Skycatcher's End

[drseti]

Allow me to join the thread drift.

In any side by seating aircraft, the student has to be taught to judge paralllax error. Here's how I do it:

Have the student taxi so as to line up to where he or she believes the nose appears straight over the yellow line, on an unused taxiway. Then, have the student shut down the plane, get out, and see that the plane is crooked. Next, repeat the exercise with the yellow line appearing to be between his or her legs. The nose will appear to be right of the line (to a right seat occupant, it will look to be left of the line.) Again, have the student get out and take a look. Now, the plane will be straight on the taxiway. If the student gets back in and memorizes the sight picture, he or she will now know how to track a taxiway or runway centerline. This will obviously help with takeoffs and landings.

Another approach: the instructor lines the plane up straight, shuts down, has the student get out and look, verifying that the plane is straight. Next, the student gets in the left seat and observes the sight picture. Finally, the student gets in the right seat, and observes the sight picture from there, noticing how different it is.

Sorry, Eddie, this doesn't work in your Sky Arrow.

[FastEddieB]

Sorry, Eddie, this doesn't work in your Sky Arrow.

Nor in either of my Citabrias.

BTW, I just find something inherently "right" about the pilot sitting right on the plane's longitudinal axis. Tandem seating is clearly not for everyone, but for me it's a big plus.

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[Flocker]

I spoke to the local Cessna Sales Rep today. Cessna will continue to support the 162. In fact, they are offering a pretty good discount on the remaining inventory. What does the group think about the promise of on-going support from Cessna?

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[CTLSi]

......

[CTLSi]

......

[CharlieTango]

Right rudder is needed on both takeoff and landing due to these effects.

You have to stop giving advice on how to fly when it is backwards. Right rudder on landings is backwards, most of us trim for left rudder on approach to land and most of us do not land at full power.

This from the guy that thinks the CT has a flaperon...care to tell the crowd about it?

CTs do have flaperons and do not require right rudder to land. They may require right rudder to correct for the pilot landing with the nose pulled to the left.

[FastEddieB]

As an aside, in my Sky Arrow I don't see much need for rudder in either direction - certainly not on landing but also not even on full power, low airspeed climbouts.

Remember, I have the same ROTAX as many of you (912ULS2), but its pointed backwards - so I would assume opposite (right) rudder might be needed in climb. But nope - there seems to be no need at all.

A visual aid (from last year's Page adventure):



Maybe there's just less spiraling slipstream effect with the prop so close to the rudder and being above the fuselage. Or maybe all the twisting moments are diminished because the thrust is produced so close to the CG.

Or maybe its just because its a toy!

(Not that there's anything wrong with that!)

[roger lee]

Hi Ed,

Your answers are all on the CT forum. I believe you missed this one. Too much to post here.
Seems like others there agree that there is no right or wrong or black and white answer and many factors affect each plane even of the same design and especially of different aircraft. You haven't flown any of our planes and have no idea if either rudder is needed. You have only flown your plane. How can you tell another guy in another state that he is braking his truck wrong if you have never driven that vehicle or driven with the driver. Same goes here.

Hi Eddie,

You have a skinny low fuselage with a tall tee tail and top mounted pusher engine. Not even in the same ballpark as a CT.

I have to use right rudder to land straight and right rudder on take off to stay straight. For anyone to say your doing it wrong and I'm not really using right rudder and I'm not really straight is like accusing me of being 20 years old again.

This isn't a math problem that has a single answer. Each plane takes what it takes to land and take off straight regardless of what someone else thinks. It is what it is.

[FastEddieB]

You have a skinny low fuselage with a tall tee tail and top mounted pusher engine. Not even in the same ballpark as a CT.

I know.

Which is why I prefaced my observations as an "aside".

It was not meant to be evidence of anything - just an interesting factoid.

[CharlieTango]

Ed, the easy answer is trim from the factory and the owner...

My plane will land cocked to the left (calm wind)... I have them always apply a little right rudder just before touch and they land straight...

What many are forgetting is each plane is trimmed ...
Why do you think so many that have CT's put marks on the windshield for landing? It is because most are cocked to the left some and need to add a little right rudder to be straight so they put lines and dots on the windshield....

Roger,

I will agree the answer is the owner. Strait is hard to see in a CT and the fact that you need a correction prior to and after touchdown isn't the plane's fault. If you go left after the nose settles there is a reason. Most landings have some amount of crosswind to deal with. When landing the aircraft yaws in relation to the relative wind at the pilots discretion either right or left, not always left requiring right rudder. The pilot should maintain alignment with rudder inputs as necessarily, either left or right depending on how much drift he is countering and any gusts. If I have a strong enough crosswind from the right I will need full left rudder to land, how does your need for right rudder work then?

I think students and instructors mark their windshields because it is hard to tell if they are strait. Because the marks are a triangulation and the distance to the runway is not a constant the marks lie to the pilot except at one point. If you rely on the marks enough it ill lead you to a continuous yaw because the angles change as you approach. Marking your windscreen could be the very thing that leads you left prior to touchdown.

You say most add a mark because they are cocked left? What good is the mark if they are still cocked left? If it could be fixed with a mark how is that the plane's fault and not the pilot's?

I'm not saying that many don't use right rudder and or right steering correction on most landings I'm just pointing out that there is no need for it beyond correcting what should have been strait in the first place. On a side-slipped landing its the pilot's job to maintain tracking of the centerline and alignment. Due to gradient and shear the amount of input required changes and if the nose yaws left of centerline the pilot failed to maintain alignment.

Saying that all CTs are trimmed different is not an issue, we land with our feet not our trim, we overcome rudder trim forces without a thought on landings.

[Jack Tyler]

"What does the group think about the promise of on-going support from Cessna?"

For some of the 162's components, it's highly likely. After all, there's a profit motive in doing so. Now for those components, the question might be: Will you want to pay what Cessna will be asking? If you visit some of the Cessna type clubs - e.g. CFO for Cardinals - you'll find that there are some breathtaking prices placed on Cessna certified parts since they are done in very small production runs. Beech is somewhat (in)famous for this. The marketplace adjusts for this to some degree with certified a/c since other suppliers can seek PMA (Parts Manufacturing Authority) for a part and can then sell it without the high overhead costs that Cessna must carry.

Perhaps Paul or someone else here can clarify how this works in the ASTM/LSA world. Is there the option for a third party vendor to design, build and market a 162 seat or glareshield for example?

But it would seem there will be iinevitable limitations on which 162 parts Cessna will be able to provide given their offshore manufacturing decision. E.g. when a door is destroyed beyond repair because the double lock on the 162 isn't used properly, the door must be ordered from and built in China. Will the tooling needed for building that door be transferred back to the U.S., room for it found on a manufacturing floor somewhere, and the skill sets put in place so a door can be built? For an elevator, the answer is probably 'yes'. For a door, I would guess the answer is probably 'no'. But both are likely to be quite expensive, even by aviation standards.

[FastEddieB]

Just posted to the CT site:


One other thought I had last night.

The need for right rudder on landing could be an aerodynamic issue with an individual plane, or it could be something else.

If the left brake was dragging slightly, that could pull the nose left on touchdown as well. As could a misaligned nosewheel, as Roger just pointed out.

In any event, I think it's important to find out why the plane is doing that - something could actually be wrong with it and the pilot should not just imagine "they all do that".

To help troubleshoot, maybe he should try watching what the plane does on an approach to landing stall in the same configuration he normally lands in. Is right rudder necessary there to keep the nose from swinging left? Is right rudder required to keep th ball centered? If so, it would seem to be an aerodynamic problem with the plane's rigging.

But if not, then that might point to something going on with the nosewheel or brakes or tracking, since other than ground effect, the aerodynamic forces on a landing plane should be the same as one approaching a landing stall.

A video taken of a landing from the runway threshold, even with just a smartphone, could tell us a lot. A better description of when the right rudder is necessary would also help.

Again, I'm just trying to troubleshoot and understand, not cast aspersions.

[drseti]

Jack,
In the certified world, a PMA has to be issued by the FAA. In the SLSA world, the equivalent would be a blanket LoA. This would have to come from the original manufacturer. If, for example, Cessna chose to issue one, then a hypothetical Skycatcher Owner's Club could get parts made, and distribute them. If not, the only option for owners could be to reregister as an Experimental.