contactflying wrote:But you were probably pulling my leg.

contactflying wrote:Dynamic proactive control movement needs to be rapid because it depends on immediate knowledge of results. Whether gross or fine, rapid rudder movement (alternating side to side just off target) will give us the rapid corrective knowledge necessary to effectively direct an aircraft down a centerline or to any target.

Slower and restricted travel of control pressure is also classical conditioning, as the reward eventually comes. We purposely slow and restrict our control pressure when flying by reference to instruments. Our cross check is rapid and dynamic as we need to start the control response quickly,. But we limit control pressure and range.

Integration of instrument with contact techniques work fine in the high altitude environment. Once high enough that either man or computer can respond quickly enough to recover from loss of control, stall, or upset, the slower pressure on controls creep us to the desired results. When IMC and totally dependant on instrument indications which we then respond to, this slow and careful control pressure techniques is necessary to prevent self induced upset.

The low altitude environment, what was officially labeled "maneuvering flight," has both vertical and horizontal space available limitations. Traffic patterns also have vertical and horizontal space available limitations. Instruments landing systems eliminate the horizontal space available limitations on the procedural track. Conflict with other aircraft is guaranteed. Visual meteorological conditions, however, require see and avoid. Maneuvering flight requires rapid and unrestricted control movement, immediately knowledge of results, and total energy management to keep the wing flying and to miss obstructions and terrain.

We instructors could move all the way to Skinner's operant conditioning by popping an M&M into the student's mouth, but taming the beast is enough reward to create muscle memory. Yet, dynamic proactive control movement techniques need not be discovery learning, as when a child first gets up on his or her bicycle. We can actually teach students to walk the rudder. We can teach them to stay ahead of the airplane rather than just recovery techniques. Reactive rudder pressure, sometimes including differential braking, is no substitute for dynamic proactive control movement to direct our course down the centerline, centerline extended, or to any target. Stall recovery technique is no substitute for the muscle memory to pitch only enough to zoom just over the obstacle with the outcome of the maneuver never in doubt.

We could completely go operant by attaching electrical wires to the student's feet, but the instructor yelling, "walk the rudder, walk the rudder," works fine. Or we could program bot with dynamic proactive stabilization so he could stand erect, fly tailwheel airplanes, and hover helicopters.

G44 wrote:

contactflying wrote:Dynamic proactive control movement needs to be rapid because it depends on immediate knowledge of results. Whether gross or fine, rapid rudder movement (alternating side to side just off target) will give us the rapid corrective knowledge necessary to effectively direct an aircraft down a centerline or to any target.

Slower and restricted travel of control pressure is also classical conditioning, as the reward eventually comes. We purposely slow and restrict our control pressure when flying by reference to instruments. Our cross check is rapid and dynamic as we need to start the control response quickly,. But we limit control pressure and range.

Integration of instrument with contact techniques work fine in the high altitude environment. Once high enough that either man or computer can respond quickly enough to recover from loss of control, stall, or upset, the slower pressure on controls creep us to the desired results. When IMC and totally dependant on instrument indications which we then respond to, this slow and careful control pressure techniques is necessary to prevent self induced upset.

The low altitude environment, what was officially labeled "maneuvering flight," has both vertical and horizontal space available limitations. Traffic patterns also have vertical and horizontal space available limitations. Instruments landing systems eliminate the horizontal space available limitations on the procedural track. Conflict with other aircraft is guaranteed. Visual meteorological conditions, however, require see and avoid. Maneuvering flight requires rapid and unrestricted control movement, immediately knowledge of results, and total energy management to keep the wing flying and to miss obstructions and terrain.

We instructors could move all the way to Skinner's operant conditioning by popping an M&M into the student's mouth, but taming the beast is enough reward to create muscle memory. Yet, dynamic proactive control movement techniques need not be discovery learning, as when a child first gets up on his or her bicycle. We can actually teach students to walk the rudder. We can teach them to stay ahead of the airplane rather than just recovery techniques. Reactive rudder pressure, sometimes including differential braking, is no substitute for dynamic proactive control movement to direct our course down the centerline, centerline extended, or to any target. Stall recovery technique is no substitute for the muscle memory to pitch only enough to zoom just over the obstacle with the outcome of the maneuver never in doubt.

We could completely go operant by attaching electrical wires to the student's feet, but the instructor yelling, "walk the rudder, walk the rudder," works fine. Or we could program bot with dynamic proactive stabilization so he could stand erect, fly tailwheel airplanes, and hover helicopters.

Huh? What did he say?