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:25:02 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Snowbird writes:

I can see you have actually begun to learn something about autopilots. There
is more to the story, though. Would you believe some autopilots act on both
the control surface and the trim device?

There are several ways to implement an autopilot. But no autopilot is
designed to relieve control pressures.

Another true but worthless statement.

Hmm... Is it a true statement though? The King autopilots (and the
S-Tec range AFAIK) both are designed such that they use pitch servos
to reposition the control surface (elevator or stabilator) to affect
a change (climb, descent) and have inbuilt feedback generators to tell
the trim servo to actuate such that it removes the load from the
surface at its new position. That seems to be at least two systems
who's basic design incorporates a methodology to actively relieve
control pressures.

In rec.aviation.piloting Just go look it up! wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:25:02 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Snowbird writes:

I can see you have actually begun to learn something about autopilots. There
is more to the story, though. Would you believe some autopilots act on both
the control surface and the trim device?

There are several ways to implement an autopilot. But no autopilot is
designed to relieve control pressures.

Another true but worthless statement.

Hmm... Is it a true statement though? The King autopilots (and the
S-Tec range AFAIK) both are designed such that they use pitch servos
to reposition the control surface (elevator or stabilator) to affect
a change (climb, descent) and have inbuilt feedback generators to tell
the trim servo to actuate such that it removes the load from the
surface at its new position. That seems to be at least two systems
who's basic design incorporates a methodology to actively relieve
control pressures.

You are being realistic and practical in your interpretation.

He is being a pendantic, semantic game playing, asshole in he's interpretation.

Strictly, he is correct.

Autopilots are designed to control aircraft.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 23:25:04 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting Just go look it up! wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:25:02 GMT, wrote:

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:

There are several ways to implement an autopilot. But no autopilot is
designed to relieve control pressures.

Another true but worthless statement.

Hmm... Is it a true statement though? The King autopilots (and the
S-Tec range AFAIK) both are designed such that they use pitch servos
to reposition the control surface (elevator or stabilator) to affect
a change (climb, descent) and have inbuilt feedback generators to tell
the trim servo to actuate such that it removes the load from the
surface at its new position. That seems to be at least two systems
who's basic design incorporates a methodology to actively relieve
control pressures.

You are being realistic and practical in your interpretation.

He is being a pendantic, semantic game playing, asshole in he's interpretation.


Ah. Yes, he does have the propensity to do that doesn't he. And he
changes the pedantry context even within the thread he's ruining. Like
in this one, yea, autopilots control aircraft but his statement that
"no autopilot is designed to relieve control pressures" in the context
of the subthread could be parsed as "no autopilot is designed (with a
mechanism) to relieve control pressures", rather than the ultimate
design goal of an autopilot system, and he switches back and forth to
suit whichever asinine argument he's proffering at the moment.....

Just go look it up! wrote:
design goal of an autopilot system, and he switches back and forth to
suit whichever asinine argument he's proffering at the moment.....

And everybody sucks it up like a sponge, responding to the troll just like
he wants....

Just go look it up! writes:

Hmm... Is it a true statement though? The King autopilots (and the
S-Tec range AFAIK) both are designed such that they use pitch servos
to reposition the control surface (elevator or stabilator) to affect
a change (climb, descent) and have inbuilt feedback generators to tell
the trim servo to actuate such that it removes the load from the
surface at its new position. That seems to be at least two systems
who's basic design incorporates a methodology to actively relieve
control pressures.

Relieving control pressure is still not the purpose of the autopilot, though.
It merely uses that as a means to an end.

If autopilots were really intended to relieve control pressures, then they
would not hold altitude or heading. Instead, they would act to keep the
controls in whatever position you last put them in, irrespective of altitude
or heading. I don't know of any autopilot that does that. The closest
approach is the control-wheel steering feature of some AFDS systems on large
transport aircraft, but apparently pilots don't use those features very often,
and it's still based on maintaining something other than control pressures.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.