In officer basic I learned how to set the headspace on a 50 cal machine gun, but my Tac Officer said, "Headspace is the distance between the ears."

The airspeed at which the tail can be brought up, the nose wheel brought just off, or the mains brought just off into low ground effect cannot be listed in the POH nor marked on any instrument because it varies with total energy available. Bot cannot be programmed with unknown airspeeds, but humans can feel for the unknown. We don't even have to look at an instrument. AI is here to stay, but we overcome tight, possibly poorly planned situations using headspace.

AI analyses data, I am told, to reprogram certain specifications. The human brain is capable of art and epiphany. We can move outside certain specifications. First we destroy certain specifications that limit energy and performance, then create new specifications. This can happen with design or technique.

Vx requires stable conditions to be optimal. Zoom reserve is assurance of maneuvering airspeed and the potential to exchange that airspeed for assured altitude. When a certain altitude, but just that altitude, is necessary to miss obstructions, assurance with or without engine seems preferable to "requires stable conditions."

Rudder movement assures immediate yaw of the nose to a desired target. Coordinated turns require both rudder to overcome adverse yaw and aileron to bank, and time. Slipping turns (inadequate rudder movement) require a dangerous, when horizontal space available is limited, long, long, long, long, long time. The first time significant rudder, perhaps to the stop, is needed and the airplane continues to fly is an epiphany. Coordination, balance, is generally best form but not always best practice.

Bot is limited to specified control movement so his data is limited. Pilots are not limited. They can move the controls to see the full extent of their function. If we don't like what happens, we can move it the other way, but experience has happened and specifications can be changed real time. Bot is programmed to nibble, as Jim Parker describes it. Pilots can move from gross to nibble and back as needed. They are capable of artistic as well as mechanical flying.

John Boyd was heavy handed on the controls. Most fighter pilots didn't want to go there. He just defeated every one of them in forty seconds or less. He called it, both design and technique, energy maneuverability.

Art finds useful variance in established standards, tactical fluidity in static principles. Pilots are tested to standards. It needn't stop there.

I find that alcohol sometimes helps me understand what your saying, cheers

Cheers! I'm running out of different ways to say the same things. I may have to go to an ask contact format.

As a 19 year old pilot and new to this forum. I appreciate the techniques Contact has to offer which are new to me. Thanks for all the free advice Jim!

Dvoracek,

Welcome. We who are old tend to be set in our ways. Unconventional ones, old and young, tend to attract the young, who are less set in their ways. Six hour solos in tw benefited from this phenomenon.

There are also old, wise, and conventional teachers on this site. Listen to all and use good judgment. We all have something to contribute.

Most are comfortable with skidding being taboo because they have never needed to change direction rapidly with no vertical space available because stall would result from the attempt to gain vertical space, from pulling back on the stick. Good judgement precludes being in that position unless engaged in low altitude work regularly outside the vertical and horizontal protection of sanctioned airports.

What I teach in Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques below is not difficult, just unconventional. I think it is safer even around those sanctioned airports. I taught only energy management turns in the pattern because there was not enough vertical space available for recovery from inadvertent stall. No way a student can pass a flight test that way. Just fly more safely where vertical space is limited.

Thanks for the support. Again test the spirits.

High altitude orientation's concern with maintaining sufficient altitude to recover from stall can lead to pitch up and increased time in downdrafts (lower altitude), but is generally safe. Unfortunately it transfers to not giving up climb/altitude in initial climb, crosswind, and downwind portends of the pattern. While not enough vertical space to stall, plenty of vertical space is available to allow the nose to go down naturally (not pull back) in the turns. 1 g turns are safer. The airplane will not stall unless the pilot pulls back on the stick. Stall in the pattern could be eliminated by allowing the nose to go down naturally in all turns.

Contact, I just can't decipher your posts, except for that last bit. I do agree with pushing the nose down in approach turns, in a slow approach you can really put nose down without the speed building up.

Step away from the crack pipe!

There is nothing, other than testing standards, requiring the nose to be held up in the turn to crosswind leg or the turn to downwind leg. In the turn to base and the turn to final, conventional wisdom already allows the nose to go down. Even spraying or during other low work, 200' is a lot of vertical space available to allow the nose to go down naturally in all turns. If too fast for the horizontal space available, we can pitch up wings level to lose airspeed and gain altitude before banking while releasing the back pressure for a 1g turn regardless of the bank angle. The greater the bank angle and/or the slower the airspeed, the more the released nose will pitch down. Some of this pitch down can safely be taken out with now (slower) light back pressure. All of these 1g energy management turns need to be anticipated if pitch up and slowing is available/necessary prior to banking.

I just turn

That works most of the time.

I'm a "needle, ball & airspeed" kind of guy it was beat into me by an much older and wiser pilot that I can only hope to be, my DAD

Most are and older guys tend to use the rudder to pull aileron better. I enjoyed the epiphany teaching especially retired airline pilots to move over a couple of rows in the field. They do spray higher now, and some fly no different than at the airport and yes, bot could do that kind of low level work. It is not as efficient and in the long run not as safe. SatLoc makes the race track pattern more workable, "Dropzone" mitigates drift, and lots of power keeps the Greyhound bus flying. It can be flown much like a normal traffic pattern. It is not a normal traffic pattern, however. Nor is some of the video work on this site.

And energy management would make the normal traffic pattern safer.

I get where you coming from Contact but......................................most flying now is a fair way from the edge. A training aircraft in the circuit should be a long way from stall speed at any attitude.
It's only the likes of Ag/survey and bush flying where flying closer to the limits is done now. On Ag turbine aircraft now make it soooooo much safer, there is still working close to the edge but with excess power certainly helps. The likes of flying an 802 full load of fuel and retardant in 45C heat flying in mountain wave/fire turbulence is still on the edge but using good piloting practice (With a bit of experience thrown in) maintains the requirement for controlled flight.
Leading with rudder mainly dependent on what machine your flying, the likes of aircraft with longer span like Air Tractors and Beaver it's normal practice. Aircraft with ailerons that have drag built into the function don't require as much rudder and the likes of a Caravan that has spoilers as part of roll function combined with ailerons not so much rudder in turns.
Most old timey sorts of machines Pawnee, Callair, Tiger Moth, Chipmunk, Brave and Cessna's all like it in turns when you lead with some rudder to keep balance.
Hopefully the olden days of staggering around in a worn out piston engine over gross with the stall warning disabled are gone,
although................

The big advantage of either the energy management coordinated/balanced 1g turn or the rudder turn in ground effect or the rudder skidding turn with the nose down to line up while going over wires is to avoid the edge, not to get closer to the edge. Hoover can fly the razor edge. I want to stay away from it. I want muscle memory that will keep me away from it in a crisis. Some energy efficiency is smooth like em turn and some is not like skidding turn and side slip in crosswind.