Stick and Rudder's 'Safety plane'

Ernest Christley misfired the following:

I'm about halfway through this book. It is quite an eye opener. The
author's explanations seem so insightful, cogent and complete. However,
there's this one blemish. Printed in 1944, the author makes the claim
that the rudder will disappear in just a few years, as it is only there
to cover the designer's mistakes. He also goes into detail about
designing an airplane that won't stall by using mechanical stops to
limit the angle of attack, and one that eliminates the need for rudder
pedals by tying the rudder to the stick so that the turn to bank
automatically produces the correct rudder action.

I began reading this book specifically because it got so much praise in
so many post in this group. Obviously, there are a lot of others here
who believe the author has a lot of flying wisdom to share. Yet, all
the airplanes I've seen have rudders and rudder pedals. Furthermore,
they all allow you to pull the airplane back into a stall.

Why?

If the ideas expressed in the book are so simple and effective, why
aren't they used?

I asked this because all of the author's other explanations seem so
insightful, cogent and complete. I feel I now have a deeper
understanding of several phases of flight. But his complete misfire on
this rudder thing has me stumped.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Complete misfire....?

Yoo Hoo, Ernest...
You are the one who is "misfiring" on every count. ;o)

You have precisely described the ubiquitous ERCOUPE.
http://ercoupe.com/couphist.htm


Barnyard BOb - RV3 driver and Ercoupe aficionado

The Ercoupe was the only airplane where all of the ideas in "Stick and
Rudder" were implemented. The rudderless Ercoupe was not a complete success;
many of them have since been modified by adding rudders. The ideas in "Stick
and Rudder" also influenced the development of several other aircraft,
including the Cessna 172. Fortunately, the Cessna Aircraft Company had some
genuine engineers working for it; they managed to keep the wierd stuff out
of it. I regard the Cessna tricycle gear line as the best implementation of
Langewiesche's ideas, if not the most complete. More modern attempts to
create stall-resistant aircraft include the Cirrus and Lancair.

Fans of the Ercoupe claim it will not stall. This is only a half-truth at
best. The Ercoupe can be maneuvered into a stall. It can also develop a
remarkably high sink rate that is a pretty darned good substitute for a
stall. The Cirrus and Lancair will stall as well, as has been demonstrated a
few times. The Cirrus will not recover from a spin, but it can be forced to
enter one.

"Stick and Rudder" is not the revealed word of God on the subject of
aviation. There are mistakes in it, as well as some rather odd theories. The
bit about the rudder is just one of them. In fact, the aerodynamics
throughout the book are more than a little suspect. Neverhtheless,
Langewiesche makes some good points. He was often right in what should be
done, but just as often wrong in how. It is obvious that Langewiesche
understood almost nothing about how air flows around an airfoil. He knew
that airplanes stall when they rich a critical angle of attack, but I see
little evidence that he understood why that is so.

There are better books about flying. "Stick and Rudder" is valuable for its
historical insights into the development of modern aircraft, but little
else.

"C J Campbell" wrote:

The Ercoupe was the only airplane where all of the ideas in "Stick and
Rudder" were implemented. The rudderless Ercoupe was not a complete success;
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And your point is what....
You like Cezznas?

Me too.
The Citations are lovely this time of year.

P.S.
You and I traveled the Ercoupe road last December.
Others can look it all up in google, if interested.


Barnyard BOb -- there are no COMPLETE successes

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
The Cirrus will not recover from a spin,

Sure it will, just pull the red handle :-)

"Barnyard BOb --" wrote in message
...
|
| P.S.
| You and I traveled the Ercoupe road last December.
| Others can look it all up in google, if interested.

I tried looking that thread up myself, but I couldn't find it.

I wonder what the Ercoupe would be like today if development had continued?
I never bought the argument that the Ercoupe was "too easy to fly," there
being no such thing.

Alon also made a float-equipped Ercoupe, but I don't know if any of these
planes still exist, nor do I know how the floats affected their useful load,
how they taxied, etc. I would love to see one.

Barnyard BOb -- wrote:
Ernest Christley misfired the following:

I asked this because all of the author's other explanations seem so
insightful, cogent and complete. I feel I now have a deeper
understanding of several phases of flight. But his complete misfire on
this rudder thing has me stumped.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Complete misfire....?

Yoo Hoo, Ernest...
You are the one who is "misfiring" on every count. ;o)

You have precisely described the ubiquitous ERCOUPE.
http://ercoupe.com/couphist.htm


Barnyard BOb - RV3 driver and Ercoupe aficionado

So these concepts are so important that the author goes on and on about
them, and there is exactly one plane that implements the concepts. I
would call that a misfire.

Never flown an Ercoupe, though I have seen one. The author even
mentions it in the book later on (past what I have read so far). But if
the ideas are so great, why aren't they used in every new design?
--
----Because I can----
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
------------------------

Jim Harper wrote:
Much excellent commentary snipped...


"Stick and Rudder" is not the revealed word of God on the subject of
aviation. There are mistakes in it, as well as some rather odd theories. The
bit about the rudder is just one of them. In fact, the aerodynamics
throughout the book are more than a little suspect. Neverhtheless,
Langewiesche makes some good points. He was often right in what should be
done, but just as often wrong in how. It is obvious that Langewiesche
understood almost nothing about how air flows around an airfoil. He knew
that airplanes stall when they rich a critical angle of attack, but I see
little evidence that he understood why that is so.

There are better books about flying. "Stick and Rudder" is valuable for its
historical insights into the development of modern aircraft, but little
else.


There are, no doubt, many other folks on this newsgroup who can better
address these issues, but I feel as if I should comment:

elevator limitation to prevent stalls. Nope, won't work. Well, not

snip

drop the nose. Another way of looking at it: Limiting elevator
authority to prevent stalls is similar to limiting steering in cars to
avoid roll-over. We cause a bigger problem than we are correcting.

aileron/rudder interconnect. Sure, you can do it. You can even

snip

Jim

So, I should just read it as I would read the diatribe of any
revolutionary thinker. Revelutionaries see problems with the status
quo, and see that the truth lies in a different direction. The problem
lies in their depth perception, so they tend to overshoot the mark. The
truth tends to lie somewhere between here and where they think it should be.

One of the problems, I think, is that "Stick and Rudder" was written in
1944. From the responses I've read, things HAVE moved toward
Langewiesche's ideas, even though they've not been taken at face value.

I still like the book. It explains much that I've experienced while
flying and found the instructors explanations lacking. But if there are
other ideas that are a little, shall we say 'overbaked', then I'd
appreciate a heads up.


--
----Because I can----
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
------------------------

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 03:24:49 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote:

I'm about halfway through this book. It is quite an eye opener. The
author's explanations seem so insightful, cogent and complete. However,
there's this one blemish. Printed in 1944, the author makes the claim
that the rudder will disappear in just a few years, as it is only there
to cover the designer's mistakes. He also goes into detail about
designing an airplane that won't stall by using mechanical stops to
limit the angle of attack, and one that eliminates the need for rudder
pedals by tying the rudder to the stick so that the turn to bank
automatically produces the correct rudder action.

The rudder has other uses besides correcting for yaw when the airplane
is banked. It also corrects for P-factor during takeoff and climb and
is needed to hold the airplane straight when power is reduced for
descent.

In addition, it comes in REAL handy during crosswind landings when you
cross control to hold the airplane straight while holding a wing down
into the crosswind.

Corky Scott

Hi Mr. C.J. Campbell:

Come by row 16 at Arlington. I'll give you all the straight scoop
on Ercoupes.

The one float equipped Ercoupe lost an aileron due to flutter during spin
testing.
The pilot bailed out and thus ended the float equipped Ercoupe.

Yes indeed you can stall an Ercoupe, yes indeed you can develop a dangerous
sink rate. Yes indeed they come over the fence quite a bit faster than other
planes of similar gross weight.

Yes indeed they can handle a cross wind component that leaves many other
planes on the ground,
Yes indeed they can cruise at 105-115 mph for 4 hours. Yes indeed they are a
fun responsive airplane
to fly. Yes indeed there are a lot of Ercoupe nuts around. G

There are some disadvantages to Ercoupes, however this is true of any of the
comparable planes
of the era.

By the way, there are 3 flavors of Ercoupe. The 2 control version where the
rudders are connected
to a mixer along with the ailerons and no pedals are installed. Next is one
with rudder pedals. The nose
wheel however is still connected to the control wheel. Last is a
conventional 3 control airplane. I'm sure
we'll have an example of all 3 versions at AWO again this year.

I feel that the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. The plum is it's
x-wind characteristics.
I hardly ever worry about the wind sock. I just crab and land--a piece of
cake.

I sure would have to change my technique if I went back to my old Champ. G

I'm the region 3 director of the Ercoupe Owners Club and WX allowing will be
at Arlington row 16 Wednesday and will camp all week.

Please stop by and we'll bore you to tears with Ercoupe facts and factoids.

Cheers:

Paul Anton
NC2273H---- yellow wing, blue fuselage 0-200 equipped 415D

"Paul" wrote...
snip
Please stop by and we'll bore you to tears with Ercoupe facts and
factoids.

But they don't come with bigger cockpits and engines...