KeroseneSnorter
Robust Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2003
- Posts
- 1,530
Tinstaafl said:It's a form of linked chain concept.
If you, say, pitch the a/c to correct a GS error using the GS to tell you when to stop pitching then you'll overcorrect, resulting in flying through the GS and a mirror image of the problem. This yo-yo-ing results in the GS being seen -momentarilly - as the a/c passes from one side to another. As a/c speeds, mass & inertia increase, and proximity to the transmitter decreases then the pilot responses will not be adequate to constrain the flight path within the required tolerances.
So, the next step back from the direct reading instrument (the GS display), is to establish a nominal rate of descent for the rate of closure that will match the GS angle. At best the a/c will exactly parallel the GS (if the descent started whilst on the GS), at worst the descent will diverge at a rate inversely proportional to the distance from the transmitter. Of course this assumes the ROD is exactly correct. If the descent rate is incorrect then it will result in either closing with the GS (yay!) or diverging from it (boo, hiss).
Trouble is that pitching to establish a descent rate by reference to a normal VSI results in a similar GS display ie yo-yo-ing.
What next? Use the AI/AH to set a constant pitch angle. If power is unchanged then ROD is roughly linearly proportional to pitch attitude, at least close enough over small changes to be useful. Now the key becomes 'check the GP to determine location WRT to the GS, check VSI to determine ROD WRT a previously calculated approx. 'ideal' ROD --> adjust pitch attitude by a small amount WRT to the AI/AH & wait for a stabilised (or nearly stabilised) new ROD in the appropriate sense --> wait for change of position WRT to the GS to be indicated on the GS display. If the rate of change is insufficient then reiterate.
NB: At some point in this process will be found a pitch attitude that very nearly 'freezes' the GS needle. Remember that attitude for when the GS is eventually regained then use it as the subsequent baseline reference point.
This results in a far more stable & controlled GS than the other scenarios I mentioned.
The principle in the above GS example is no different to establishing a CDI intercept. I don't think anyone would advocate rolling the a/c until they saw the CDI move? Or, one step back from that, roll the a/c until they saw the HDG reach the desired point? Try that a 180deg required HDG change.... Instead we all roll the a/c by referencing the AoB on the AI/AH, holding the desired AoB while the a/c turns, then holding the new heading while waiting for the CDI to move etc.
So... in my view the AI/AH is the primary instrument(s) along with power & the ball.
Sorry if this gets a bit basic, but I found it difficult to explain my point without resorting to first principles.
Holy Crap, Tin!
Loc, G/S, Hdg, Alt, A/S, Repeat until minimums.......small corrections as necessary.
Just fly the freakin thing!!! Works in a 140 as well as a 757!
It ain't rocket science, each student needs to find what works for him/her.
I had a kid one time that got some screwy formula from a retired Air Force Col. that was teaching ground school, He was doing great until he decided to try to use that formula for decent FPM , intercept angle, yadda, yadda, yadda, Once I got him to forget all that crap and just fly the airplane he could nail an ILS no problem!