Flying the localizer...

[dmccormack]

Well, having shot ILSs through various sorts of storms and other excessive bumps and still managed to keep the needles centered without what feels like much effort (although I'll admit to slowing down to 140 for those since I don't want to exceed my 150 gear speed in a gust), I'm not sure I see the point.

It seems like sloppy technique and a crutch to me, but that's just my perception. What Lance said is what I do - bank ~5 degrees for a bit (standard rate turns end up being closer to 25-30 degrees in the Aztec anyway), and come back. That's worked fine for me even in 172s and Archers. I really don't have to think about it anymore, it's just automatic.

Fine.

 

[nosehair]

The problem with trying to use the rudder for such small corrections is that when you let go of the rudder, the airplane goes back the other way. You have to rudder past the heading and then let the plane realign itself with the air when you let go. All in all, it's pretty ugly.

Wrong technique. Very wrong. You don't "let go" of the rudder. You hold the necessary pressure that holds or changes a degree or two. You are flying a heading.

This rudder vs. aileron is like the power vs. pitch for airspeed. Eventually, everyone uses a combination, but in the beginning, using a primary control will help a student learn the skill of each control and later, combine the two for a smooth coordinated effort.

Further, beyond localizer alignment, the practice of primarily using rudder to maintain a heading transfers to landing on the runway with the nose aligned with the rudder.

It has been my experience that pilots who primarily bank for heading control on final continue to use bank for minor heading control during flare and touch down. Bad habit.

 

[nosehair]

Dan, I have tried it and (at least in my airplane) it feels sloppy (especially to those in the rear). Some airplanes are pretty unstable in yaw and exciting that axis is just asking for someone to decorate the upholstery with their lunch. And I beg to differ WRT rudder turns not skidding, that's exactly what you are doing.

What kind of airplane do you have? Do you not use the rudder primarily to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway during the flare and touch-down?

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Maybe my butt's not sensitive enough to feel a 1 degree heading course.



I actually learned to use the rudder correction in an A36.

Caveat -- I'm not advocating rudder-only for more than 3 degrees off course. But once established and flying the approach (especially with DTK and TRK displayed on a GPS) corrections should be small. When DTK shows 031 and TRK is 040, then bank slightly (4 degrees or so) to the desired track. When the difference is 1 or 2 degrees, rudder-only works fine and is not perceived when done gently.

I'm in the rudder-only school for tracking the loc as well. The two things to keeep in mind are left rudder for power decreases, and not to use too much that you feel a bunch of yaw. I find if I press slightly harder than in normal cruise with both feet, and press a little harder on the side toward the needle drift, I have a better "feel" of the airplane. My CFII described it as "baby steps". Using bank I always tend to over correct, especially as the loc course gets narrower closer to the map.
ymmv.

 

[dmccormack]

I'm in the rudder-only school for tracking the loc as well. The two things to keeep in mind are left rudder for power decreases, and not to use too much that you feel a bunch of yaw. I find if I press slightly harder than in normal cruise with both feet, and press a little harder on the side toward the needle drift, I have a better "feel" of the airplane. My CFII described it as "baby steps". Using bank I always tend to over correct, especially as the loc course gets narrower closer to the map.
ymmv.

Right -- there is a distinction between correcting for 5 degrees off course and 2 degrees.

I use coordinated bank to get established. Once established, my goal is to maintain wings level all the way down. In my experience, correcting 1 or 2 degrees of course drift with bank causes more problems than it fixes.

 

[Ted]

What kind of airplane do you have? Do you not use the rudder primarily to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway during the flare and touch-down?

I can't speak for Lance's flying technique in his Baron, but in my Aztec, I don't really need to use the rudder to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway. Leading with the right engine on takeoff pretty much has P-factor a non-issue. For landing, it needs to be a pretty stiff crosswind for me to use much rudder. The only time I use it significantly is in an engine out.

Trying to use it for minor heading corrections? I just don't see it. But I'm not sure how you label the opposite technique "wrong" when it works well. I'm not sure who's labeled using rudder for minor heading corrections "wrong", just sloppy.

 

[dmccormack]

Trying to use it for minor heading corrections? I just don't see it. But I'm not sure how you label the opposite technique "wrong" when it works well. I'm not sure who's labeled using rudder for minor heading corrections "wrong", just sloppy.

"Sloppy?"

Not really.

In the Chief the ball is hardly ever centered once I turn from downwind -- I slip in, and use whatever rudder it takes to keep the track straight (and if it's not, the airplane will tell me!)

Is that "sloppy?"

Well -- try to keep the ball centered all the way to touchdown in a taildragger -- then you'll truly experience "sloppy."

I can't tell you where the ball is when landing a trike, either. The nose is wherever it needs to be to keep tracking straight while the bank counters drift.

I think there's confusion in this thread between coordinated flight when turning -- when rudder is used to counter adverse yaw -- and other flight regimes.

I've been consistent in stating the rudder pressure course correction is used for small (tiny, miniscule, <3 degree) corrections. Larger corrections are accomplished by turning back to the course through coordinated use of aileron and rudder (e.g. "Bank").

 

[poadeleted20]

Wrong technique. Very wrong. You don't "let go" of the rudder. You hold the necessary pressure that holds or changes a degree or two. You are flying a heading.

OK, you hold the rudder until the heading changes to what you want. Now what happens? Either you "let go" of (recenter) the rudder or the plane keeps turning. Since the plane is being held in a yawed condition while the rudder is applied, when you let go, it will realign itself with the air causing the nose to swing back a degree or two. This is easy to demonstrate.

 

[dmccormack]

OK, you hold the rudder until the heading changes to what you want. Now what happens? Either you "let go" of (recenter) the rudder or the plane keeps turning. Since the plane is being held in a yawed condition while the rudder is applied, when you let go, it will realign itself with the air causing the nose to swing back a degree or two. This is easy to demonstrate.

If you're changing heading by 10 degrees, then yes, this is the result.

If you change heading by 1 or 2 degrees with rudder only, the airplane will assume the new heading and remain there.

 

[Ted]

I think there's confusion in this thread between coordinated flight when turning -- when rudder is used to counter adverse yaw -- and other flight regimes.

I've been consistent in stating the rudder pressure course correction is used for small (tiny, miniscule, <3 degree) corrections. Larger corrections are accomplished by turning back to the course through coordinated use of aileron and rudder (e.g. "Bank").

The initial question (and what I've been addressing) is the one of flying the localizer, so your statements on what you do in the Chief are largely irrelevant. If you want to use your rudder for your small heading corrections in that situation that's fine. I think that's sloppy. What's the first thing you tell people who say "So you use the rudder to turn, right?" In my plane, that would lead to uncomfortable passengers, as well. The planes you fly may be different, but as I said I do the same in 172s up through the Aztec.

 

[dmccormack]

The initial question (and what I've been addressing) is the one of flying the localizer, so your statements on what you do in the Chief are largely irrelevant. If you want to use your rudder for your small heading corrections in that situation that's fine. I think that's sloppy. What's the first thing you tell people who say "So you use the rudder to turn, right?" In my plane, that would lead to uncomfortable passengers, as well. The planes you fly may be different, but as I said I do the same in 172s up through the Aztec.

I use the Chief example to show that "coordinated flight" is not merely "Ball in the center."

That's true for every airplane -- Chief through 172 through 205 though A36 .....

 

[nosehair]

OK, you hold the rudder until the heading changes to what you want. Now what happens? Either you "let go" of (recenter) the rudder or the plane keeps turning. Since the plane is being held in a yawed condition while the rudder is applied, when you let go, it will realign itself with the air causing the nose to swing back a degree or two. This is easy to demonstrate.

No, Sir, ...you "squeeze" the rudder "a touch" to "push" the heading over a degree or two as the localizer needle makes a slight movement from center, and hold it there.
You squeeze and hold the pressure just exactly as you do on landing to keep the nose aligned with the centerline. I treat the localizer the same as if it were the runway centerline during the final.

No, you don't do that if the localizer needle gets a couple dots away from center - then you bank, with coordinating rudder towards the needle. Just like you do if you get to the edge of the runway on short final, but as long as you are..oh, a dot away from center, or a half-wing length from centerline during flare, you use rudder only. ..and I don't mean large gross movements, only a slight increase in pressure that is not felt as yaw, but by god it holds the heading and the localizer.

 

[bbchien]

That technique works on a P3. You don't want ANY turn momentum as then you will have to stop it. It's one of the most turn neutral platforms out there. Start a turn, and it will just keep turning.

But I haven't had any luck with that in my Seneca, in a 414 or in a Baron.

 

[nosehair]

in my Aztec, I don't really need to use the rudder to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway. Leading with the right engine on takeoff pretty much has P-factor a non-issue. For landing, it needs to be a pretty stiff crosswind for me to use much rudder. The only time I use it significantly is in an engine out.

OK, Ted, you are flying your Aztruck with out using any or much rudder. You can get by with that in an Aztruck - they are pretty good at not having much aileron yaw, especially at higher speeds. You probably land pretty fast, too, huh? Drive it on fast and you can get by with less rudder control. I use the term "get by" because you just haven't experienced any of the 'unusual' conditions that might get you in trouble, or haven't flown an airplane that has a worse adverse aileron yaw. This thread isn't about driving a twin - they are easier to "drive" - meaning less aileron yaw, and little or no P-Factor.

However, I would bet a dollar that you sometimes touch-down with a slight "drift", or sideload. Not much, mind you, probably not enough to take the time and effort to "steer" this machine with the rudder as it was designed to do.

And...this isn't about anybody's personal techniques they have found to bypass the laws of physics and aerodynamics, it is about a student who is trying to learn to fly a single-engine, which really has a lot more yaw problems than any twin. There is more than aileron yaw. Every time -repeat - everytime you make a power change, or get an updraft(lift) in a single-engine, the heading changes, or tries to change. Your job, as pilot, is to counter these yaw changes with rudder. Not aileron.

I'm not sure how you label the opposite technique "wrong" when it works well. I'm not sure who's labeled using rudder for minor heading corrections "wrong", just sloppy.

OK, the "wrong" is for the student. It really doesn't matter that much about how you fly the localizer; what is important is how you transition from "driving" the localizer heading with the yoke, then change to "steering" the heading with the rudder before touch-down. I find it simpler to "steer" with my feet all the way down from final descent to touchdown.

The localizer is an electronic extension of the runway centerline.

 

[kgruber]

II don't really need to use the rudder to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway. Leading with the right engine on takeoff pretty much has P-factor a non-issue.

I am thinking you would have to lead with the left engine.

 

[azure]

I am just gonna sit here and keep reading all this because I don't have to reinvent the wheel here...I was getting a bit overloaded yesterday for a number of reasons...flew again today noontime 2.5 hours in the plane...we did our work, and my CFI said lets have some fun...take off the foggles and climb and maintain 4000 at a 500 fpm. climb, and he got an IFR clearance vectoring us to the ILS 6 approach at KPOU. We were about 45 miles to the northwest. I knew the ceilings were about 2900...into the IMC we went. First time I flew the plane in it, and it was awesome..I found it alot easier to work with the plane without those freakin foggles. We broke out on top at about 4050 ft and skimmed along the tops between 2 layers...sun was shining and it was so beautiful! Now I know what all the hard work is for. He did the radio work and had me fly the approach back into the IMC, intercept the glideslope and land the plane. I felt like I had accomplished something!
SO LIZ...DO THE SAME..have your instructor take you into actual and shoot the approach...it will make you feel so good!
Let me know how it goes

Hey Bruce! Glad you got into the clouds (and above)!! I've been trying to time my lessons to coincide with wx where we could actually get in some actual IMC, but the weather gods have been against me. Tonight the whole area was IFR all day until about an hour before my lesson, then VLL went IFR a half hour after we landed. There was scattered scud here and there so we filed (also to give me experience with filing and copying IFR clearances --- CRAFT works great!), but I had to wear that $*&!# hood the whole time. It's been clearing up around sunset all week, and that's the only time my CFII's schedule and mine come together.

By Friday it's supposed to be a LOT colder... probably cold enough for ice at 3000 or so. So I probably won't get any actuals in until after my checkride. Sigh.

BTW-We had a fatal emergency at KPOU yesterday, and I was holding at rwy 6 for departure at the time, and got involved in the SAR...sad day and very very intense feelings and thoughts.

Oh no, Bruce, I'm so sorry you had to be so close to that. It's very sobering. Before my lesson on Saturday PTK was closed for an hour or so because an Aztec caught fire on the runway. That gave me the shivers too, but fortunately I don't think any fatalities were involved.

Prayers for the family of the pilot who was killed, and wishing a speedy recovery for his pax.

 

[Ted]

I am thinking you would have to lead with the left engine.

My mistake. Thanks for the correction.

 

[kevin7500]

Next we'll be doing some approaches. Then some more approaches. Then some more. Then someday we might even do some XC's.

I also just started IR training. My instructor is aware that I want to meet requirements as efficiently as possible. So, first lesson was just hood time. Second lesson was holds. Third lesson was cross country with VOR approaches to two different airports before returning. Yesterday was cross country to two different LOC airorts.

We do holds and missed each time and also touch the wheels down to get the cross country time. All of my minimums should come together at about the same time since the cross country time is the highest requirement. It is all under the hood following needles, so not real exciting...especially with my instructor saying: "what a beautiful night, too bad you can't see this"

 

[DutchessFlier]

"what a beautiful night, too bad you can't see this"

Doncha love that^^^^^

Hey Kevin...welcome to the 'suffering' IR students den, don't be shy and share all the S***F with us man!! BTW I got a prediction from my instructor..if I can keep up the pace, and not screw it up (my opinion) I can try to get the rating done by Jan or Feb.

 

[azure]

"what a beautiful night, too bad you can't see this"

My instructor pulled that on me too, about the time the fall colors peaked. "Ooh, I'm seeing lots of beautiful color out here!".

I told him to shut up.

 

[bbchien]

"You put my head in a bag. You make me turn off all my toys, and we fly around. Then you give me puzzles"......recent IR student.

 

[gismo]

What kind of airplane do you have? Do you not use the rudder primarily to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway during the flare and touch-down?

I fly two different airplanes although I can't say I've ever tried flying a LOC in the taildragger. In the Baron, I generally crab into the flare and then yaw the plane into alignment with the runway, but I fail to see what that's got to do with tracking a LOC.

I'm not saying that you can't track with just rudder, and that technique does make it less likely you will overcontrol but as I've been trying to point out it's quite possible to avoid overturning while making small coordinated corrections. It's all a matter of rolling into a very shallow bank briefly and rolling back out before you see the heading change on the HSI or DG.

 

[nosehair]

I fly two different airplanes although I can't say I've ever tried flying a LOC in the taildragger. In the Baron, I generally crab into the flare and then yaw the plane into alignment with the runway, but I fail to see what that's got to do with tracking a LOC.

During the precise moment you describe as "then yaw the plane into alignment" is what I/we are precisely saying that I/we do to the localizer (think runway centerline). You are putting just enough pressure on the rudder to align the nose (change the heading). You are (hopefully) not banking the wing to align the nose. You can do that in your Baron, but you know you can't do that in your taildragger.

I'm not saying that you can't track with just rudder, and that technique does make it less likely you will overcontrol but as I've been trying to point out it's quite possible to avoid overturning while making small coordinated corrections. It's all a matter of rolling into a very shallow bank briefly and rolling back out before you see the heading change on the HSI or DG.

You have accomplished the technique. This thread is for the individual who is having difficulty, and my overall experience with students is that they will tend to continue banking towards the centerline during the transition from hood to runway.

 

[Everskyward]

This discussion is interesting because years ago a CFI pointed out to me that I was making my corrections using rudder. I think it was just a comment on his part, not a criticism. In fact I think he was surprised that it worked well. I was not consciously aware that I was doing it. In thinking about it I realized that I had grown up in flying in the mapping industry where all corrections on line, even fairly large ones, are done with rudder pressure since the wings need to be level. We did not have gyro-stabilized mounts. This became instinctive to me so I carried it over into approaches, at least when making small corrections. That obviously went away when I started flying airplanes with yaw damp, besides I have grown more concerned with what people in the back are feeling.

 

[dmccormack]

This discussion is interesting because years ago a CFI pointed out to me that I was making my corrections using rudder. I think it was just a comment on his part, not a criticism. In fact I think he was surprised that it worked well. I was not consciously aware that I was doing it. In thinking about it I realized that I had grown up in flying in the mapping industry where all corrections on line, even fairly large ones, are done with rudder pressure since the wings need to be level. We did not have gyro-stabilized mounts. This became instinctive to me so I carried it over into approaches, at least when making small corrections. That obviously went away when I started flying airplanes with yaw damp, besides I have grown more concerned with what people in the back are feeling.

Good point -- an A36 has aileron-rudder interconnect, so anything more than slight rudder pressure will cause corresponding bank.

 

[gismo]

During the precise moment you describe as "then yaw the plane into alignment" is what I/we are precisely saying that I/we do to the localizer (think runway centerline). You are putting just enough pressure on the rudder to align the nose (change the heading). You are (hopefully) not banking the wing to align the nose.

The difference I'm visualizing is that on the LOC, I'm using small, short duration banks to shift the plane laterally and maintain the centerline without concern for the specific heading. In the landing flare, I'm using rudder to adjust the heading to match the runway centerline but I'm still using bank (along with inertia) lateral positioning. I do understand that using rudder while flying down the LOC does work and that because with rudder input, releasing pressure stops the turn vs the situation with aileron/bank where a countering roll/pressure is needed. All I'm trying to say is that it's not really any more difficult to fly a LOC with coordinated turns than with rudder once you "learn" the roll-in then roll-out technique. Granted that this is slightly more difficult to learn than ruddering your way along but IMO the only reason pilot's have trouble with this (using coordinated turns to fly a LOC course) is that no one explained/demonstrated the proper technique and the pilot intuitively continues the turn until the needle stops moving or even passes through center coupled with the (incorrect) notion that smaller banks are needed for small corrections. I think that Dan's comments about the difficulty of maintaining a one to two degree bank reflect this very issue.

 

[dmccormack]

I think that Dan's comments about the difficulty of maintaining a one to two degree bank reflect this very issue.

Clarification -- My point is that a 1 or 2 degree correction from Actual Track to Desired Track is simpler with a slight squeeze on the rudder, and is less likely to cause compounding problems that excessive bank may cause.

I'm not advocating this as the only way to fly a heading -- that would be dumb. But I don't agree that rudder pressure to correct a 1 or 2 degree excursion is "sloppy" any more than a displaced ball is "sloppy" during landing.

 

[ScottM]

"what a beautiful night, too bad you can't see this"

Doncha love that^^^^^
.

I did most of my instrument training at night and would often hear that from the left seat. I quick push of the rudders with a shout of "WHAT'S THAT!" into the intercom and I would have my CFI-I's attention again.

 

[jesse]

It seems like this debate is becoming the best way to make a one-degree correction. You might be able to see a degree when flying an approach with a GPS -- but there is no way I'd get worked up about correcting a single degree. Why? Because unless you're super pilot you're not going to be able to hold that degree and you're going to be constantly correcting for a degree. Instead I just hold what I visually see on the DG which holds me to the glideslope (GPS or ILS). It sure isn't one degree accuracy.

On an ILS -- there is simply no way I'd know what single *DEGREE* would hold me on the localizer. The GPS isn't going to be one-degree accurate with the actual loc signal.

I just don't see the point in debating the best way to make a one-degree correction. No human pilot I've flown with can hold a degree. If you're worrying about trying to hold a degree you're going to be making a lot of corrections. More corrections means more work-load.

I make much less corrections by not worrying about a single degree. When I do need a correction I do it with a slight bank. I make most of my corrections by looking at the loc needle. I do reference the DG and hold it via the DG (if I'm actually flying an airplane with a good DG. sadly most of the rental fleet doesn't seem to think you need one)

 

[dmccormack]

It seems like this debate is becoming the best way to make a one-degree correction. You might be able to see a degree when flying an approach with a GPS -- but there is no way I'd get worked up about correcting a single degree. Why? Because unless you're super pilot you're not going to be able to hold that degree and you're going to be constantly correcting for a degree. Instead I just hold what I visually see on the DG which holds me to the glideslope (GPS or ILS). It sure isn't one degree accuracy.

On an ILS -- there is simply no way I'd know what single *DEGREE* would hold me on the localizer. The GPS isn't going to be one-degree accurate with the actual loc signal.

I just don't see the point in debating the best way to make a one-degree correction. No human pilot I've flown with can hold a degree. If you're worrying about trying to hold a degree you're going to be making a lot of corrections. More corrections means more work-load.

I make much less corrections by not worrying about a single degree. When I do need a correction I do it with a slight bank. I make most of my corrections by looking at the loc needle. I do reference the DG and hold it via the DG (if I'm actually flying an airplane with a good DG. sadly most of the rental fleet doesn't seem to think you need one)

Not really -- if you catch and correct for 1 or 2 degree off DTK with a slight press on the appropriate pedal, you have less work to do.

 

[jesse]

Not really -- if you catch and correct for 1 or 2 degree off DTK with a slight press on the appropriate pedal, you have less work to do.

And then you'll hit a bump a second later that'll knock you a degree in the other direction. Or the wind will change changing your ground track which will also change your DTK. As long as the needle is reasonably stable I'm not going to mess with corrections.

It seems to work with me. I've never went unstable in an approach forcing a go-around. I've yet to see the needle make it to one dot off. After flying approaches via flight simulators since I was about 5 years old I tend to find it incredibly easy in an actual airplane.

All I know is I can't fly a single degree. So I'm not going to worry about a single degree. Conditions will change so much that making those one degree changes won't have much of a net gain IMO.

 

[dmccormack]

And then you'll hit a bump a second later that'll knock you a degree in the other direction. Or the wind will change changing your ground track which will also change your DTK. As long as the needle is reasonably stable I'm not going to mess with corrections.

It seems to work with me. I've never went unstable in an approach forcing a go-around. I've yet to see the needle make it to one dot off. After flying approaches via flight simulators since I was about 5 years old I tend to find it incredibly easy in an actual airplane.

All I know is I can't fly a single degree. So I'm not going to worry about a single degree. Conditions will change so much that making those one degree changes won't have much of a net gain IMO.

To each his own. I prefer small corrections before the diversion requires a big correction. In this thread I have consistently argued that a small amount of rudder pressure can help maintain desired track. If there is a wind shear or other reason for a large correction (>4 degrees, for example), then a momentary shallow, coordinated bank is the proper method to regain the desired track.

As far as bumps -- the degree of turbulence determines the degree of precision, and typically an average suffices.

I've seen the needles blur enough that as long as they were near center I was happy. It gets pretty bumpy around here, given the topography.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

All I know is I can't fly a single degree. So I'm not going to worry about a single degree

And if the World's Greatest Pilot can't do it, then none of the rest of us can either.

 

[nosehair]

You know what? ..it's just like flying a tailwheel. I was reading thru the "1 degree" stuff and realized you do have to push on the pedal even for 1 degree, or even a half degree. Any movement is unaceptable. ...and it becomes an unconscious habit. ..and about half way down from the OM, I'm flying the localizer only, not the heading. By that time, I have found the sweet spot of tiny unconscious rudder pressures that keep the localizer needle center in exactly the same way you keep the nose going down the centerline of the runway or taxiway.

With a tailwheel, you have to.

 

[dmccormack]

With a tailwheel, you have to.

Yep -- I don't like the feeling when I don't!

 

[gismo]

It seems like this debate is becoming the best way to make a one-degree correction. You might be able to see a degree when flying an approach with a GPS -- but there is no way I'd get worked up about correcting a single degree. Why? Because unless you're super pilot you're not going to be able to hold that degree and you're going to be constantly correcting for a degree. Instead I just hold what I visually see on the DG which holds me to the glideslope (GPS or ILS). It sure isn't one degree accuracy.

On an ILS -- there is simply no way I'd know what single *DEGREE* would hold me on the localizer. The GPS isn't going to be one-degree accurate with the actual loc signal.

I just don't see the point in debating the best way to make a one-degree correction. No human pilot I've flown with can hold a degree. If you're worrying about trying to hold a degree you're going to be making a lot of corrections. More corrections means more work-load.

I make much less corrections by not worrying about a single degree. When I do need a correction I do it with a slight bank. I make most of my corrections by looking at the loc needle. I do reference the DG and hold it via the DG (if I'm actually flying an airplane with a good DG. sadly most of the rental fleet doesn't seem to think you need one)

Jesse, no one expects that they can hold a heading to such precision. While this discussion pertains to making a single small correction, the reality is that multiple such corrections are required. Furthermore there's no need to make a correction of exactly one degree (or any other precise angular change), what's required (and being discussed WRT methods) is the ability to make the corrections small, on the order of half to two degrees. Any more than that and you'll end up chasing the needle and overcorrecting, once you get close in.

And I want to try one more time to clarify my position. I'm not advocating that coordinated, banked turns are the only way or that they are superior to ruddered heading changes, just that they are possible and easy as long as you roll in and out quickly without pausing in a banked condition for more than a second or two.

 

[jesse]

Jesse, no one expects that they can hold a heading to such precision. While this discussion pertains to making a single small correction, the reality is that multiple such corrections are required. Furthermore there's no need to make a correction of exactly one degree (or any other precise angular change), what's required (and being discussed WRT methods) is the ability to make the corrections small, on the order of half to two degrees. Any more than that and you'll end up chasing the needle and overcorrecting, once you get close in.

I understand that Lance.

What I was trying to get at -- if one is worried about a one degree correction then they are probably doing a LOT of corrections. If they'd put more effort towards the DG and the CDI they'd be making less. You can't see something that small on the CDI and the CDI doesn't even represent that information.

I've noticed watching some folks fly GPS approaches that they tend to focus on the track numbers on the GPS more than the CDI. As a result they make a boat-load of corrections.

Talking about flying an approach and flying an approach are well, two entirely different things. It becomes such a subconscious exercise that it becomes rather difficult to actually discuss how you do it.

The actual flying of the approach is by far more fluid (at least for me) then it is precise numbers.

 

[dmccormack]

Talking about flying an approach and flying an approach are well, two entirely different things. It becomes such a subconscious exercise that it becomes rather difficult to actually discuss how you do it.

...which is why not every pilot is an instructor.

 

[dmccormack]

And I want to try one more time to clarify my position. I'm not advocating that coordinated, banked turns are the only way or that they are superior to ruddered heading changes, just that they are possible and easy as long as you roll in and out quickly without pausing in a banked condition for more than a second or two.

I agree with this technique is a valid option -- especially in airplanes with rudder-aileron interconnect where rudder pressure only will cause a bank (unless you exert counter control pressure).

 

[jesse]

...which is why not every pilot is an instructor.

The best instructor in the world isn't going to put it into words that'll translate perfectly for the student. They can guide a student, but in the end, the student themselves will learn this own slight variation of the instructor's teachings that works best for them.

There is a lot to focus on during an approach. A GPS approach now provides magical numbers we didn't have before. Those numbers easily steal a lot of attention and when presented as precise numbers people tend to want the numbers to be perfect. In reality you can't make it perfect and the desire to constantly align the degrees will result in a LOT of correcting one wouldn't do if they'd just use the CDI.

In the end, the best way to make a one degree correction will completely vary from airplane to airplane which is why you'll see different pilots saying different things. I do think that once you're getting into one-degree-attention arena that you're probably either over-correcting OR you're towards the final moments of the approach where (hopefully) your airplane is coupled to the CDI via yourself.

The presence of a HSI also completely changes things. One can bring headings into the final parts of the approach *MUCH* easier with a HSI then they can with a ****ty DG (like the rental airplanes I seem to find).