Steering on the taxiway

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 01:03:04 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:


As far as I can tell, the Baron has a direct connection from rudder to
nose wheel. The part I don't understand is how an aircraft can
overshoot in a turn if the rudder is connected directly to the nose
wheel. Either the wheel stays put, in which case it must skid a bit
as the aircraft continues to turn, or the nose wheel turns and forces
the rudder pedals to move in consequence (which I would not be able to
feel in a simulator). Do you know which way it works?

Hmmmm.... I have not seen any nose wheels "skid" sideways while
taxying on dry pavement.. one would have to be taxying way to fast...
I guess I would look to the sim software or a possibly misadjusted
"null" in the rudder pedal input parameters...

I'm getting better at turns. I try to anticipate enough in advance
that I don't keep turning past the centerline. Oddly enough, it seems
to be more difficult to turn on the ground than it is in the air.

Actually, this is true sometimes... Tailwheel aircraft especially....

Maintaining speed is irritating, too. Sometimes I hit it just right
and the aircraft just putts along at about 11 kts, but finding that
sweet spot consistently is difficult. And with long runways and large
airports, one is rolling about for quite a while at 11 kts.

It usually takes constant adjustment of power to maintan a constant
taxi speed. ..unless the surface is perfectly level and smooth, and it
is perfectly calm. Think about this, - a power setting produces thrust
in a calm situation, the aircraft settles in at a constant speed. The
wind gusts, impacting your plane from the front - this will reduce the
effective thrust, and add drag - you will slow down.

You have to nudge the throttle up....to compensate.



If that is your circumstance, I hope it is temporary, and you may
experience the thrill of piloting a real aircraft someday.

I hope so, too, but I'm not very optimistic at the moment.

Don't give up on it, if it is really what you want to do...

I am a pilot, have lots of hours in sims, and I am fortunate to have a
clean medical and my own plane, - at this time in my life.

I hope you didn't have to wait long.


Got lucky, could afford to start at 33, still at it , now 58.....


Hmm. It seems so slow. How about 11 knots? I go faster than that on
a bicycle ... why do aircraft have to taxi so slowly?

11 knots is fast. Notice , few aircraft tires have a tread suitable
for traction on other than dry, hard surface runways... and the
landing gear/steering geometry is not set up to handle turns at
higher speeds...

Some have a narrow track, and will tip easily and scrape a wingtip,
or worse...

For large aircraft, even more caution.. many tons of aircraft will
NOT stop on a dime!

One of my hangar mates is an "Alpha Jet" ,- out weighs my car by 4
times, has 1/3 of the rubber friction surface of the 4 car tires.

Dave

Dave writes:

Hmmmm.... I have not seen any nose wheels "skid" sideways while
taxying on dry pavement.. one would have to be taxying way to fast...
I guess I would look to the sim software or a possibly misadjusted
"null" in the rudder pedal input parameters...

Since the overshoot has to be explicitly simulated, I assume that it
corresponds to some real-world behavior of the aircraft, but I'm not
sure of the details.

Don't give up on it, if it is really what you want to do...

There are many obstacles right now.

11 knots is fast. Notice , few aircraft tires have a tread suitable
for traction on other than dry, hard surface runways... and the
landing gear/steering geometry is not set up to handle turns at
higher speeds...

Points taken.

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

"Dave" wrote

I am having some difficulty understanding why some here find it
necessary to chastize you for being a "sim" pilot. I know some local
"sim" pilots who would love to do the real thing, but are unable for
various reasons.

Have you read any of the FADEC thread? The stuff he makes up is out of the
realm of reasonable. He continues to back it up, as being the truth.

He has made claim to designing systems like FADEC, but will not say what. He
does not understand the most basic of things that would be necessary for a
person to design anything like a FADEC..

He asks a question, then when given a good answer by a pilot, questions it, and
gives reasons why it is the wrong answer.

He does not want to fly a real plane. He finds them dangerous, and pilots on
the whole incompetent.

You can get questions from a different reasonable reader. Not this guy, if you
want this group to remain health. He is a troll, plain and simple. Go over to
the sim group, and ask about him. They ran him off, over there.

If you continue to respond to this guy, and can not see why that is a problem,
you are part of the problem.
--
Jim in NC

In article , says...

You can get questions from a different reasonable reader. Not this guy, if
you
want this group to remain healthy. He is a troll, plain and simple. Go over
to
the sim group, and ask about him. They ran him off, over there.




How did they get rid of him?
Can they give us some instruction?

In article , Greg Farris
wrote:

You can get questions from a different reasonable reader. Not this guy, if
you
want this group to remain healthy. He is a troll, plain and simple. Go
over
to
the sim group, and ask about him. They ran him off, over there.

How did they get rid of him?
Can they give us some instruction?

How did we get rid of the fish that shall not be named?

What happened to the long island looney bird?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Bob Noel wrote in
:

In article , Greg Farris
wrote:

You can get questions from a different reasonable reader. Not this
guy, if
you
want this group to remain healthy. He is a troll, plain and simple.
Go over
to
the sim group, and ask about him. They ran him off, over there.

How did they get rid of him?
Can they give us some instruction?

Maybe we should all just go over to the sim group and leave him here all by
himself.

How did we get rid of the fish that shall not be named?

Dumping Nuclear Waste in the water?

What happened to the long island looney bird?

Shot 'em all?

"Greg Farris" wrote

How did they get rid of him?
Can they give us some instruction?

Everyone quit responding to him.

We still have members here that think it is worthwhile to answer him, and
continue threads with his insertions.

He will not leave, until nobody will play with him.
--
Jim in NC

Dave wrote in
:

....for the record..I find your questions here to be reasonable and
the (correct) answers posted will be of some value to You and the
many who lurk here..

Most of Manic's questions seem to start off in that direction, true. But he
frequently hunts down a way to turn it into an argument, even when he gets
an answer that is accurate. Often he simply states that the answer cannot
be correct because it doesn't work that way for him in the sim, or because
he has some preconceived notion that itself may be inaccurate. Other times
he will find some minor detail within the response that is refutable, and
take immediate action to refute it in an attempt to discredit the entire
post. It's disingenuous, inflammatory, and it is not interesting to pilots
on this newsgroup.

He continues to repeat the same pattern over and over again. Many of us
gave him the benefit of the doubt for too long a time.

I am having some difficulty understanding why some here find it
necessary to chastize you for being a "sim" pilot. I know some local
"sim" pilots who would love to do the real thing, but are unable for
various reasons.

No one is chastising him just for being a Sim pilot. What we are chastising
him for being a troll.

If that is your circumstance, I hope it is temporary, and you may
experience the thrill of piloting a real aircraft someday.

He has indicated that he has neither the money nor the interest to actually
pilot a real plane. He has disdain for pilots and believes flying to be too
risky. I am convinced that his entire purpose on this newsgroup is to
improve his own ego by demonstrating how well he can manipulate the "elite
pilots" on this newsgroup.

Ignore the rants, there are some here that will answer your question
properly and correctly..

But that won't stop him from arguing with them, either.

Judah writes:

Most of Manic's questions seem to start off in that direction, true. But he
frequently hunts down a way to turn it into an argument, even when he gets
an answer that is accurate. Often he simply states that the answer cannot
be correct because it doesn't work that way for him in the sim, or because
he has some preconceived notion that itself may be inaccurate. Other times
he will find some minor detail within the response that is refutable, and
take immediate action to refute it in an attempt to discredit the entire
post. It's disingenuous, inflammatory, and it is not interesting to pilots
on this newsgroup.

Not really--but it's injurious to pilot egos, and for some pilots,
that overrides every other consideration.

Do you really expect me to accept every answer I get unconditionally?
I can't even get coherent answers from more than one person at a time
in some cases. The answers are contradictory, or bizarre, or conflict
with other sources I've consulted. I'm not stupid enough to just
swallow whatever I'm given. I may actually have to apply this
knowledge someday.

I have _consistently_ found that people who know exactly what they are
talking about can explain every answer they give in exhausting,
grueling detail if necessary. Furthermore, they can do it without
becoming defensive or emotional, and without insulting whoever asked
the question. Some people here may think that they are valiantly
defending their egos and honor when they fly off the handle and whine
like children. In fact, I'm just drawing a line through their names.
They can't explain their answers, and they get antsy when anyone
questions them--these two behaviors combined are an extremely strong
indicator that they simply don't know what they are talking about.

No one is chastising him just for being a Sim pilot.

Some people are. It's an ego issue, again.

He has indicated that he has neither the money nor the interest to actually
pilot a real plane. He has disdain for pilots and believes flying to be too
risky.

I haven't the money or time to fly. The medical requirements are
(unnecessarily) strict. Given all this, the obstacles to flying are
simply too high to make it a consideration. Perhaps if they didn't
exist, I might be more willing to try it out.

I don't have a disdain for pilots, only for stupid people.
Unfortunately, being a pilot doesn't prevent someone from being
stupid.

Flying _is_ risky--the numbers prove it. It's not necessarily risky
enough to avoid, but pretending that GA is as safe as stepping onto an
airliner is deliberately and dramatically misleading.

I am convinced that his entire purpose on this newsgroup is to
improve his own ego by demonstrating how well he can manipulate the "elite
pilots" on this newsgroup.

It's easy to manipulate people; it doesn't provide much for the ego.
And I can't say that I've seen much in the way of elite pilots on this
newsgroup. I've seen some who I'd say know a lot more than others,
but I won't name names.

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Do you really expect me to accept every answer I get unconditionally?

No. Yet you seem to expect the rest of the group to accept every answer you
give unconditionally, even when you do not include sources, citations,
relevant experiences, or any other forms of support for your ideas.

I can't even get coherent answers from more than one person at a time
in some cases. The answers are contradictory, or bizarre, or conflict
with other sources I've consulted. I'm not stupid enough to just
swallow whatever I'm given. I may actually have to apply this
knowledge someday.

Clearly not all pilots have the same opinions about all things. And
certainly, as pilots posting on a newsgroup, not all answers are accurate.

No one would fault you for asking for more details or for support regarding
an answer that you received. But many of your responses seem to be
inflammatory, belittling the people who tried to genuinely help you.

I have _consistently_ found that people who know exactly what they are
talking about can explain every answer they give in exhausting,
grueling detail if necessary. Furthermore, ...

If you really only wanted correct answers, you would read the appropriate
documentation. Some of your questions evidence the likelihood that you may
have read the documentation, and are specifically looking to bait pilots so
you can prove that pilots are humans who make mistakes.

I haven't the money or time to fly. The medical requirements are
(unnecessarily) strict. Given all this, the obstacles to flying are
simply too high to make it a consideration. Perhaps if they didn't
exist, I might be more willing to try it out.

I'm not sure what the rules are in France, but in the US, you can fly
certain types of aircraft with little or no licensing or medical
requirements... Perhaps there is something similar in France. The cost to
fly these types of planes is also lower.
However, disregarding your current income and medical situation (which
perhaps could change someday), you have made comments implying or
indicating that you have no interest in flying anything other than a sim.
So I have trouble believing your last statement.

I don't have a disdain for pilots, only for stupid people.
Unfortunately, being a pilot doesn't prevent someone from being
stupid.

Stupid people can increase their intelligence through learning.

Flying _is_ risky--the numbers prove it.

There are _many_ things in life that are risky.

It's easy to manipulate people; it doesn't provide much for the ego.

So then why do you keep doing it?