"I was taught..."

[FastEddieB]

A poor one thinks advice on mental coordination must produce the same physical action.

Hold on!!!

Have the people advocating "leading with rudder" just been saying it's a "mental coordination" exercise that leads to the same end result: aileron and rudder applied together in a coordinated fashion?

That you think about rudder first, but apply them together?

If so, that's completely different. I thought we were talking about applying rudder first.

 

[warthog1984]

Hold on!!!

Have the people advocating "leading with rudder" just been saying it's a "mental coordination" exercise that leads to the same end result: aileron and rudder applied together in a coordinated fashion?

That you think about rudder first, but apply them together?

If so, that's completely different. I thought we were talking about applying rudder first.

Mostly, although less "mental" and more "autonomic".

The effect is the same (coordinated turn with aileron and rudder), but what saying "lead with rudder" does is take advantage of the body's hard-wired reactions: because humans are bipedal, our upper body WANTS to react to our lower body, which in turn follows our eyes.

If you think about applying aileron "first", coordinating with rudder requires conscious thought; whereas when you push on the rudder, you WILL automatically feed in aileron at the same time. You have to fine tune it, but for an adult with a functioning sense of balance 90% of the aileron movement will be automatic. Result: an unconsciously coordinated turn.

 

[FastEddieB]

Mostly, although less "mental" and more "autonomic".

If you think about applying aileron "first", coordinating with rudder requires conscious thought; whereas when you push on the rudder, you WILL automatically feed in aileron at the same time.

OK.

I think this is coming into focus...

The question seems to be:

Aileron first, then whatever rudder is needed to coordinate the turn, or,

Rudder first, then whatever aileron is needed to coordinate the turn.

False choice, since the advice from both me and the FAA is the simultaneous application of both.

Since my turns are pretty well coordinated as is, I really don't see the need to change either my technique nor my advice at this late stage in my career.

 

[jordane93]

I would somewhat disagree. No two aircraft are exactly alike. Lot's of small differences, from rigging to the actual shape of the aircraft. The differences are built in, or from years of use or abuse. Those differences create subtle differences in how they fly, handle, feel. The first flight in any aircraft is a "discovery" flight, as you get the feel for the aircraft. What years of experience gives you is an almost unconscious ability to pick up and process the clues.

That is true. Not all airplanes all the same but the concepts are all the same. In the Airplane Flying Handbook and Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge both say to use coordinated rudder and aileron in a turn. Not lead with rudder and then apply aileron. This is a strange concept. I've never heard of the phrase leading with rudder before this thread. And so far no one has convinced me why I should lead with rudder.

 

[Henning]

I would somewhat disagree. No two aircraft are exactly alike. Lot's of small differences, from rigging to the actual shape of the aircraft. The differences are built in, or from years of use or abuse. Those differences create subtle differences in how they fly, handle, feel. The first flight in any aircraft is a "discovery" flight, as you get the feel for the aircraft. What years of experience gives you is an almost unconscious ability to pick up and process the clues.

Even loading and CG changes it in a particular aircraft.

 

[warthog1984]

OK.

I think this is coming into focus...

The question seems to be:

Aileron first, then whatever rudder is needed to coordinate the turn, or,

Rudder first, then whatever aileron is needed to coordinate the turn.

False choice, since the advice from both me and the FAA is the simultaneous application of both.

Your focus needs adjustment- badly.


You can split your attention and try consciously coordinating aileron and rudder simultaneously.

You can use aileron and try to coordinate the turn with rudder later.

OR

You can concentrate on using the rudder and your body will automatically and instantaneously coordinate the turn with whatever aileron is required.

Only one of these allows you to fly coordinated while keeping your focus fully outside. Why then would you ever NOT take advantage of 1000s of years of evolution to accomplish the same end better and easier?

 

[Henning]

Hold on!!!

Have the people advocating "leading with rudder" just been saying it's a "mental coordination" exercise that leads to the same end result: aileron and rudder applied together in a coordinated fashion?

That you think about rudder first, but apply them together?

If so, that's completely different. I thought we were talking about applying rudder first.

If you think rudder first you will apply rudder first. We're not talking a significant delay, fraction of a second stuff. There is the beginning throw of the rudder where it does very little, all I try to do is be at the end of that as I'm starting in with aileron.

You're never going to transition into the turn in perfect coordination, it's just not going to happen. We will always have some swing moment before we can react and compensate. If you start with the rudder the swing moment will be a skid, if you start with aileron it will be a slip moment.

The issue is only one of comfort for people in the back seat.

 

[FastEddieB]

Only one of these allows you to fly coordinated while keeping your focus fully outside.

False.

Applying both together is how I was taught, what is recommended by training materials, and takes zero extra thought or attention. The controls move together instinctively. The ball stays centered throughout, which is, or should be, a goal of a good pilot.

If someone is pushing rudder first and beginning every turn with a slight skid, that's fine. Be my guest. But it's sloppy flying if your goal is to keep the ball centered.

Which it will not be.

If your claim is that you can "lead with rudder" and stay coordinated, with the ball in the center throughout, that's not credible. The plane MUST skid, if only a little.

If your claim is that you just "think" of the rudder first, but apply both together for a coordinated turn entry, then that's just a perceptual, mental exercise and if it works for you, great.

 

[Henning]

False.

Applying both together is how I was taught, what is recommended by trsining materials, and takes zero extra thought or attention. The controls move together instinctively. The ball stays centered throughout, which is, or should be, a goal of a good pilot.

If someone is pushing rudder first and beginning every turn with a slight skid, that's fine. Be my guest. But it's sloppy flying if your goal is to keep the ball centered.

Which it will not be.

If your claim is that you can "lead with rudder" and stay coordinated, that's not credible. The plane MUST skid, if only a little.

If your claim is that you just "think" of the rudder first, but apply both together for a coordinated turn entry, then that's just a perceptual, mental exercise and if it works for you, great.

My ball doesn't leave the cage either. Please video your ball as you fly and show me it not shift as you roll back and forth.

 

[FastEddieB]

My ball doesn't leave the cage either.

Then you are not applying rudder first. Basic aerodynamics.

 

[Henning]

Then you are not applying rudder first. Basic aerodynamics.

You are really misunderstanding the quantity of lead.

 

[FastEddieB]

You are really misunderstanding the quantity of lead.

Tiny lead = tiny skid

Microscopic lead = microscopic skid

Unclear why one would desire any skid at all.

And I still hold if you're NOT seeing any skid then you're not really leading - you just think you are!

 

[RoscoeT]

And I still hold if you're NOT seeing any skid then you're not really leading - you just think you are!

Well you could be skidding slightly and momentarily, but just don't see it. The skid ball is a pretty sloppy slip/skid indicator, prone to rolling momentum errors. Unless mounted precisely on the roll axis of the airplane (uncommon), the ball will only give you a good indication when your bank angle is stabilized - at which point the rudder input has already come and gone. They can be pretty useless as the airplane is in the process of rolling...which is the moment we're really talking about here. A yaw string is really what you need if you want to split hairs about precision technique. Unfortunately, they generally only work in gliders.

I think this thread has run its course. So we have learned that some people like to lead (or think they're leading) with the rudder by a fraction of second. Others have no mental block about rudder usage and use the rudder and ailerons simultaneously with perfectly good results.

To each their own, but I sill disagree with teaching someone this technique unless it is truly the only way to get someone with lazy feet from lagging behind with the rudder. In these cases, the instructor should make clear to the student exactly what is happening and how the problem was corrected. In my strong opinion, simultaneous input in concept and practice is the proper technique.

To me it's similar to how some tailwheel instructors want their new tailwheel student to have "happy feet" during the takeoff and landing roll. Totally unnecessary to flap the rudder just to flap it. But I think some advocate this as a a way to wake up lazy feet. But again, it's not good rudder usage long-term and the instructor should explain all of this. But just like 'lead w/ rudder', this is something I'd never teach. But unfortunately, some pilots never get over it. Hell I once saw a pilot flapping the rudder like mad while taxiing a Champ slowly down the taxiway.

 

[Fearless Tower]

To me it's similar to how some tailwheel instructors want their new tailwheel student to have "happy feet" during the takeoff and landing roll. Totally unnecessary to flap the rudder just to flap it. But I think some advocate this as a a way to wake up lazy feet. But again, it's not good rudder usage long-term and the instructor should explain all of this.

I've flown with those people. Always cracks me up....you'll be on short final and all the sudden the airplane starts wagging back and forth. I'm like 'is that really necessary'?

 

[Henning]

Tiny lead = tiny skid

Microscopic lead = microscopic skid

Unclear why one would desire any skid at all.

And I still hold if you're NOT seeing any skid then you're not really leading - you just think you are!

Because if you start with rudder, in the skidding direction, when the aileron comes in you stop at neutral, one small skidding moment in their ear. If you start with aileron, or even equal with the rudder, you will induce a slight slipping motion first which you then catch with the rudder, one small slipping motion in their ear. You can't get it perfectly coordinated every time, you will always have a transitory imbalance. People are accustomed to skidding, they are not accustomed to skidding. When you disturb the inner ear fluids of many people in a manner to which they are not accustomed, they vomit.

If you lead with rudder you deal with adverse yaw proactively, if you lead with aileron you deal with advers yaw reactively. You will never roll into a turn with no yawning moment.

 

[RoscoeT]

If you start with aileron, or even equal with the rudder, you will induce a slight slipping motion first which you then catch with the rudder, one small slipping motion in their ear.

I guess there are two camps here with fundamental differing views of the laws of physics. I'm in the camp that believes any moveable control surface whether it's the rudder, aileron, or elevator begins to exert a force immediately upon deflection. Not sure why the ailerons have special powers or status, or why the rudder has such relegated or weak status. For those who believe that control deflection = instantaneous response will believe that aileron-induced adverse yaw and rudder-induced yaw can be in perfect equilibrium at any precise moment from start to finish if both surfaces are moved simultaneously, and at the appropriate rate and degree. Nothing else makes sense from a physics standpoint.

When you raise the tail quickly in a tailwheel airplane with a metal prop, do you need to lead with the rudder in order to get a jump on that gyroscopic precession? Nope, you apply rudder at the same time, at the appropriate rate, and in the amount required to equalize the opposing force that exists at any given instant.

I still think this issue boils down to people with slow feet. But I guess we can now add this subject to the long list of never-ending debates in aviation. And what would aviation forums be without long debates about unimportant academic minutiae.

 

[narchee]

I still think this issue boils down to people with slow feet.

True but strictly speaking everyone has a slower reaction to moving their feet compared to their hands. Longer pathways. Maybe you are right and some people are just slower than average and need to consciously command their feet to move sooner to maintain a simultaneous action.

 

[RoscoeT]

True but strictly speaking everyone has a slower reaction to moving their feet compared to their hands. Longer pathways. Maybe you are right and some people are just slower than average and need to consciously command their feet to move sooner to maintain a simultaneous action.

Cool with me. Well said. Thread closed.

 

[CharlieTango]

Slow feet are not the only problem, many pilots maneuver with their feet flat on the floor.

If you don't even use your feet and then transition to 'leading with rudder' the end result might be improvement.

 

[jordane93]

Slow feet are not the only problem, many pilots maneuver with their feet flat on the floor.

If you don't even use your feet and then transition to 'leading with rudder' the end result might be improvement.

It comes down to instruction. If the CFI doesn't correct the students lazy feet in the beginning, it wll be very hard for the student to accomplish anything in their training. Every manuever involves some sort of rudder usage.

 

[txflyer]

Cure for lazy feet = Taildragger.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

So based on some of the comments here I am either a bad pilot, a ignorant pilot that doesn't understand theoretical ideals related to aerodynamics or am the victim of long standing shortcomings from poor instruction at some early stage of my career. Not to worry though.....if only I could fly a taildragger and master its mystical nature I would be cured.

 

[txflyer]

So based on some of the comments here I am either a bad pilot, a ignorant pilot that doesn't understand theoretical ideals related to aerodynamics or am the victim of long standing shortcomings from poor instruction at some early stage of my career. Not to worry though.....if only I could fly a taildragger and master its mystical nature I would be cured.

Cured or ground looped.

 

[RoscoeT]

So based on some of the comments here I am either a bad pilot, a ignorant pilot that doesn't understand theoretical ideals related to aerodynamics or am the victim of long standing shortcomings from poor instruction at some early stage of my career.

You could always replace vague, oblique comments with logical explanations on the subject. I'm open to different views. I'm a facts person, not a faith person...on any matter.

 

[FastEddieB]

You could always replace vague, oblique comments with logical explanations on the subject. I'm open to different views. I'm a facts person, not a faith person...on any matter.

And I immediately thought txflyer's three possibilities are not mutually exclusive!

 

[pilot1956]

I am confused. How do thousands of years of evolution help me fly my plane? Total conjecture...

And, do you really think that your brain has not learned that it takes a few milliseconds longer for motor signals to reach the muscles of your feet than your hands? That has nothing to do with how humans fly an airplane.

The amount of totally unsupported speculation has reached a remarkable level in this thread.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

You could always replace vague, oblique comments with logical explanations on the subject. I'm open to different views. I'm a facts person, not a faith person...on any matter.

There was nothing vague about what I said. The airplane I fly requires a very slight lead with rudder in some portions of the flight envelope. Specifically at high AOA and high power when going to a full deflection aileron input. If you don't start with the feet and let that pull the aileron the ball comes out of the cage and the roll response is diminished. Plus its a conventional geared aircraft so I should have the mystical aviation gods helping me understand the environment I am flying within.

I can tell you factually that simultaneous coordinated input in a high alpha condition results in the nose ever so slightly swinging outside the turn and a delay in roll response. Nothing vague about it. If you want an explanation find an engineer. Im not that guy. I never offered an explanation because I honestly don't have one. Theoretically it shouldn't happen but it does. For all I know the rudder aileron interconnect is rigged improperly or there is a dent in just the right place to change something..hell I just don't know. All I can tell you is what the airplane does in response to the control input. If you don't start the roll with the rudder it gets sloppy.

I would like to think that after 16 years of working as a professional pilot I am actually aware of what I'm doing with the flight controls. Not just what I think I'm doing or what some flight instructor explained to me incorrectly. That said I learn something every time I fly....

edit

I hope my posts do not sound argumentative. didn't have that intention but just read back over them and felt like i should clearly state that is not the case. I am not very good at the internet it seems.

 

[FastEddieB]

I hope my posts do not sound argumentative. didn't have that intention but just read back over them and felt like i should clearly state that is not the case. I am not very good at the internet it seems.

No problem.

As I said, I never heard of this before, and none of the planes I've flown - which is a fairly wide cross-section of GA planes - has exhibited this apparent "need" for rudder "lead".

That's why I went to at least three sources* I respect to see if I missed something along the way. It's also why I stipulated there may be some oddball types that DO require rudder "lead".

If I seem argumentative, it's only that some of the "pro" arguments seem flawed on their face. Hence, I will point out those flaws.

Still, interesting discussion.

*The third was "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" which I did not quote since it says little about the timing of the rudder and aileron in turns, except by implication.

 

[Fearless Tower]

*The third was "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" which I did not quote since it says little about the timing of the rudder and aileron in turns, except by implication.

That's because Naval Aviators are the best of the best of the best! They don't need to overthink things.

 

[RoscoeT]

The airplane I fly requires a very slight lead with rudder in some portions of the flight envelope. Specifically at high AOA and high power when going to a full deflection aileron input. If you don't start with the feet and let that pull the aileron the ball comes out of the cage and the roll response is diminished. Plus its a conventional geared aircraft so I should have the mystical aviation gods helping me understand the environment I am flying within.

I can tell you factually that simultaneous coordinated input in a high alpha condition results in the nose ever so slightly swinging outside the turn and a delay in roll response. Nothing vague about it.

OK good explanation. To continue the purely academic discussion of unimportant technical matters, my thoughts are that what you are seeing at high alpha is increased adverse yaw combined with increased yaw/roll coupling from high dihedral in ag planes. That's the airplane you're talking about right? It makes sense that roll response would be slightly delayed by not leading with the rudder, since leading with rudder should produce a nearly immediate roll response due to dihedral effect. But IMO, that doesn't necessarily mean this rudder-lead turn is perfectly free of momentary skid. Again, the skid ball may not necessarily show a skid. If the ball is mounted above the roll axis, the ball will naturally displace slightly in the slipped direction while rolling into a perfectly coordinated turn. It's pure momentum, just like when your upper body gets pushed in the opposite direction of the roll, assuming your upper body is above the roll axis.

So if the skid ball in the airplane is prone to this effect, a slightly skidded turn initiation could actually cause the ball to stay perfectly centered, since the skid is opposing the opposite reaction of the ball. And if humans in general seem to have slow feet, I think this only worsens in high AOA conditions, making it seem like the lead w/ rudder requirement exists, or is made more obvious. Good discussion, but I'm still not convinced that a truly properly timed, and sufficiently deflected rudder input cannot immediately control adverse yaw and maintain perfect coordination. But maybe that assumes a computer is flying the airplane. Humans just aren't necessarily that precise, and I guess do what they need to do to get good results. Nobody is saying you or other 'rudder leaders' don't get decent results, or can't fly an airplane.

 

[Bob T]

If you want an explanation find an engineer. Im not that guy. I never offered an explanation because I honestly don't have one. Theoretically it shouldn't happen but it does. For all I know the rudder aileron interconnect is rigged improperly or there is a dent in just the right place to change something..hell I just don't know. All I can tell you is what the airplane does in response to the control input. If you don't start the roll with the rudder it gets sloppy.


I hope my posts do not sound argumentative. didn't have that intention...

I'm not an engineer either, and I don't find it inconceivable that leading with the rudder in some aircraft would produce better results in a banking turn. Heck, even in slow flight in a C172 I use rudder alone to do slow turns. I use a little right rudder to turn to the right and with the natural left yaw at slow speed and high rpm, all I have to do is relax the right rudder a bit to come back. I barely even have to touch the yoke. The airplane doesn't just yaw into a skidding turn. The plane banks a bit in the direction of turn. It may move a little bit but the ball stays centered. In fact, the yoke even turns a bit due to the difference in airflow over the ailerons. At higher air speeds the effect is reduced, but I doubt that it disappears altogether.

At higher speeds, I can rock the wings back and forth by applying a slight lead with the rudder each way and I can see the nose right in front of me pivot around a single point. That's not what I read in a book or anything, just my own observation.

Funny, or maybe not so funny thing is, my wife and I were at the beach a couple of weeks ago when some cat came flying by at about 100 feet over the water trying to rock his wings. I told my wife that he wasn't using his rudder. The airplane looked like a leaf blowing side to side in the wind.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

OK good explanation. To continue the purely academic discussion of unimportant technical matters, my thoughts are that what you are seeing at high alpha is increased adverse yaw combined with increased yaw/roll coupling from high dihedral in ag planes. That's the airplane you're talking about right? It makes sense that roll response would be slightly delayed by not leading with the rudder, since leading with rudder should produce a nearly immediate roll response due to dihedral effect. But IMO, that doesn't necessarily mean this rudder-lead turn is perfectly free of momentary skid. Again, the skid ball may not necessarily show a skid. If the ball is mounted above the roll axis, the ball will naturally displace slightly in the slipped direction while rolling into a perfectly coordinated turn. It's pure momentum, just like when your upper body gets pushed in the opposite direction of the roll, assuming your upper body is above the roll axis.

So if the skid ball in the airplane is prone to this effect, a slightly skidded turn initiation could actually cause the ball to stay perfectly centered, since the skid is opposing the opposite reaction of the ball. And if humans in general seem to have slow feet, I think this only worsens in high AOA conditions, making it seem like the lead w/ rudder requirement exists, or is made more obvious. Good discussion, but I'm still not convinced that a truly properly timed, and sufficiently deflected rudder input cannot immediately control adverse yaw and maintain perfect coordination. But maybe that assumes a computer is flying the airplane. Humans just aren't necessarily that precise, and I guess do what they need to do to get good results. Nobody is saying you or other 'rudder leaders' don't get decent results, or can't fly an airplane.

my suspicion is it has something to do with the rudder aileron interconnect and perhaps airflow changes over the tail at the high AOA. It is only observable when the aircraft is heavy (14k roughly) and high power settings. Once the load comes down and the power comes back any lead causes the nose to yaw into the turn. The aircraft has very different flight characteristics heavy vs light but it does carry almost the full empty weight in the hopper.

 

[denverpilot]

Hasn't anyone here done those (they're not really...) fake Dutch roll things where you park the nose on a spot on the horizon and rock the wings back and forth slowly with correct pressures to hold that spot on the horizon exactly on top of a spot on the cowl?

Doing that you figure out in about 60 seconds max, how much pressure and input the ailerons and rudder need in that particular airplane, and it is a quick and easy thing to do.

Hell I sometimes do them when bored and all the chores are mopped up in VFR cruise.

Just rock back and forth, no side loads in your butt at all. Ball in place. Steepen the rock. Now roll faster. Now roll slower. Play with it.

It bypasses a lot of stupid thoughts on how to use enough pressure for that aircraft and gives the brain something tactile to have to latch onto.

 

[FastEddieB]

Hasn't anyone here done those (they're not really...) fake Dutch roll things where you park the nose on a spot on the horizon and rock the wings back and forth slowly with correct pressures to hold that spot on the horizon exactly on top of a spot on the cowl?

Yep!

Shown those by a "99"*. I thought of her then as elderly, but at the time she was probably no more than my age now. And I don't feel elderly!

Good exercise, and I don't recall rudder "lead" was ever brought into it.

Reminiscing now, does anyone else remember Katie Strehle or Fran Sargent, both of whom I knew from Miami Dade Community College, or Don Chalmers from Tursair at Opa Locka? I'm talking late 70's through the 80's.

 

[Henning]

High AoA is another matter really. High AoA (well into the stall warning) rudder is the only directional control you should be using since application of the aileron can cause one wing tip to exceed critical AoA. Sometimes even opposite aileron is called for as one does sometimes with a hammerhead stall.

 

[RoscoeT]

Hasn't anyone here done those (they're not really...) fake Dutch roll things where you park the nose on a spot on the horizon and rock the wings back and forth slowly with correct pressures to hold that spot on the horizon exactly on top of a spot on the cowl?

I hope this doesn't spark more controversy, but the ball in center coordinated 'Dutch roll' will cause small S-turns moving the nose back and forth rather than keep the nose on a point. The nose on point 'Dutch roll' requires x-controlling and is definitely not a ball in center exercise. The ball in center exercise is the best for learning to fly the airplane realistically. The nose on point dutch roll is a pure 'helluvit' exercise in a different type of precision, more relevant to aerobatic pilots. FYI- I will flame anyone who tries to claim the x-controlled nose on point dutch roll helps with x-wind technique.

High AoA is another matter really. High AoA (well into the stall warning) rudder is the only directional control you should be using since application of the aileron can cause one wing tip to exceed critical AoA. Sometimes even opposite aileron is called for as one does sometimes with a hammerhead stall.

Agree w/ first two sentences, but not sure how the hammerhead reference relates. Opposite aileron during hammerheads is done purely to control engine torque. It's also done at zero AOA, and is not a stall, so aileron use during stalls and hammerheads is apples/oranges.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

High AoA is another matter really. High AoA (well into the stall warning) rudder is the only directional control you should be using since application of the aileron can cause one wing tip to exceed critical AoA. Sometimes even opposite aileron is called for as one does sometimes with a hammerhead stall.

Not that high of an AOA....being on the threshold of a stall is not what I'm talking about. I never get that slow in the ag plane. That just begs for an oh **** moment way to close to the ground.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

There was nothing vague about what I said. The airplane I fly requires a very slight lead with rudder in some portions of the flight envelope. Specifically at high AOA and high power when going to a full deflection aileron input. If you don't start with the feet and let that pull the aileron the ball comes out of the cage and the roll response is diminished. Plus its a conventional geared aircraft so I should have the mystical aviation gods helping me understand the environment I am flying within.

I can tell you factually that simultaneous coordinated input in a high alpha condition results in the nose ever so slightly swinging outside the turn and a delay in roll response. Nothing vague about it. If you want an explanation find an engineer. Im not that guy. I never offered an explanation because I honestly don't have one. Theoretically it shouldn't happen but it does. For all I know the rudder aileron interconnect is rigged improperly or there is a dent in just the right place to change something..hell I just don't know. All I can tell you is what the airplane does in response to the control input. If you don't start the roll with the rudder it gets sloppy.

I would like to think that after 16 years of working as a professional pilot I am actually aware of what I'm doing with the flight controls. Not just what I think I'm doing or what some flight instructor explained to me incorrectly. That said I learn something every time I fly....

edit

I hope my posts do not sound argumentative. didn't have that intention but just read back over them and felt like i should clearly state that is not the case. I am not very good at the internet it seems.

Walter Cunningham might be incorrect. Lindbergh bailed out twice.

 

[denverpilot]

Thought of one!

"I was taught..."

... not to waste time on the computer online.

Epic fail.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

So based on some of the comments here I am either a bad pilot, a ignorant pilot that doesn't understand theoretical ideals related to aerodynamics or am the victim of long standing shortcomings from poor instruction at some early stage of my career. Not to worry though.....if only I could fly a taildragger and master its mystical nature I would be cured.

There is no doubt that if you were a good tail wheel pilot you would be a better pilot that's for sure and with some glider experience , even better yet! Both add insight on control both in the air and on the ground. Also probably true that if you were taught by a former military instructor with thousands of hours ,your probably better off than trained by a recent CFI , trying to build hours who doesn't have many more hours than you do.