Mechanics of Elevator Trim. In Detail.

On Jun 9, 8:18 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:

> Both these explanations are true, but one of them eliminates the need
> for $30 product (or $30,000 aircraft) to know what is going on.

I find that its pretty difficult to teach students to fly without the
aircraft.

-Robert, CFII

On Jun 9, 10:48 pm, "Robert M. Gary" <N70...@> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 8:18 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:
>
> > Both these explanations are true, but one of them eliminates the need
> > for $30 product (or $30,000 aircraft) to know what is going on.
>
> I find that its pretty difficult to teach students to fly without the
> aircraft.

That brings us full-circle to a theme that was mildly explored in
another post - what utility, if any, is there in using a simulator to
learn things that do not require actual flying.

So here the question would be whether it is possible to understand how
a trim tab works without ever having flown an aircraft.

I have flown in DA-20 and Tomahawk, but I do not think actual flight
would have been necessary to understand how trim tab works.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

>"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibuduvin@> wrote in message
>news:9483664d-6897-4777-b4d4-
>
>Another might say, "Trim wheel is connected to a trim tab on elevator,
>often located on one side of elevator only, and air moving across
>elevator results in aerodynamic force vector on tab that acts on
>elevator to position elevator so that point of equilibrium is reached,
>and such force being sufficient that you no longer need the yoke to
>position the elevator. As you can imagine, speed and orientation of
>aircraft will have some effect on force...and therefore position of
>elevator. Also, if only one tab, force applies asymetrically to
>aircraft...etc."
>

I'm glad I wasn't there the day he introduced the radio.

Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@> wrote in news:6b0f0604-da90-4433-
8df1-59410de702a4@y21g2000hsf..com:

> On Jun 9, 1:06 pm, "Robert M. Gary" <N70...@> wrote:
>> On Jun 9, 9:34 am, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:
>>
>> > MSFS was the means by which I discovered the mechanism.
>>
>> > If I had learned in actual aircraft, the question still would have
>> > been relevant.
>>
>> I disagree. I've never had a student have trouble understanding trim.
>> I think this is just something that is confusing for the sim guys. As
>> such it is more approporiate for a sim group, not a pilot's group.
>
> I never had trouble undestanding it.

Yes, you have and stil do.


Bertie
>
>

Le Chaud Lapin <jaibuduvin@> wrote in news:8675d961-0cdf-49a3-
8927-8f0fc8ad6421@l42g2000hsc..com:

> On Jun 9, 10:48 pm, "Robert M. Gary" <N70...@> wrote:
>> On Jun 9, 8:18 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:
>>
>> > Both these explanations are true, but one of them eliminates the need
>> > for $30 product (or $30,000 aircraft) to know what is going on.
>>
>> I find that its pretty difficult to teach students to fly without the
>> aircraft.
>
> That brings us full-circle to a theme that was mildly explored in
> another post - what utility, if any, is there in using a simulator to
> learn things that do not require actual flying.
>
> So here the question would be whether it is possible to understand how
> a trim tab works without ever having flown an aircraft.
>
> I have flown in DA-20 and Tomahawk, but I do not think actual flight
> would have been necessary to understand how trim tab works.

Which is an admission that you do not know how trim works.


Bertie

"Robert M. Gary" <N7093v@> wrote in news:a70d185c-acc8-458f-8551-
a06760fcb91f@u36g2000prf..com:

> On Jun 8, 8:54 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:
>
>> Spent 30 minutes at pool yesterday discussing with professional
>> metalworkers best way to weld a complex joint for important element of
>> prototype of what would be considered a wing.
>
> When you go to look for commerical rated pilots to do the test flight
> please cross my name off the list.

Hell, I don;t even want to be in the same hemispehre.


Bertie

Some students want the first approach, some may want the second - it's
probably 95% to 5%. If you assume they all want the more detailed
explanation for everything, you will have frustrated students who either
think that flying is too complicated for them to learn, or who quit because
they are bored.

When I took driver's ed in high school they didn't explain the inner
workings of a carburetor, nor did they need to in order for me to be able to
learn how to drive. Knowing how a carburetor works and having the ability
to tear one down and put it back together again does not make me a better
driver.

You want to know every detail - fine. You just need to find an instructor
who is willing and able to do that for you. As you know, not all of them
are nor do they need to be in order to be able to teach you to fly and fly
well. I suspect you dispute that fact, but history has already proven you
wrong.



"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibuduvin@> wrote

It is the
instructor's choice to determine how deep s/he should delve into the
mechanics of flight.

One instructor might say, "Move trim wheel up or down to relieve
pressure on yoke."

Another might say, "Trim wheel is connected to a trim tab on elevator,
often located on one side of elevator only, and air moving across
elevator results in aerodynamic force vector on tab that acts on
elevator to position elevator so that point of equilibrium is reached,
and such force being sufficient that you no longer need the yoke to
position the elevator. As you can imagine, speed and orientation of
aircraft will have some effect on force...and therefore position of
elevator. Also, if only one tab, force applies asymetrically to
aircraft...etc."

"Le Chaud Lapin" <jaibuduvin@> wrote in message
news:8675d961-0cdf-49a3-8927-8f0fc8ad6421@l42g2000hsc..com...
On Jun 9, 10:48 pm, "Robert M. Gary" <N70...@> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 8:18 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@> wrote:
>
> > Both these explanations are true, but one of them eliminates the need
> > for $30 product (or $30,000 aircraft) to know what is going on.
>
> I find that its pretty difficult to teach students to fly without the
> aircraft.

That brings us full-circle to a theme that was mildly explored in
another post - what utility, if any, is there in using a simulator to
learn things that do not require actual flying.

So here the question would be whether it is possible to understand how
a trim tab works without ever having flown an aircraft.

I have flown in DA-20 and Tomahawk, but I do not think actual flight
would have been necessary to understand how trim tab works.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

Well, it's been a long time since I flew a Tomahawk and I never flew the
DA-20, and my Tomahawk manual has gone AWOL; but I don't recall the Tomahawk
having a tab--IIRC, it had a spring system. That gives a different "feel"
and a different contribution to the feel of the primary controls; but there
should have been little motivation for MS to attempt to model those
subtleties--especially since the purchaser has choices in the physical
controls (yokes, etc.) attached to his computer.

Knowing how the systems work can be intellectually interesting for the
technically oriented; essential for designers, builders and mechanics; and
can easily save your life in the event of a systems failure in a real
aircraft. Therefore, most members of this group need to know the systems on
the aircraft they actually fly; but have no need for all of the possible
combinations and permutations.

The bottom line is that you are apparently part of the primary market for
MSFS and it gives you enjoyment. OTOH, most members of this group (who use
it at all) use it as a tool for procedure training, such as practicing
intercepts and approaches, and do so for efficiency rather than
entertainment.

Peter

On Jun 10, 9:32 am, "Peter Dohm" <lefty...@> wrote:
> Well, it's been a long time since I flew a Tomahawk and I never flew the
> DA-20, and my Tomahawk manual has gone AWOL; but I don't recall the Tomahawk
> having a tab--IIRC, it had a spring system.  That gives a different "feel"
> and a different contribution to the feel of the primary controls; but there
> should have been little motivation for MS to attempt to model those
> subtleties--especially since the purchaser has choices in the physical
> controls (yokes, etc.) attached to his computer.
>
> Knowing how the systems work can be intellectually interesting for the
> technically oriented; essential for designers, builders and mechanics; and
> can easily save your life in the event of a systems failure in a real
> aircraft.  Therefore, most members of this group need to know the systems on
> the aircraft they actually fly; but have no need for all of the possible
> combinations and permutations.

My OP did not mention anything about combinations and permutations.
It was asked in general, and then just for C172, as an example.

> The bottom line is that you are apparently part of the primary market for
> MSFS and it gives you enjoyment.  OTOH, most members of this group (who use
> it at all) use it as a tool for procedure training, such as practicing
> intercepts and approaches, and do so for efficiency rather than
> entertainment.

Yes, I do enjoy understanding things, but my primary motivation is
efficiency of savings.

It was a lot cheaper to check my understanding of how trim tab works
using a simulator than it was to drive 40km out to airport and fiddle
with a real plane.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

"BDS" <skyhi203m> wrote in message
news:qgs3k.11293$Ri.9655@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Some students want the first approach, some may want the second - it's
> probably 95% to 5%. If you assume they all want the more detailed
> explanation for everything, you will have frustrated students who either
> think that flying is too complicated for them to learn, or who quit
> because
> they are bored.
>
> When I took driver's ed in high school they didn't explain the inner
> workings of a carburetor, nor did they need to in order for me to be able
> to
> learn how to drive. Knowing how a carburetor works and having the ability
> to tear one down and put it back together again does not make me a better
> driver.
>
> You want to know every detail - fine. You just need to find an instructor
> who is willing and able to do that for you. As you know, not all of them
> are nor do they need to be in order to be able to teach you to fly and fly
> well. I suspect you dispute that fact, but history has already proven you
> wrong.
>
In general, I agree with you--one certainly didn't need to know the inner
workings of the carburetor. However, it could be very usefull to understand
what the throttle (accelerator) return spring did! That sort of information
is in the POH for any aircraft certified under Part 23.

OTOH, the answers to the original question posted by the OP might be
included over the course of an airframe mechanic's curriculum--or might not.

Peter