Leading Turns With Rudder

On Jul 21, 9:53*am, sisu1a wrote:
. He holds little value of MYopinion, so I
was hoping to get some 'name brand' opinions to help my case. And if I
am just putting to much into this, I would rather hear it from this
group.

Well lots have jumped in with feet first but I was taught, and used to
teach, stick and rudder together.

I have to agree though with those that say do what ever it takes to
make the glider do what you want it to. For student pilots that's
usually to keep the yaw string centered entering, exiting, and while
established in, a turn.

I have flown lots of glider types but most of my experience is in
single place Schleichers. I never lead with rudder to roll my 28, nor
did I with my 19. (except when flying rudder only when the hands were
busy with something else)

I received my initial glider training in UK but first soloed in US.

Andy (not a brand name)

I feel compelled at this point to add that this guy does not promote
stomping the rudder or other outwardly unsafe flying habits and is
absolutely fanatical about keeping the string straight, to the point
of obnoxiousness. He would not accept my explanation of mildly
slipping during thermaling ala' Holighaus/Johnson on a flight last
year, outright rejecting it on principal (he was sure I read the
article wrong or remembered it incorrectly).

I also want to add that my concern is geared toward what ab-initio
students should or should not be taught, as it is very hard to unlearn
something, no matter how wrong. As far as I understand the human
brain, it will most likely revert to these early lessons when/if a
'situation' arises and stress levels are very high.

I certainly don't think he should have his ticket yanked by any means,
I just have my own reservations about the soundness of *possibly*
instilling reflexes into people that can potentially be dangerous if
reverted to at an inopportune moment. This forum seems like a good
place for this discussion, to see how others more qualified than I
weigh in on the subject before making it a campaign and I thank
everyone thus far for their thoughtful responses.

-Paul

"sisu1a" wrote in message
...
I feel compelled at this point to add that this guy does not promote
stomping the rudder or other outwardly unsafe flying habits and is
absolutely fanatical about keeping the string straight, to the point
of obnoxiousness. He would not accept my explanation of mildly
slipping during thermaling ala' Holighaus/Johnson on a flight last
year, outright rejecting it on principal (he was sure I read the
article wrong or remembered it incorrectly).

I also want to add that my concern is geared toward what ab-initio
students should or should not be taught, as it is very hard to unlearn
something, no matter how wrong. As far as I understand the human
brain, it will most likely revert to these early lessons when/if a
'situation' arises and stress levels are very high.

I certainly don't think he should have his ticket yanked by any means,
I just have my own reservations about the soundness of *possibly*
instilling reflexes into people that can potentially be dangerous if
reverted to at an inopportune moment. This forum seems like a good
place for this discussion, to see how others more qualified than I
weigh in on the subject before making it a campaign and I thank
everyone thus far for their thoughtful responses.

-Paul

I'm uncomfortable with teaching "lead with rudder" to primary students. In
fact, aerodynamically, there is no need for rudder until adverse yaw
manifests itself so both rudder and aileron should be applied
simultaneously.

Where this idea comes from, I think, is that it often FEELS like rudder
input needs to come first. This is because most people move their feet
slower than their hands. If your brain tells your hands and feet to move at
the same time, the hands will move first. If you consiously try to move
your feet a fraction of a second before your hands, it's likely they will
move at nearly the same time.

The problem with "institutionalizing" the rudder-first idea is that as
pilots gain experience, their hands and feet will start moving in
synchronization leading to real rudder first action and inadvertant skidding
turn entries.

I tell students to move the rudder and ailerons at the same time but to
expect that, at first, their sluggish feet reactions will make it feel as if
they need to use the rudder first. Later, when they have more experience,
it will feel like they are moving them at the same time.

So much for inadvertant skiding turn entries. It is actually an advantage
to deliberately skid turn entries with some gliders. If the glider has a
lot of dihedral, there will be a strong yaw-to-roll coupling effect which
adds to the roll effect from the ailerons. Slightly skidding the turn
entries with my Nimbus 2C will cut a second off the 45 degree right bank to
45 degree left bank turn reversal which is significant in a 20m glider.

BTW, the effect of the Holinghaus/Johnson slipping turn is not to achieve
"fuselage lift" but to use the dihedral yaw to roll coupling to hold off
overbanking while keeping the ailerons centered. Centered ailerons keeps
the wing profile intact tip to tip resulting in a greater rate of climb. It
also has the added safety benefit that if the glider stalls it is likely to
drop the high wing giving the pilot an additional second or so to recover
wings level.

Bill D

At 02:56 22 July 2008, Bill Daniels wrote: (Snip)

I'm uncomfortable with teaching "lead with rudder" to primary
students.
In
fact, aerodynamically, there is no need for rudder until adverse yaw
manifests itself so both rudder and aileron should be applied
simultaneously.


Bill D


So am I and I personally have never done that. I have pointed out to post
solo pilots that the technique of leading with the rudder on some gliders
(Grob103 in particular) will clean up the entry to a turn where it is
intended to use large aileron input, it seems prevent the adverse yaw
starting. It is not necessary for "normal" turn entry. I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.

At 09:41 22 July 2008, Don Johnstone wrote:
I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.


It may not be necessary Don, but it is effective. How many competitions
have you won in your ASWs (of any type)?

At 20:56 22 July 2008, Jim White wrote:
At 09:41 22 July 2008, Don Johnstone wrote:
I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.


It may not be necessary Don, but it is effective. How many competitions
have you won in your ASWs (of any type)?

Jim, what's this got to do with argument? A BGA National Coach said of
one top UK competition glider pilot "The only time the slip ball is ever
in the middle is as it crashes from one side to the other!" Top
competition pilots are very good at knowing WHERE to fly to find the best
lift and do not necessarily have to have perfect handling skills.

Del Copeland

Nonsense...if you don't fly the glider efficiently you won't climb or
glide well and you certainly won't win. Accurate flying is fundamental to
XC speed.

btw Don, the W in ASW is Waibel. duh

At 06:11 23 July 2008, Derek Copeland wrote:

Jim, what's this got to do with argument? A BGA National Coach said of
one top UK competition glider pilot "The only time the slip ball is
ever
in the middle is as it crashes from one side to the other!" Top
competition pilots are very good at knowing WHERE to fly to find the
best
lift and do not necessarily have to have perfect handling skills.

Del Copeland

At 09:41 22 July 2008, Don Johnstone wrote:
I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.


It may not be necessary Don, but it is effective. How many competitions
have you won in your ASWs (of any type)?

At 20:56 22 July 2008, Jim White wrote:
At 09:41 22 July 2008, Don Johnstone wrote:
I have never
found it necessary on a ASW glider of any type.


It may not be necessary Don, but it is effective. How many competitions
have you won in your ASWs (of any type)?

What has that got to do with anything. I was commenting on the handling
properties. Gliders designed by Weber, the W of ASW tend to be very well
co-ordinated and do not require any strange rudder input. This was
certainly true of the ASW17 and all the smaller ASWs, sadly I cannot
comment on the ASW22. I would say that leading with rudder where it is not
necessary is in-efficient and could delay achieving a constant turn rate.
On the other hand flying a Grob 103 and avoiding adverse yaw with large
aileron inputs was a different matter, leading with rudder led to a much
more clean entry. The other two main types I have flown a lot the Discus
and LS8 did not require leading with rudder, and in my experience neither
did the ASK21.

I might not have won any comps but I have been an instructor for over 40
years and I am still walking about, must have done something right.

I love how some pilots are so bull-headed and opinionated about exact
procedures. The whole point of receiving training is to develop
skills and JUDGEMENT about the best course of action under different
circumstances! As a glider pilot who flies a landing-pattern full of
semi-subjective criteria, you ought to KNOW that each case is unique.

All of these people huffing and puffing about what you "must" do or
"can't" do or what's "always" right or wrong are missing the whole
point. You have to remain flexible and treat each situation as a
unique one - giving it full consideration and taking into account all
of the variables (no matter how they come at you).

Here's a recent situation in my club that illustrates how poorly
blanket rules work:

I acquired a DG-300. I've never flown one, but I love them and have
sat in a few on the ground. I owned a Russia for a year before
upgrading. This year I put nearly 20 hours into flying an LS-4 at
Minden, plus some time in a Discus, SZD-55, and even a couple of short
flights in a Mini-Nimbus. I studied hard but was flatly REFUSED the
chance to fly with my club the first week I had the glider, because
the club was operating out of a remote airfield. A CFIG at the field
swore it was unsafe for me (a "low time" pilot) to fly a new aircraft
the first time at a "dangerous" airfield (even though I'd flown there
several times before). He would not take into account my preparation,
judgement, or the currency of my skills - he relied on blanket rules
and judged me on my total time.

So what happened the very next week? An extremely skilled former
airline pilot with thousands of hours was allowed to take up a club
ship. He's a friendly and helpful person who I like very much - but
he's been out of the area for most of a year. It is questionable
whether our club guidelines on currency were checked before he flew.
He landed a club glider short of the field and twisted it up
(thankfully no injuries) - AT OUR HOME AIRFIELD. Meanwhile, I was in
the desert at another remote strip that I'd flown at only once
before. I put almost 10 hours on my new glider in 1 weekend, racking
up a lot of safe miles.

Bottom line: Blanket rules don't work, and no one is immune from bad
judgement or poor preparation no matter their location, age, or past
experience.

You MUST be prepared and you MUST exercise good judgement in ALL
phases of your flying (pre-flight preparation through post-flight
storage) - and those are the ONLY criteria that matter in the end.
GOOD instructors (of which there are far too few) need to be teaching
those things, not hard-and-fast rules or robotic procedures to be
followed to the letter. Good instructors should also be judging
pilots NOT just on how they follow a checklist or repeat a set of
steps they've been shown; but rather how the pilot reacts to different
circumstances and exercises good judgement and decision-making.

If a pilot (be it a student or a veteran) can't show good judgement
and timely decision-making, they have no business being Pilot In
Command.

I would argue that by the time you take your check-ride, you should
understand the aerodynamics and physics of your aircraft well enough
to know safe inputs from unsafe control inputs. How ONE particular
aircraft responds to those inputs and what makes it fly best is a set
of judgements (...there's that word again...) that you can only
develop with understanding and experience.

--Noel
[rant over]