Coordinated turns without rudder, and autopilots

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
It's an attractive conclusion (for those who wish to disdain simulation),
but
not a logical one.

Seems to work real well for eveyone but you, but then were not taking the
same meds either.

"Mxsmanic" wrote ...

Which aspects are inaccurate?

All, to a lesser or higher degree. I already pointed out one of the most
glaringly inaccurate areas. Read what I wrote.

A coordinated turn is neither a stall nor a spin.

It is an area within the flight envelope. Read what I wrote.

Table-driven models are often more accurate.

Show me scientific proof.

I don't fly at the edges of the envelope--on that path lies
danger.

That's why pilots train stalls. Accurately knowing the signs of approaching
the danger zone gives safety.

Well figure it out- you've been wasting all of this bandwith stating that
MSFS does a coordinated turn with the AP, and now you're saying that the
ball is not centered when you make a turn?

If the ball is centered it is a coordinated turn, if not, the turn is
uncoordinated. If you were accurate in reporting the behavior of the game,
it does in fact mimic the real life situation. The AP does not command a
coordinated turn, the ball is not centered exactly during a standard rate
turn.

If this were the true behavior in the game, the MSFS model was correct, and
your interpretation was incorrect.

The simulation is grossly inaccurate in many aspects, and I have tried it
extensively. It's main value may be to practice instrument approach
procedures, but the flight model, inability to recreate the "feel" of
flying, are lacking, which is no surprise since it is not a multimillion
dollar full motion sim.

The Extra model is pathetically weak- the roll rate, stall characteristics,
ability to spin and tumble are non existent.

The game may provide satisfaction and enjoyment at many levels, but by your
own admission you have no basis of comparison to assert that it is accurate
and a realistic representation of actual flying.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com writes:

Your simulated autopilot in your simulated Baron appears to make
"coordinated turns" without using the simulated rudder because that's
how Microsoft wrote the software.

No, that's not it. That would require special coding. I can't
imagine writing special code just to simulate something that doesn't
match real life, when not writing the code would result in behavior
that _does_ match real life.

And the Baron I fly wasn't created by Microsoft.

Who cares?

the actual reason is it's not writen for pilots, it's written for idiots
like you.


Bertei

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

george writes:

Why don't you like flying real aeroplanes?

Not having piloted a real airplane, I cannot say with certainty that I
would not like it.

Irrelvevanty, you wouldn';t be able.


bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Snowbird writes:

MSFS has for a long time been known to have a rather inaccurate
flight model. MS tends to focus on the eye candy aspects of
simulation.

Which aspects are inaccurate?

All of them


bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Viperdoc writes:

OK- one more time: I fly a real Baron with an autopilot, and I can
categorically tell you that the autopilot does not command a
coordinated turn. However, the plane itself does not have a lot of
adverse yaw, and even at a standard rate turn it only goes around
half a ball into the turn on the TC. It is not noticeable by any seat
of the pants criteria.

I'm in the Baron right now. With altitude and heading hold set, the
ball moves about 3/4 out of its cage as the AP rolls into a turn, then
settles at about 1/5 of the way out of the cage during the turn. It
moves about 2/3 out of the cage as the aircraft rolls back to level
flight.

If I turn off the altitude hold, the excursions are a bit worse, and
the aircraft loses 1200 feet or so in altitude during a 90-120-degree
turn (from stable flight at 3000).

This is the way a real Baron flies, and I have been in more than a
few.

See above.

If you believe that your game is more accurate than a real plane with
a real pilot, you are more delusional than you appear.

If you believe the simulation is grossly inaccurate, you haven't tried
the simulation.

Unless you've flown a real Baron (or Extra) as well as played MSFS,
you have no basis of comparison.

My main handicap is that I don't know what the excursions of the ball
represent in terms of magnitude. The ball is pegged to the right and
left stops during even the gentlest turns on the taxiway, which
implies that it must be very sensitive, but since I have no sensation
in this sim I try to keep it centered, and that is not easy.

I'll have to practice turns with no rudder to see if I can meet or
exceed the performance of the AP.

Bwawhahwhahhwahhwhahwhahwhha1

Hey, now you're a test jerkoff!


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bob Crawford writes:

How do you substantiate your initial claim that "[Real life GA]
autopilots make coordinated turns even when they cannot control the
rudder"?

By watching the ball in the turn indicator.

You don't have a ball, you don';t have a turn indicator.

you have a computer, fjukkwit.


bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:


Paul kgyy writes:


They also start the turn rather gradually, which minimizes the
adverse yaw.

They turn quickly considering that they are not touching the rudder.
I want to know how they do it.


Tough ****, noone is going to tell you.

Unless you send me $300

You're forgetting about the $1500 pain in the ass troll charge.

MX, that's in US dollars, none of that euro crap.

On May 30, 8:25 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Crawford writes:
How do you substantiate your initial claim that "[Real life GA]
autopilots make coordinated turns even when they cannot control the
rudder"?

By watching the ball in the turn indicator. It moves far less in an AP turn
without rudder than it moves when I make a turn without rudder.

But you're watching the ball in a simulator. What's that
got to do with ANY claim about a real life GA plane?
Watch the ball in a real life plane, (or pay attention to
someone who has actually watched the ball in a
real life plane) and you'll see that autopilots that
can't control the rudder turn in the same way that
a hand-flying pilot turns when he keeps his foot
away from the rudder pedals. Generally speaking,
both will be slightly uncoordinated.

The degree of uncoordination varies from one
plane to the next, but at least in cruise, it's
normally not enough to matter too much. In
those planes where the AP can't control the
rudder, the decision was made that the
lack of coordination is not severe enough
to justify the extra expense and weight
penalty of giving the AP control over the
rudder.

Everyone's telling you the same thing -- real life
planes don't behave the way you're describing the
simulator to behave. Furthermore, the fact that
you've asked the question that started this thread
indicates you find some cognative dissonance
in the simulator's behavior on this point. It
simply doesn't make sense that an autopilot
with no rudder control could maintain coordination
in a situation where a human would require
rudder control to maintain coordination.

You have two choices: Either the simulator's
right, all the real pilots and real planes are
wrong, and there is some unexplainable
magic that allows the autopilot to maintain
coordination in a situation where rudder input
is required but not available, or else there's
no magic, real planes behave the way
real planes are observed to behave, and
the simulator is wrong on this particular
point.

It's obvious that you've made your choice
as to which alternative you want to
believe.