Talk:Visual flight

Would it not be better to have an article something like Flying an aircraft which deal with this, plus flying by reference to instruments, at a basic level. Then we wouldn't have to give info twice. We could also include attitude in that. DJ Clayworth 18:25, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

There's lots of material, so it would be good for someone to creat ethat one and have this as well. Lots of general principles in common but also lots of differences in the details.JamesDay 23:58, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I also agree in one big article, and if it gets TOO big, just create sub articles the big sections. dave 02:53, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

A lot of the material says "aircraft," but is actually specific to airplanes. - Palmpilot900 0600Z, 2 Nov 2003

It would be better to differentiate between roll and bank. Typically bank is used to describe the bank angle, ie what is the angle of the lateral axis with respect to the horizon. Roll more correctly refers to the rate of change of the bank angle. Roll would be in degrees per second, where bank is in degrees.

---

Much of what is here is unfortunately not accurate. It needs a thorough review, which I do not have time to give it. For example, the section on bank indicates that the airspeed will decrease, the nose drop and the aircraft start to descend. Actually what happens if you apply bank and take no other corrective action is that the nose will drop, the aircraft descend, the airspeed increase and you enter something called a spiral dive which has been responsible for a large number of fatalities. DJ Clayworth 16:09, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Having now edited to fix some of the problems I mentioned above, I now find that this article describes basic manouvers in an airplane. However most of what it says is relevant not just to visual flight, but to basic instrument flight too. For example all the stuff about the nose dropping in a turn applies as much to instrument flight. I'm soliciting suggestions for what to do with this. For example we could:

1. Put most of this information in Flight controls. But Flight controls is already quite long and full of technical stuff about the controls themselves. Also this is really about suing the controls, not the controls themselves.
2. Put it in Aircraft attitude, but that doesn't really seem appropriate either.
3. Make a new article Controlling an airplane or Basic airplane manouvers and put it there, leaving only what is said about referencing the horizon here
4. Move this article to Controlling an airplane or Basic airplane manouvers and then add the necessary information about flying by reference to instruments.

Suggestions? DJ Clayworth 12:54, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

---

I agree that this article could use an overhaul. I like the idea of a more generic Basic airplane maneuvers article, although I dislike the title Controlling an airplane because it could easily degenerate into an inappropriate how-to article.

I also think this article fails to emphasize the most important goals of visual flight, especially during training. Firstly, learning to fly without excessive dependence on instruments gives the new pilot a fundamental feeling (or intuition) for how to control the airplane. These skills are absolutely essential, since instruments fail, and even when working, can deceive the unwary. Secondly, the visual pilot must be trained from the very beginning to look outside, not only for see-and-avoid, but also to foster situational awareness and discourage tunnel vision. Knowing what's going on in the world outside your aircraft is just as important as knowing what's going on inside.

With that in mind, could we create a Basic airplane maneuvers article, and then leave this article around as a sort of companion which focuses on the reasons why visual flight is important and how it differs from instrument flight? How could we best structure the generic article so that it reads informatively (not as a how-to) and presents everything in a way that non-pilots will understand? Danorris 20:53, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, this article is indeed weak. First, it should be renamed to Visual Flight Rules. Waitaminute... That already exists (and is a good article). Second, it should cover Sensory Illusions in Aviation. No, wait - that exists, too (and is excellent). Third, in addition to the three components to an aircraft's attitude, it largely ignores the very critical other three components involved in the aircraft's position: heading, airspeed, and altitude, all three of which are vital to flying an aircraft using visual cues. Finally, it is void of any mention of the many techniques pilots use to determine wind, drift, weather, and other critical aspects of flying. This isn't how-to (advanced) stuff, but what (introductory) stuff. An example would be, "The visual pilot can use the effects of wind on rising smoke to determine wind direction and estimate it's strength." Another example: "Visual pilots must pay close attention to the weather, both to take advantage of it's benefits, including thermals for gliders, and increased groundspeed for cross-country fliers, as well as to avoid it's dangers, such as windsheer, hail, and turbulence." Just some ideas... 16:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.177.28.124 (talk)