coordinated/linked controls

B

Brad W

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Nov 19, 2019
Messages
2,073
Location
NE Florida
Display Name
Display name:
BLW2
watching a video this morning while walking the dog. Skywagon University about the Beech debonair.
I have zero Beech time and very little familiarity...
He was showing how the ailerons and rudder were mechanically linked....you get a little aileron deflection with only just rudder input...and visa versa....
Is this true for all Beech's?
With planes like this, is it possible to force uncoordinated flight...slips, skids.... say do a Dutch Roll for example?
and if so how are these two different systems connected to allow the override? springs? clutches?
 
Ercoupes have a similar connection, but they lack rudder controls.
 
I don't know if it's true for all Beeches, but the B33 I flew for my complex, HP and mountain checkout had it. But it wasn't a solid interlock - you could still move the rudder independently of the ailerons. It just added a bias. At least that is how I remember it. That was a long time ago.
 
Yup, as others said, there is a mechanical connection, but not a solid one. It uses springs/bungees I believe, so there is plenty of give for whatever control input combinations you need. Similar to the nosewheel steering linkage to the rudder pedals, on planes that are equipped with it (unlike pipers, which are hard-linked)
 
Mooneys have this also. It’s just bungees so you can overpower it to slip.
 
thanks
ahh...I don't remember it in the little bit of Mooney time I have.... long time ago.
 
Cirrus had interlink controls for a while, but they stopped doing it in later models.
 
Why do you think you can fly a Cherokee with your feet on the floor?
 
Salty said:
Mooneys have this also. It’s just bungees so you can overpower it to slip.
Click to expand...

Yea I wasn’t used to that- I can see how over time can make the feet a lil lazy, coming out Of tailwheel I’m used to dancing on the ground but even in the air my old vintage bird needed to be lead with rudder.. to now see the ball centered doing little to nothing seems a bit foreign at the moment! :) I’m sure that’ll pass
 
Beech Musketeers also have this. It’s a bungee so you can overpower it for uncoordinated flight when desired.
 
Domenick said:
Ercoupes have a similar connection, but they lack rudder controls.
Click to expand...
Most of them. Some of them came from the factory and some had rudder pedals added on an STC. Our airpark, with about 30-40 active GA pilots, has six or seven Ercoupes, most without pedals but a couple with.

They are fun to fly. Plus it was my first flight in months when the ball stayed centered!
 
TriPacers. Cessna 172s with the float kit hardware installed. Some, like the TriPacer, use some pretty stout springs. The float 172 springs are hardly worth the name. Very light.

There have been plenty with aileron/rudder interconnects. I just can't bring them all to mind right now.

I once did a bunch of work on a Maule M-4 that had an aileron-rudder tab interconnect. No springs. The aileron movement worked the tab to move the rudder in the right direction for coordination. Moving the rudder with the pedals did nothing to the ailerons.

Cirrus had it in the SR20. It used plain rubber bungee cord, the sort of thing you might use to strap stuff on your bike.
 
Love the Ercoupe - simple and safe - when less is better, no rudder pedals, no flaps, no spins, no stalls etc. waiting for one in MSFS. Cheers.
 
FrankPilot said:
Love the Ercoupe - simple and safe - when less is better, no rudder pedals, no flaps, no spins, no stalls etc. waiting for one in MSFS. Cheers.
Click to expand...
But it had a habit of sinking rapidly when you got slow with it. Plenty were wrecked that way, pancaking into the runway. Not stalled, just awesome sink rate.

There are no foolproof airplanes. Good training, lots of it, contributes far more to safety than any "simple, safe" airplane.
 
Dan Thomas said:
But it had a habit of sinking rapidly when you got slow with it. Plenty were wrecked that way, pancaking into the runway. Not stalled, just awesome sink rate.

There are no foolproof airplanes. Good training, lots of it, contributes far more to safety than any "simple, safe" airplane.
Click to expand...

Yep, gotta know the particular idiosyncrasies of your aircraft. Cheers.
PS. I would place “as safe a plane as possible” and “training as good as possible” alongside each other.
 
aftCG said:
Why do you think you can fly a Cherokee with your feet on the floor?
Click to expand...
Not sure whether that means feet on the actual floor or feet on the rudder pedals.

A well-rigged and trimmed Cherokee can be flown for minutes with rudder alone. I've done so in my Warrior for minutes at a time (no AP). Use rudder to pick up a sagging wing.
 
Domenick said:
Not sure whether that means feet on the actual floor or feet on the rudder pedals.

A well-rigged and trimmed Cherokee can be flown for minutes with rudder alone. I've done so in my Warrior for minutes at a time (no AP). Use rudder to pick up a sagging wing.
Click to expand...


Agreed, but the Cherokees I flew had rudder trim which helps a lot. Get pitch and yaw trimmed properly and it will fly well hands off, then just give an occasional tweak to the pedal or the trim knob.
 
Half Fast said:
Agreed, but the Cherokees I flew had rudder trim which helps a lot. Get pitch and yaw trimmed properly and it will fly well hands off, then just give an occasional tweak to the pedal or the trim knob.
Click to expand...
Cessnas have rudder trim as well, it's just tougher to adjust in-flight, lol.
 
FrankPilot said:
Yep, gotta know the particular idiosyncrasies of your aircraft. Cheers.
PS. I would place “as safe a plane as possible” and “training as good as possible” alongside each other.
Click to expand...
The Ercoupe has another glaring problem: It can't slip for a crosswind landing. It has to touch down in a crab, and then steering it straight on the runway means you're putting the upwind aileron down, and the wind can lift that and the airplane is wrecked.

So where is the increased safety there?

Airplanes made to be safe and foolproof are also limited in what they can handle. Airplanes are full of compromises anyway, and the Ercoupe, while loved by many, has too many compromises, IMHO.

I was a flight instructor for awhile, until the maintenance duties took me out of that. We taught people to fly and to score well above government minima. Just training to pass an exam was not good enough; our students were aiming at flying in some difficult parts of the world, and they had to be the best they could be. They got their money's worth from us.

I flew an Alon Aircoupe, the final iteration of the Ercoupe. It had the rudder pedals. It could outrun a Cessna 150 and fly circles around it. It had 90 HP, giving it the same power-to-weight ratio of the 150, but it had a lot less drag. Took off shorter, climbed faster, cruised faster. The rudder pedals made crosswind stuff safer, but it would still sink badly when slow. The old rule of thumb of approaching at 1.3 Vso does not work with such airplanes. I was used to my Jodel, which also has a short wing and high sink rate if slow, so it didn't bother me. That homebuilt Jodel also had the wheels and brakes off an Ercoupe that had pancaked and smashed itself.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Cessnas have rudder trim as well, it's just tougher to adjust in-flight, lol.
Click to expand...
Starting with the 177, Most Cessnas had cockpit rudder trim. Some 180s had it in the 1950s already. It's only the 140s/150s/ and most 172s that had the ground-adjustable tab. The later legacy 172s had the cockpit-adjustable rudder trim option.
 
Half Fast said:
Beech Musketeers also have this. It’s a bungee so you can overpower it for uncoordinated flight when desired.
Click to expand...
Also, the FBO can tow it in tight circles with that rudder clamp thingy in place. Lots of stretch in those bungees.
 
Dan Thomas said:
The Ercoupe has another glaring problem: It can't slip for a crosswind landing. It has to touch down in a crab, and then steering it straight on the runway means you're putting the upwind aileron down, and the wind can lift that and the airplane is wrecked.

So where is the increased safety there?

Airplanes made to be safe and foolproof are also limited in what they can handle. Airplanes are full of compromises anyway, and the Ercoupe, while loved by many, has too many compromises, IMHO.

I was a flight instructor for awhile, until the maintenance duties took me out of that. We taught people to fly and to score well above government minima. Just training to pass an exam was not good enough; our students were aiming at flying in some difficult parts of the world, and they had to be the best they could be. They got their money's worth from us.

I flew an Alon Aircoupe, the final iteration of the Ercoupe. It had the rudder pedals. It could outrun a Cessna 150 and fly circles around it. It had 90 HP, giving it the same power-to-weight ratio of the 150, but it had a lot less drag. Took off shorter, climbed faster, cruised faster. The rudder pedals made crosswind stuff safer, but it would still sink badly when slow. The old rule of thumb of approaching at 1.3 Vso does not work with such airplanes. I was used to my Jodel, which also has a short wing and high sink rate if slow, so it didn't bother me. That homebuilt Jodel also had the wheels and brakes off an Ercoupe that had pancaked and smashed itself.[/QUOTE

I am just a recreational pilot who has never flown the Ercoupe IRL, just in the Sim, so I bow to your better knowledge & judgement. Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top