Not understanding AoA indicators...
#11
Adding AoA indication to GA aircraft would be an unnecessary cost, and would further be pointless unless pilots are trained to use it.
By "trained" I don't mean somebody showing them how it works...I mean it's use would have to be extensively incorporated into primary training from the very outset. Otherwise it would be just another costly dust collector.
Unlike say a fighter, there are no normal phases of flight in which the AoA data would be interesting for GA aircraft...comply with the AFM speeds and attitudes and you'll never get near the AoA limit except maybe in the flare. Since it would not be interesting or useful, most pilots would tune it out...and it would be silly to expect them to suddenly revert to referencing the thing in a crisis.
It could be useful for aircraft certified for sustained FIKI. That's the only time I ever look at it.
By "trained" I don't mean somebody showing them how it works...I mean it's use would have to be extensively incorporated into primary training from the very outset. Otherwise it would be just another costly dust collector.
Unlike say a fighter, there are no normal phases of flight in which the AoA data would be interesting for GA aircraft...comply with the AFM speeds and attitudes and you'll never get near the AoA limit except maybe in the flare. Since it would not be interesting or useful, most pilots would tune it out...and it would be silly to expect them to suddenly revert to referencing the thing in a crisis.
It could be useful for aircraft certified for sustained FIKI. That's the only time I ever look at it.
Well there are A LOT of very smart people involved in this development and pilots that are using them right now (the FA just made getting them installed much easier because they have finally come around to see the usefulness in the systems) that would disagree with you on this point rickair.
I can send you a link to a informative thread should you like to pursue the posts before flat out saying that are near useless. You might even learn a thing or two .
#12
Well...as you can tell - I am bias on this subject - and it is my opinion.
I can tell you though that I wish I had an AoA gauge in every aircraft I fly - and if I owned (especially at today's costs) it would be one of the first things I'd have in my plane - - sort of like that tornado shelter I put in my house!
#13
Absolutely - but what if you could cover up all those instruments like you are suggesting and then look at ONE instrument that would give you (for instance) best range, best endurance, best climb, best descent, best landing (full or half or NO flaps) and if you did lose control - best recovery - under all conditions?
+1 to this.
Learning to fly high performance jets that spent a great deal of time in various stages of pre-stall buffet, AOA information was extremely helpful. Instructors would describe areas to avoid (like “heavy buffet”) as “elephants (or something else big) jumping on the wings”. An energy saving turn was a “light tickle”. Max acceleration to get knots was “light in the seat” or floating your feet off the rudder pedals.
The problem was, all those descriptions were subjective. One guy’s elephants weren’t the same as another’s. Having an AOA gauge to correlate what was really happening to what I was actually feeling made it so much easier to eventually, with some experience, fly the aircraft into those regimes accurately simply by feel.
Translating that to a new student in a light airplane – I think an AOA gauge would be extremely helpful. For starters, what a great independent backup in the event of a pitot-static problem. Also, they could learn more about how the aircraft performs closer to the edges of the envelope. Not that you want a student flying on the edge right away, but to make him fly in the middle all the time doesn’t allow him to gain full knowledge of the aircraft and its limits. There is still approach to stall and stall recovery training for a PPL, right? Most analog airplanes talk to you as you approach various AOA milestones. Being able to recognize those just by feel has always been an important thing to learn – an AOA gauge just makes that easier, IMO.
#15
Cost, reliability, failure modes (e.g. if somebody begins to "depend" on the sensor, and it gets stuck, etc), decreased efficiency, tendency to break off or poke you on the walkaround, and many others that I can't think of right now are all good reasons.
That being said, I'm a fan and would like to have one but I'm not going to retrofit.
I agree, if somebody is going to stall/spin then they probably should not be flying. It would just be one more gauge to ignore while yanking back on the yoke.
You are far from the only person that has this opinion and I'm always somewhat surprised by it. I learned steam+G430 and upgraded to glass G1000 and it took all of an hour to become extremely comfortable.
I read the manual over a few more months, and on a BFR spent an extra 15 minutes instructing my instructor on some shortcuts with the computer, showing him how to insert waypoints rapidly in flightplans etc. It started out quizzing me to ensure I was competent but he was honestly interested.
Obviously I was an engineer and am comfortable with technical stuff, and did have some sim experience, but I can not conceive how it could take almost "all of 25 hours" to get somebody up to basics with those avionics!
Are you exaggerating or serious? Very confused.
That being said, I'm a fan and would like to have one but I'm not going to retrofit.
Just a safety aid. I actually worry that light aircraft have become overly complex with glass cockpits, and the data seems to suggest that too much electronic stuff in front of them makes the average pilot less safe. I used to teach in glass panel planes and I could never solo anyone in less than about 25 hours which was almost all spent getting them to run the avionics to a basic level. I could solo someone in a steam gauge airplane in about ten hours, really even less if they were a good stick.
I read the manual over a few more months, and on a BFR spent an extra 15 minutes instructing my instructor on some shortcuts with the computer, showing him how to insert waypoints rapidly in flightplans etc. It started out quizzing me to ensure I was competent but he was honestly interested.
Obviously I was an engineer and am comfortable with technical stuff, and did have some sim experience, but I can not conceive how it could take almost "all of 25 hours" to get somebody up to basics with those avionics!
Are you exaggerating or serious? Very confused.
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 834
Cardio, What is your definition of extremely comfortable? Would that also mean competent? After only an hour with the G1000, would you have launched into the clouds with it? And... You read the manual AFTER you were comfortable with the G1000? Also curious how much "some" Sim experience was?
Last edited by Yoda2; 11-13-2014 at 05:58 PM.
#17
Cardio, What is your definition of extremely comfortable? Would that also mean competent? After only an hour with the G1000, would you have launched into the clouds with it? And... You read the manual AFTER you were comfortable with the G1000? Also curious how much "some" Sim experience was?
Tuning and identify, dialing in radials all much easier, enhanced SA, AHRS with less dip / lag / acceleration errors, no gyro precession, all advantages.
Yes sir - read the manual after I was comfortable. Did 10 minute ground intro then maybe 1 hr flight. Enough to get basics, then read the manual for the rest. Perhaps people take 25 flight hours because they don't do a tiny bit of ground work.
#18
I agree, if somebody is going to stall/spin then they probably should not be flying. It would just be one more gauge to ignore while yanking back on the yoke.
Guess what helped me recover during some of those OCF moments.
Sounds like that person needs more training. At least with a AoA gauge that person might just pull enough instead of too much.
Care to tell us how much experience you have flying with reference to an AoA instrument? If you are trained to it - it doesn't take much experience to learn how to incorporate it effectively. I mean you're good enough on the G1000 after 1 hr - I can't imagine a single gauge would be too overwhelming.
#19
Well there are A LOT of very smart people involved in this development and pilots that are using them right now (the FA just made getting them installed much easier because they have finally come around to see the usefulness in the systems) that would disagree with you on this point rickair.
BTW, my post was at the same time as yours, I hadn't seen your post and was not replying to it.
#20
The OP's question was directed at the use of AOA in a GA training environment - not 121 ops.
Not surprising. We've had it for years at FedEx and it's just recently began to be incorporated into the very few scenarios that might require (or at least benefit) from using AOA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nightflight
Hangar Talk
6
05-08-2006 07:48 AM