Originally Posted by
cardiomd
Those that simply refer to the "AOA gauge" are at risk of losing, or never developing, the skills that the AFH refers to.
Again to clarify my consistent position, I would find an AOA gauge somewhat interesting, and would not object to it on a new plane. I'm simply not naiive enough to think this will affect accident rates, or will be of general utility outside of training.
Doc, consistency is not always a virtue.
The USAF put an AOA gauge on the T-38 to stop it from killing students and their instructors. You don't have to visualize anything, you just associate cues (buffet, stick position, KIAS, etc.) to an accurate indication of AOA instead of associating those cues to some ignorant hallucination of what you visualize AOA to be. Sure, the T-38 is a pretty extreme example, as most pilots with less than 100 hrs won't be piloting them, but in military training that's the program. Having that AOA gauge reduced the fireballs in the traffic pattern to a reasonable number in short order (here's the study:
www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0757243 )
I really don't care to visualize all that crap the AFH talks about. I think that statement is wishful thinking by someone who should know better. I'd rather have an AOA guage to
KNOW my angle of attack, a g-meter to
KNOW my load factor, and an airspeed indicator to
KNOW my KIAS (kinetic energy). I can fly better and with less effort if I have those indicators (and if I've used them and then you take them away I probably have a more accurate feel for the plane than if I never had them in the first place).
Tell me, would you rather have test results to look at, or would you just look at the patient and VISUALIZE what's wrong with them? Would you find it naive to think a blood test could help with accurate diagnosis? I'm sure you also visualize, as do pilots, but don't professionals prefer to use the most objective indicators?