Pitch for Speed, Power for Altitude Mentality Question

N918KT

N918KT

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
716
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Display Name
Display name:
KT
So it is one thing for me to know to adjust my pitch for speed and adjust my power for controlling altitude, but it is another thing to get it wired into my brain and put it to practice.

How did you get that "pitch for speed, power for altitude" mentality wired into your brain and put it to practice?

Was your brain at first wired to "pitch for altitude, power for speed"?
 
I honestly never thought about it - not in those first few flight hours, and not now. Just did what needed to be done to make the airplane do what was needed. ;) People make flying so complicated. Power gives you additional energy. You can either use that energy for increased speed, or for altitude issues, or some degree of both. It's up to the pilot. It's not an either/or question.
 
Which brings to mind an old story from WWII:

Some old school commercial transport pilots were going through indoctrination to become MATS pilots. They were less than overjoyed to be taught by a newly minted 2nd Lt. who tried to drum the concepts of "modern" flight theories into the old hands.

The IP and a grizzled old pilot rolled out onto the runway in a DC-3 and after rolling a ways and locking the tail wheel the veteran stopped the plane and began rapidly working the yoke back and forth.

"What in hell are you doing ??" the 2nd Looie asked.

"Building up airspeed," The old hand replied, "When we hit Vr grab them throttle and give me some altitude." :D
 
Spend 15-20 minutes of a lesson working this.

First get to a decent altitude practice altitude and trim for hands off straight and level flight. Enjoy a few seconds of touching no controls and marvel how stable your aircraft is. Take a look at the tach and note the RPM needed to maintain this. Also note your airspeed.

Then, without making any inputs on the yoke or stick, add power smoothly until you get a 500 fpm climb. Again note the RPM. Better, write it down. Check your airspeed and I bet it did not change, but if it did, not by much.

Now bring the power back down to the first RPM. Again, with no inputs to the stick or yoke. You might see a bit of up and down oscillation happen that gets less and less and less each cycle. This is normal as the aircraft seeks stability. But what is the result? Straight and level flight.

Now pull the power out slowly until you have a 500 FPM descent. Again note and record the RPM. Again note and record your airspeed. Because you pitched and trimmed for your original speed, you're likely still glued right there at that speed. But because you are producing less power than needed for straight and level, you're descending. But again at the speed you were straight and level at.

Now apply power back to your original RPM and level out.

We have just experienced "Power for Altitude" lesson. Even better, you now have some useful numbers for your aircraft that you can use again and again. When you want to cruise straight and level, use the first RPM. When you want to cruise climb, use the second RPM. When you want to cruise descend, use the third.


Pitch For Speed is just as easy. Start straight and level at a good practice altitude, and put your power for the first RPM and trim so you're hands off. Note the airspeed.

Now, without changing the power, pitch up 5-degrees (first line on your artificial horizon) and do your best to hold that steady by trimming out the force on the yoke or stick. Let the climb stabilize. You'll see the airspeed be less than S&L flight, but also stabilize at the lower number.

You pitched your nose upward and it slowed you down.

Return to straight and level flight by pushing forward on the stick or yoke. Leave power alone. Notice that you sped up? You pitched your nose down, increasing your speed. Trim out the forces and stay stright and level for a few moments.

Now push the stick or yoke forward, again, leave the power alone. Pitch downward for a 5-degree descent (the first line BELOW the horizon on your attitude indicator). Hold that and trim out the forces. Note that your airspeed increases but eventually stabilizes at a number higher than your straight and level speed.

Again, you pitched our nose downward, and the speed increased.


So what have you learned? For the same power setting, pitching upward slows you down. Pitching downward speeds you up. Adding power increases your altitude. Reducing power loses you altitude.


Now, where do you put this into practice? Why landing the aircraft!!

You've seen many discussions about the proper speeds to use when landing various aircraft. This is where the proper pitch (and trim) come into play. If your aircraft lands best at 65KIAS, you work and practice until you find the right pitch provides that speed. Use the trim for fine tuning. Goal is to get the speed nailed so you're not doing any push or pull inputs. If any are needed, it's fingertip pressure, not wrist, elbow or shoulder.

"Power for altitude" comes in to play to keep your aircraft, already pitched for the correct speed, on the proper glide path. Learning the proper sight picture is a big player here too.

If you are doing it right, then the runway will appear to be steady and not move. But if it appears to rise upwards, you're descending a bit too rapidly. Add a touch, a skosh, a smidgen of power until you correct this and bring the runway back to the desired picture.

If the runway appears to be dropping ot of the sight picture, your climbing a bit too rapidly, or perhaps not descending a the proper rate. Remove a touch, a skosh, a smidgen of power until you correct this and bring the runway back to the desired picture.

Make sense?

There is more to take away and apply. But let's start with that. Go out and practice in the air before you apply it to the actual landings. But once you and your instructor are happy with how you're doing at altitude, then you can start applying it to your landings.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Which brings to mind an old story from WWII:

Some old school commercial transport pilots were going through indoctrination to become MATS pilots. They were less than overjoyed to be taught by a newly minted 2nd Lt. who tried to drum the concepts of "modern" flight theories into the old hands.

The IP and a grizzled old pilot rolled out onto the runway in a DC-3 and after rolling a ways and locking the tail wheel the veteran stopped the plane and began rapidly working the yoke back and forth.

"What in hell are you doing ??" the 2nd Looie asked.

"Building up airspeed," The old hand replied, "When we hit Vr grab them throttle and give me some altitude." :D
Click to expand...

Funny.

Fits in with the "tall tale" I would tell first time passengers about the Johnson Bar on the PA28's....

"What's that bar between us for?" they would ask.

"Well, look out side and behind the wing. See the bit that moves when I pull the bar up and down?"

"Uhhh, yeah..."

"If we need some extra speed on take off or when flying, I'll get you to pump that up and down rapidly like a bird flapping it's wings."

Then it was fun to watch their face as their brain tried to make sense of that.
 
I know all the jokes about pumping the yoke for airspeed, and the issues that are high altitude cruise, you can't add more power for a climb.

Pitch for airspeed, power for altitude is a critical concept because it is crucially important and must be second nature at the three most important phases of flight.
1 - Takeoff
2 - Landing
3 - Engine failure

On takeoff, you pitch for airspeed. The throttle is maxed, pitch is the only control you have. Max throttle, pitch for airspeed.

On landing, you have to be on speed. Pitch controls airspeed, engine controls glidepath. Stay on speed and adjust glidepath with power. Trying to 'stretch' the glide with pitch will only steepen your approach angle, and put you short.

If the engine quits, pitch for airspeed (because you have no power). Mess it up, and either you stall (not pitching down quickly enough) or you lose glide. The plane glides best at a speed. Pitching up from best glide to 'stretch the glide' and getting below best glide only make your problem worse, not better.

Same thing happens if you need to descend in bumpy air. If you push the nose down, you increase speed, but you can't because you need to stay below Va. Solution? Pull power. Airspeed is the same, but you're descending.

So, there's one regime of flight where a climb is controlled by pitch, and that's when you are cruising at wide open throttle and have no more power to give (higher altitudes). But even then, pitch is reducing airspeed, and the excess energy is creating a climb.
 
N918KT said:
So it is one thing for me to know to adjust my pitch for speed and adjust my power for controlling altitude, but it is another thing to get it wired into my brain and put it to practice.

How did you get that "pitch for speed, power for altitude" mentality wired into your brain and put it to practice?

Was your brain at first wired to "pitch for altitude, power for speed"?
Click to expand...
Yes, it was wired 'backwards' into my brain from years of RC flying. Not that's it any more right, just expeditious.

Then a CFI, watching me struggle with the pre-solo death grip blues, demonstrated a take off thru landing approach flight using only power and pitch trim. Suddenly I got it. Not to say I never pitched for alt or powered for speed but I KNOW that it really works the other way.

Now flying an extremely well mannered and balanced R10, there's no question about how things work. I pitch trim for speed and adjust power for climb/descent rate. Deviating from that and I just look like those guys at KSFO.
 
Non Compos Mentis said:
These days, a GPS can guide you there. :D
Click to expand...

When my CFI was quizzing me about the "C's" of how to deal with being lost, I responded,

"Climb, Circle, Confess, and Comply."

"Yes, but you forgot one," says he.

"No I didn't." says I.

"Yes, you did," says he. "Cash. So you can buy a better GPS".
 
Like someone else said, more throttle is more energy in the system, which can be used for more altitude, or for more speed, or a bit of both. The reason there are so many proponents of "pitch for airspeed" is because the plane naturally apples a change in energy to altitude more than it does to airspeed.

(Why? For any fixed configuration (static pilot input and trim) extra airspeed will create more life from the horizontal stabilizer downforce. It an upside down wing, so this means more downforce. Like a teeter-totter, this raises the nose, causing the airplane to slow down. If you get slow, the tail generates less downforce, the nose drops, and airspeed increases. The weight of the nose and the downforce of the horizontal stab balance out when it gets near the original speed.)

So, basically, you're fighting the tendencies of the airplane when you use throttle to adjust airspeed. To force extra energy to work towards speed, you have to rebalance the airplane at that new speed (with control input and/or trim). Sometimes this is necessary, like when you're taking off or when you're leveling out at altitude.

Simplified:

When the airplane is maintaining altitude, whether unavoidable (you're rolling but don't have enough lift to fly) or by pilot interaction (you wish to maintain a specific altitude), use throttle for airspeed, pitch for altitude.

When you are in a climb or descent pitch for airspeed, throttle for climb/descent rate.
 
Its a MIMO system (Multi input, multi output). Trying to pretend that one input controls only one output may be a convenient fairytail to tell students (like any explanation of lift that involves an airfoil having a flat bottom and curved top), but in the end it won't reflect the reality of the coupling between AOA and thrust. So, it's pretty hard to argue pitch / power vs power / pitch because both are wrong.
 
The phrase is great for getting someone to have an initial understanding of how to fly an airplane.

However if you are flying along straight and level at 100kts and just add power for a 500fpm climb, you are not going to transition smoothly into a 100kt climb. The plane will pick up some speed, then it will pitch up, then the speed will drop off, then it will pitch down, pick up more speed. This oscillation will continue but the plane will eventually settle in the 500 fpm climb at 100kts, say 5 degrees nose up.

How do you do this smoothly? Add power and simultaneously pitch the nose up to 5 degrees at the same time. You are immediately in a 100kt 500 fpm climb. No oscillation.
 
dell30rb said:
The phrase is great for getting someone to have an initial understanding of how to fly an airplane.

However if you are flying along straight and level at 100kts and just add power for a 500fpm climb, you are not going to transition smoothly into a 100kt climb. The plane will pick up some speed, then it will pitch up, then the speed will drop off, then it will pitch down, pick up more speed. This oscillation will continue but the plane will eventually settle in the 500 fpm climb at 100kts, say 5 degrees nose up.

How do you do this smoothly? Add power and simultaneously pitch the nose up to 5 degrees at the same time. You are immediately in a 100kt 500 fpm climb. No oscillation.
Click to expand...

But it's more fun to hold altitude with the added power, let the speed go up, release the yoke and go wheeeeeeeeeee. Of course, I have 55-60 extra knots I'm pouring into that if I'm putting around at 100kts. I also see the VSI go to +2000 :D
 
EdFred said:
But it's more fun to hold altitude with the added power, let the speed go up, release the yoke and go wheeeeeeeeeee. Of course, I have 55-60 extra knots I'm pouring into that if I'm putting around at 100kts. I also see the VSI go to +2000 :D
Click to expand...

Even more fun if you are at 3' agl when this happens
 
Pitch and power are related by the following:

Pitch for attitude
Power for thrust

No need to make it confusing.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
but in the end it won't reflect the reality of the coupling between AOA and thrust.
Click to expand...

The results aren't theoretically perfect, like applications of aerodynamic rarely are, but power changes in conventional airplanes are very heavily weighted towards a single output. So much so that it's a valuable principle to fly by, in my opinion.
 
bqmassey said:
The results aren't theoretically perfect, like applications of aerodynamic rarely are, but power changes in conventional airplanes are very heavily weighted towards a single output. So much so that it's a valuable principle to fly by, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Not really.

Try getting in a Cessna 172, trimming for level flight at 80 KIAS, and then yanking the power to idle. Watch the airspeed. It won't be close to constant. It will go up. Quite a bit, since you've removed all the propwash over the elevator, reducing its authority.

It will probably work a bit better with a T-tail.

Some airplanes have props well off the centerline, so you get a big pitch moment from throttle changes. An example is a Lake Buccanneer, which has a very high propeller to keep it out of the water. Pulling the prop pitches up and you lose airspeed, the opposite direction from a 172. Even with the prop on centerline, a pitch angle significantly above zero will mean that there is a vertical component to thrust (in a Cessna, far far forward), and removing that will give you a pitch-down moment.

You can use the thrust=altitude, pitch=airspeed to get started, but it's a fairy tale not that much better than telling kids that to go down, you push on the yoke. An adjustment in sink rate at constant airspeed requires both a throttle and a trim change, and neither is negligible. And some left rudder, too, just for good measure. This is the point of a "stabilized approach."

The OP's question has been answered, but I'll repeat it. The way you get it in your head is to do it. For a while, you're going to have to think about it.

I prefer an options list. If fast and high, pull the throttle and pitch up. The speed is more important than the altitude for energy management (total energy scales with v^2, but only linearly in altitude). If fast and low, just pitch up. If slow and high, pitch down. If low and slow, add a bunch of throttle (you're probably behind the power curve) and pitch down. Repeat as needed. Retrim after every step! If not stabilized at 100 AGL, cram the throttle and go around.
 
Last edited:
The funnest teacher of all for this concept is an aerobatic flight. When the nose is pointed straight down at the ground with engine at idle and you can see exactly where you are going to impact, as the VSI winds up like a turbine, you should quickly think of altering your pitch angle to solve this. :yesnod:
 
Intelligent people are the biggest idiots. Smart enough to rationalize the dumbest stuff. Pitch controls airspeed, everything else is people thinking too hard.
 
Yup. If you want to go up, pull back. If you want to go down, just pull back a lot.
 
I slammed the control wheel full forward and then told the instructor once we hit 60 I'd put in the throttle and we'd climb.

Everything in practical aerodynamics is deeply intertwingled. You pull back on the wheel and you go up, but you increase drag and slow down. The net result is you're not changing glidepath much (you're actually decreasing it slightly due to the other "you can break even" laws of thermo).

It really gets fun when you start looking at helicopters. Raise the collective and the thing wants to torque a bit, so you put a little pedal correction in, now the thrust of the tail rotor is also causing you a little horizontal translation so you have to add a little cyclic to counter and now you're disk isn't horizontal so you need more collective.

The big sikorsky's put in elaborate hydraulic mixing to try to remove some of the coupling. When I worked at APG we had some guys in an outfit of called the Human Engineering Lab (HEL(l) as we called it). They built a helo that totally decoupled this interplay. Boy, it drove the real helicopter pilots crazy when they tried to fly it at first.
 
Don't worry Kevin, apparently there are three Korean pilots that are having trouble getting it wired in their heads also. ;)
 
Learn to fly a glider, pitch controls airspeed, you have no power to worry about.

On approach, pitch or attitude controls airspeed, drag devices like spoilers or air brakes control rate of desent. Watch out for the student that realizes he is landing long, beyond the desired touchdown point, and pushes on the stick to "get down". Break them of that habit or they'll never solo.

Conversely, the glider pilot that is landing short that pulls back on the stick does not streatch his glide, he slows down (and could increase sink rate) and really lands short.

So, transition to airplane, pitch(attitude) controls airspeed, application or removal of power controls climb or descent.

On approach, Pitch for airspeed, power for rate of descent.
 
Pitch for power, speed for altitude and heed the No Fasten Smoking Seatbelt signs. ;)
 
I think of this from the perspective of someone who's taken too many physics classes.

An airplane is a giant application of physics with 2 sources of potential (stored) energy (fuel + altitude) and 1 source of kinetic (in motion) energy (x,y,x direction velocity). The thought process below assumes straight and level flight as a prerequisite.

Think of it this way, pushing forward trades potential energy (altitude) for kinetic energy (airspeed) usually x-axis oriented but not always. Pulling back trades kinetic (airspeed) energy for potential energy which is stored in the form of extra altitude. This is the interaction between 2 of the 3 forms of energy.

There's also the exchange of fuel for potential and kinetic energy. If you think of the trim tab as configuring the aircraft for straight and level flight at a given airspeed, rather than a specific altitude this starts to make more sense. Adding power dumps extra kinetic energy into the system which the trim tab counteracts, resulting in increased altitude rather than increased speed. The opposite happens removing power from the engine, the airframe wants to ,maintain constant speed so it descends. That's why you can adjust the trim tab for a different setting and the airplane will react by diving to recover speed or climbing to lose speed while maintaining constant power.
 
For me the concept of pitch for speed, and power for altitude works perfectly fine for me when I am sitting in front of my computer and working on what we used to call in college thinking problems. However, and maybe it is just because I am too naïve or too poor of an aviator at this point in my flying experience, but when I fly it seem that the reality of the situation is that it is not so simple, and it seems though I use pitch for speed, and power for altitude, I use pitch for altitude, and power for speed as well, and for me the perfect configuration of changes seems to me to be a balance of the pitch, power, trim, and prop setting to give me what I need to fly the plane.
 
Trim is just another manifestation of pitch

For a cs prop power and prop act in concert to result in thrust which is what we're really talking about here
 
My cfi made it simple for me. He said to use pitch to control airspeed, and use throttle to control where you'll land. If you are pitching for 75 but look like you are coming up short, then add some throttle. If it looks like you will land long then reduce throttle. If you are wayy to long then do a slip.
 
airheadpenguin said:
Trim is just another manifestation of pitch

For a cs prop power and prop act in concert to result in thrust which is what we're really talking about here
Click to expand...
You are obviously right about trim (maybe I should have added mixture into the combination as well but that is in essence power). What I was trying to say and it seems to be not working real well is that for me it is not as simple as pitch for speed, and power for altitude. (Maybe I should have added mixture into the combination as well but that is in essence power.)

For me it is however not so simple. For example, if I am already at pattern altitude, and am slowing to pattern speed, I pull back on my throttle, and adjust my trim for level flight. Here my simple mind tells me I am using pitch for altitude, and power for speed. Though if you do the thought experiment it could be interpreted the other way too that by pulling back the throttle I would lose lift at a constant horizontal speed but "decreased" vertical speed and to maintain my vertical speed I need to change my pitch which will maintain my vertical speed decrease my horizontal speed... so for me it is a combination of both again.

But I guess if you really if you think about it, it is not so much pitch for speed and power for altitude as it is pitch for horizontal speed, and power for vertical speed...or maybe I am making it too complicated as well.

Maybe I should just stay out of the thread and stop typing.
 
Pitch for speed and power for altitude works well enough with light aircraft, but as you move up the ladder and you fly larger and heavier aircraft that method becomes less and less effective. Try pitching for airspeed in a jet and you're going to give the folks in the back a real ride.

Aircraft with flight directors and autopilots track the localizer with the ailerons, the glideslope with the elevators and you control the airspeed with the throttle. That method works in all aircraft - large or small - and, everything considered, it's probably the best way to accomplish the task.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Its a MIMO system (Multi input, multi output). Trying to pretend that one input controls only one output may be a convenient fairytail to tell students (like any explanation of lift that involves an airfoil having a flat bottom and curved top), but in the end it won't reflect the reality of the coupling between AOA and thrust. So, it's pretty hard to argue pitch / power vs power / pitch because both are wrong.
Click to expand...

I've been struggling with the pitch/power thing too(well I was much more so earlier on, and now getting more at ease with it) and your post makes sense to me.

I am getting to where I am comfortable with approaches but to me it seems if you adjust one, you have to also adjust the other. If I'm pitched for 65kt and I find I'm low, adding power changes that, but now my airspeed has also gone up so I find myself pitching up slightly to control the rise in airspeed. Conversely, if I am high, and I pull out power, my glidepath changes, but my airspeed also drops unless I pitch down.

I've used the basic principles as the instructor taught me, but I feel like it's a combination of pitch and power all at the same time to get the desired result. Of course I'm just a student pilot with a bit over 20 hours, so take my experience for what it's worth:D
 
bqmassey said:
The results aren't theoretically perfect, like applications of aerodynamic rarely are, but power changes in conventional airplanes are very heavily weighted towards a single output. So much so that it's a valuable principle to fly by, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Another way of thinking about it is that if you make the pitch or thrust change slowly enough, you will only be aware of the single output. i.e. slowly increase power and you will just climb at a constant airspeed. Conversely, if you are flying acro, a quick application of up elevator will send you climbing with little immediate change in speed.

When at KSFO, obey the rules.
 
BillTIZ said:
Learn to fly a glider, pitch controls airspeed, you have no power to worry about.

On approach, pitch or attitude controls airspeed, drag devices like spoilers or air brakes control rate of desent. Watch out for the student that realizes he is landing long, beyond the desired touchdown point, and pushes on the stick to "get down". Break them of that habit or they'll never solo.

Conversely, the glider pilot that is landing short that pulls back on the stick does not streatch his glide, he slows down (and could increase sink rate) and really lands short.

So, transition to airplane, pitch(attitude) controls airspeed, application or removal of power controls climb or descent.

On approach, Pitch for airspeed, power for rate of descent.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Was going to post something similar.

Go fly something that doesn't have any power to add, and you'll start thinking in terms of energy, and gravity as your friend... Until you're too low, and it's not. ;)
 
BillTIZ said:
Learn to fly a glider, pitch controls airspeed, you have no power to worry about.

On approach, pitch or attitude controls airspeed, drag devices like spoilers or air brakes control rate of desent. Watch out for the student that realizes he is landing long, beyond the desired touchdown point, and pushes on the stick to "get down". Break them of that habit or they'll never solo.

Conversely, the glider pilot that is landing short that pulls back on the stick does not streatch his glide, he slows down (and could increase sink rate) and really lands short.

So, transition to airplane, pitch(attitude) controls airspeed, application or removal of power controls climb or descent.

On approach, Pitch for airspeed, power for rate of descent.
Click to expand...
I am not a glider pilot so my thinking could be totally wrong and I am not trying to be argumentative, nor disagreeable, but for me the glider analogy does not really work for me, because you do not have any source of power on the glider, except for the initial tow and unless you have a power glider, your only source of "power" is altitude(provided by updrafts I would assume) and an appropriately vectored wind(I would think adds as well). So the only way to control speed is by increasing or decreasing your pitch as there is no power part of the equation. Now if you increase your pitch would not your glider climb(increased vertical airspeed) as well as the airspeed drops, and as you said if you decrease your pitch not only does airspeed increase, but your glider descends(decreased vertical airspeed). As for drag devices do they not control altitude by decreasing air speed and thus decreasing lift, or am I missing something there as well or are they changing the shape of the wing much like flaps and allowing the same amount of lift at a slower airspeed?

Maybe I am missing something, like I said I am not a glider pilot, but it seems to me that pitch in effect controls both horizontal airspeed, and vertical airspeed in this situation.

Maybe I should opt out and let people think I am ignorant and not let people know I am ignorant.
 
Last edited:
douglas393 said:
, because you do not have any source of power on the glider,

Maybe I am missing something, like I said I am not a glider pilot, but it seems to me that pitch in effect controls both horizontal airspeed, and vertical airspeed in this situation.
Click to expand...

Convective, or other forms of lift from air currents are your source of power(nee, energy). Managing that well is what allows sailplanes to stay aloft for hours, and travel hundreds(or more) miles.

I agree that they are excellent teachers of energy management. When a sailplanes enters a rising column of air, rather than us power jockeys who would push the yoke forward to maintain altitude, they will pull the yoke back(reducing speed, just as this thread is about) to maintain time in the lift zone and ride it up as much as they can. Conversely, if they enter a falling column of air, the will pitch down to gain speed in an attempt to get out of that descent as quickly as possible. A textbook example of 'pitch for speed'.
 
docmirror said:
Convective, or other forms of lift from air currents are your source of power(nee, energy). Managing that well is what allows sailplanes to stay aloft for hours, and travel hundreds(or more) miles.

I agree that they are excellent teachers of energy management. When a sailplanes enters a rising column of air, rather than us power jockeys who would push the yoke forward to maintain altitude, they will pull the yoke back(reducing speed, just as this thread is about) to maintain time in the lift zone and ride it up as much as they can. Conversely, if they enter a falling column of air, the will pitch down to gain speed in an attempt to get out of that descent as quickly as possible. A textbook example of 'pitch for speed'.
Click to expand...

I think we are pretty much describing the same thing though I use the term updraft for rising columns of air. However, it seems to me that when a glider pilot pitches down to increase airspeed we are saying that the loss of altitude(which also occurs) is just an unintended consequence, where as we could just as easily say when we pitch down to lose altitude the increased airspeed is just an unintended consequence. So to me it comes down to how we define the conditions of the environment and what we want to accomplish. So for example on with a powered fixed wing flying machine approach if we want to keep constant horizontal speed and change vertical speed then throttle(power) is the answer, and if we want to continue the same vertical velocity and change horizontal speed then yoke+trim(pitch) is the answer. However if I am straight and level en route and want to change my horizontal speed and stay straight and level I will use power to change my speed and pitch to maintain my altitude. I guess you can say the opposite is true as well that by changing my pitch I have changed my horizontal speed, and am using power to maintain my altitude, but in my mind's eye I changed the power to change the horizontal speed and used the pitch to maintain vertical speed in that situation.
 
Thinking too hard. Pitch controls airspeed engines are annoying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top