It can be ok to use the rudder to nudge the plane's heading around a bit in level cruise. Watch the Turn Coordinator... if you aren't moving the ball out of the center, you probably are not overusing the rudder. If the ball is moving, you need to be using the ailerons and rudder together.

 

You can do it, but it is a very bad habit to have. Using the rudder to turn the aircraft means you are in a skid. If the skid is very small and you are in cruise flight you aren't going to get in trouble. On the other hand if you are slow and/or banked you are setting yourself up for a sudden entry into a spin.

 

I had the opportunity to perform this for training. It is abrupt and there is no warning in a 172. One sec you're upright and uncoordinated, the next you're rolling over and entering the spin. This is not good in a tight space!

 

Ok, thanks! Constantly applying a little rudder is of course the same as using the rudder trim... So I guess the main thing I have to watch out for is that the ball stays around center. I simply like keeping my feet on the rudder for small corrections... But as soon as I start to really turn, I will do it the official way: aileron with rudder to keep the turn coordinated.

When I flew a C-152, and 172, I used to practice flying with just the rudder pedals for directional control

 

My instructor taught me how to turn a 150 by opening and closing the doors. He also showed me how to change pitch by moving our seats back and forth. One time he took-off, flew the pattern and landed using only throttle and rudder. He was an old barnstorming airshow pilot and knew lots of cool things. He use to say, "Planes don't kill pilots. Pilots kill planes." Another one he was found of was "Only the pilot knows how high off the ground the plane is."

 

Back on topic. I've broken out the old steering wheel and I'm going to set up the pedals to see if I find it more immerse.

When I am flying low and slow through a valley I only use rudder to correct my heading or to make small turns, so without ever touching the aileron

 

That would be a skidding turn, which is part of the recipe for a cross-control stall. Like Oracle said... a bad habit should you choose to fly in actual aircraft.

 

I will do it the official way: aileron with rudder to keep the turn coordinated.

 

"correct way"... use bank to turn the plane and rudder to keep the turn coordinated (ball centered).

 

I would never... ever... teach someone to change heading with rudder alone (assuming all our controls are working). Skidding turns in the pattern can kill.

 

Constantly applying a little rudder is of course the same as using the rudder trim...

 

Level flight @ cruise the plane should have rudder trimmed out (ball centered). I cannot ever think of a situation of a properly rigged airplane (the few types I have flown) where I was fiddling with rudder trim. Even in a twin practicing engine out maneuvers (whether at altitude or in the pattern) I never messed with the rudder trim.

 

Edit: the Stumpwiz listed two very interesting uses of rudder trim (http://forum.avsim.net/topic/375817-new-to-flight-having-a-slight-problem/page__st__25__hl__acm#entry2386297)

I use my pedals all the time. When I'm not using them for flying they make great foot-rests for regular computing. They help me concentrate when I'm working on a music or spreadsheet project. :Peace:

My understanding was that *turns* were done with coordinated aileron and rudder, while small corrections to keep on a course were normally done with just rudder. This didn't always make sense to me, and didn't work well in flight sims. It still doesn't work well in Flight except for the Maule, which can be controlled quite well without ailerons... just keep your rudder corrections subtle.

 

My use of rudder pedals in flight simming goes back at least as far as the A10 Cuba! game. In those days the rudders were used mainly for taxiing, not much during flight. I got the CH Pro Pedals to use them for car racing games as well, so flight simming use was a bonus.

 

I think one reason a lot of people haven't used rudder pedals much is that many times aircraft in flight sims simply don't exhibit any adverse yaw. This includes even good payware aircraft: the Carenado Cessna C337 Skymaster has absolutely no adverse yaw; the numbers in the air file are zeros. I know we have some 337 pilots here, perhaps someone can tell us how much adverse yaw the real 337 has.

 

Hook

I remember my 1/2A radio control days (.049 engines!), flying with only a rudder and elevator, and still doing some pretty radical aerobatics. The dihedral in the wing helped a lot.

I know we have some 337 pilots here, perhaps someone can tell us how much adverse yaw the real 337 has.

 

I've only got wrench time on the Mixmaster... but stories go you can lose the rear engine and not immediately realize it has failed (as opposed to what would happen with a winged-engined twin).

 

while small corrections to keep on a course were normally done with just rudder

 

You know... I have heard this also Hook... I just see it as improper technique that can lead to a very bad habit (that could lead to a heartbreak situation). I use very small bank, like 5° for small heading changes... small gentle corrections on the ILS e.g.

 

 

Edit: and just to be a little persnickity here... adverse yaw is due to aileron movement... used to be i.e. the "older" planes you would bank say right, and the left aileron would create more drag than the right dragging the nose left.

 

I had the opportunity to perform this for training. It is abrupt and there is no warning in a 172. One sec you're upright and uncoordinated, the next you're rolling over and entering the spin.

 

Ah... ok.. I have done only in the Chipmunk... so you know how quickly it happens. And in the pattern... not expecting... odds of recovery are next to nil.

I think one reason a lot of people haven't used rudder pedals much is that many times aircraft in flight sims simply don't exhibit any adverse yaw. This includes even good payware aircraft: the Carenado Cessna C337 Skymaster has absolutely no adverse yaw; the numbers in the air file are zeros. I know we have some 337 pilots here, perhaps someone can tell us how much adverse yaw the real 337 has.

 

Most prop aircraft require almost no rudder under normal operation, rudder being used sometimes only during takeoffs and landings, and some high power steep climbs.

 

In my area the use of rudder is, quite on the contrary, almost allways mandatory - gliders are really prone to adverse yaw!

The yaw string is a great "instrument" we use to help coordinate our turns, and sometimes during tight thermal turns I find myself crossing controls to mantain coordination. This can be easily explained...

 

When I took a few lessons on a ULM (P90) I found I was tempted to use rudder, when it really wasn't required at all. The turn-coordinator really liked a lot more the kind of feet on floor technique :-)

 

On a simulator with a glider model, behaviour regarding the use of rudder, adverse yaw, roll moment due to roll rate, aileron authority during sidelsip, etc... are the mandatory tests I run. Some simulators and add-on gliders fail completely at reproducing such characteristics...

 

I believe the real RV6 is a "feet on floor" type of aircraft, while the Maule will probably exhibit some adverse yaw requiring rudder input for turn coordination.

Most prop aircraft require almost no rudder under normal operation, rudder being used sometimes only during takeoffs and landings, and some high power steep climbs.

 

The Cessna 152 required right rudder during high power climbing (and slow flight, iirc), left rudder during low power descending, and normal turn coordination. During level flight the rudder was centered. I thought this was pretty standard from what I've read. I know that some aircraft will have more or less adverse yaw due to various design differences.

 

You know... I have heard this also Hook... I just see it as improper technique that can lead to a very bad habit

 

It may have been what was taught in the early 70s, or something taught by local instructors (possibly due to having learned it from the same CFII). It didn't work for me very well in the 152, but I didn't have enough hours to practise it at the time.

 

Hook

The Cessna 152 required right rudder during high power climbing (and slow flight, iirc), left rudder during low power descending, and normal turn coordination. During level flight the rudder was centered. I thought this was pretty standard from what I've read.

 

"Exactamente". Btw... don't keep that ball centered (w/ right rudder) during a power-on stall and watch how quick the nose will whip to the left at the stall break. The Carenado C152 doesn't do it justice. :Big Grin:

 

It may have been what was taught in the early 70s, or something taught by local instructors

 

Now that I think about it... maybe this comes from something used in the Air Force... seems to me this is something used for the T-38. Col. Bob Scott around to square us away?

Btw... don't keep that ball centered (w/ right rudder) during a power-on stall and watch how quick the nose will whip to the left at the stall break. The Carenado C152 doesn't do it justice.

 

I never even looked at the ball. This was early enough in my instruction that the CFI didn't even mention instruments. I just kept the nose straight by looking over the cowl. Stalls were no problem whatsoever for me for some reason. Left wing break off, yoke forward, quick correction, back climbing in a couple of seconds. My best friend had lessons in a Piper Cub, and it was interesting comparing notes.

 

Why the hell would I want a payware C152 anyway? Just because I happened to have a couple of hours in one 40 years ago? And given the amount of tweaking I had to do on the C337, it just wouldn't be worth the effort.

 

Oh yes... the C337. When I was taking lessons, I wanted a plastic model to visualize some of the forces on the plane. The only thing I could find that was even close was a Skymaster. I ended up falling in love with that plane, and bought it as soon as it was available from Carenado. I think the Carenado version even had the same color scheme as the plastic model, which I had fully painted.

 

Hook

I just kept the nose straight by looking over the cowl.

 

That is the way to do it... keeping the wings level with the rudder. As a (nervous ehem... concerned) instructor my eyes occasionally peak at that inclinometer. But it is a good thing to point out to the student... just because a good instructor harps on keeping one's eyes outside, doesn't mean an occasional reference to an instrument will not provide some kind of useful information.

 

Why the hell would I want a payware C152 anyway? Just because I happened to have a couple of hours in one 40 years ago?

 

Dunno. I didn't fly it (an actual C152) until I started using it to instruct in... and I thoroughly enjoy the gorgeous model from Carenado (from time to time). Isn't that what this is about? Fun? Diversity?

• Pedals are more realistic - that's what you find in real airplanes.
  
• You need rudder not only to turn coordinated, but also to avoid to turn when the airplane would like to do it on its own. P-factor, slipstream and gyroscopic effect all try to turn the airplane and need some rudder to keep it straight. The latter happens on tailsitters when the tail lifts (guess the Carbon Cub should simulate it). Rudder trim may be useful in a climb, but not in "transient" effects.The strenght of those forces depends on the airplane design, and in simulators on your "realism" settings.
  
• Flight has no multiengine airplanes yet, so you don't need rudder to fly without one engine. Whenever it will introduce them and properly simulate one engine failure pedals are far better to control rudder than a joystick in such situation.
  

If my Wife didn't use this computer, I would have them hooked up forever. However, since she gets on this computer throughout the day, I'm sick and tired of unhooking my yoke and pedals. I use my Microsoft FF2 joystick exclusively, and I look forward to the day that FLIGHT gives me forcefeedback response. Coupled with Russell Dirks' Force Feedback program, I am unable to fly enjoyably without the force I feel when taxiing, taking off, and landing.

Stan

 

ps. why hasn't anyone marketed a "force feedback yoke"?

I used to fly a '46 Ercoupe and I can tell you, I was glad it was converted to rudder pedals. Everyone I knew at the time that had Ercoupes had converted. With the coordinated controls, it had some funny handling particularly in crosswind landings and taxiing.

 

As for rudder pedals in Flight, I use them the same as I did in real life. Takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and making pedal turns in the air. They are also very handy when flying with a quartering cross wind. Also, you can't properly slip into some of the smaller strips without them.

 

To each his own though.

 

I think the design theory of the Ercoupe was it was supposed to be stall and spin proof, so it was supposed to be the safest plane you could fly. Turned out it had one of the highest fatality rates at the time, of all the GA aircraft.

 

That is the way to do it... keeping the wings level with the rudder. As a (nervous ehem... concerned) instructor my eyes occasionally peak at that inclinometer. But it is a good thing to point out to the student... just because a good instructor harps on keeping one's eyes outside, doesn't mean an occasional reference to an instrument will not provide some kind of useful information.

 

 

 

Dunno. I didn't fly it (an actual C152) until I started using it to instruct in... and I thoroughly enjoy the gorgeous model from Carenado (from time to time). Isn't that what this is about? Fun? Diversity?

 

I got my license in the C-152 and I think it is a great aircraft, and fun to fly at a reasonable cost.

 

I never even looked at the ball. This was early enough in my instruction that the CFI didn't even mention instruments. I just kept the nose straight by looking over the cowl. Stalls were no problem whatsoever for me for some reason. Left wing break off, yoke forward, quick correction, back climbing in a couple of seconds. My best friend had lessons in a Piper Cub, and it was interesting comparing notes.

 

Why the hell would I want a payware C152 anyway? Just because I happened to have a couple of hours in one 40 years ago? And given the amount of tweaking I had to do on the C337, it just wouldn't be worth the effort.

 

Oh yes... the C337. When I was taking lessons, I wanted a plastic model to visualize some of the forces on the plane. The only thing I could find that was even close was a Skymaster. I ended up falling in love with that plane, and bought it as soon as it was available from Carenado. I think the Carenado version even had the same color scheme as the plastic model, which I had fully painted.

 

Hook

 

The Skymaster, I flew in one many years ago. Wear your earplugs , cause we are talking 'LOUD!!!!!"

 

One problem the Skymaster had was the fuel management system. If you forgot to switch tanks in time, and one of the engines stopped making noise, when you moved the fuel valve to hopefully correct the problem , nothing happened for about 20+ seconds, making you think maybe you moved it the wrong way or the wrong valve. So then you might move that one back and move another one... When both engines stopped making noise, you really sat up straight!!!!!!!!