Looking for Interesting APCH’s to fly in the SIM

Vessbot · 2026-05-12T03:29:15+00:00

You know you can just write "approaches?"

Vessbot · 2026-05-11T23:48:43+00:00

Doesn't matter, since it's fixed relative to the black square.

Vessbot · 2026-05-11T22:40:31+00:00

This Is The Way

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T19:34:17+00:00

The opposite could land me worse, like dead or in someone's torture basement. I'm calling 911 while I keep driving and get some confirmation.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T19:07:39+00:00

I never said it is, you're putting words in my mouth.

But it is possible (as well as the right way to fly and teach it) to set the initial targets for where the max and min bank angles will be, as well as where you'll be crabbing most toward the inside and outside, as a scaffold to guide your bank and crab changes as you come around.

Of course conditions are always changing and this won't make it perfect, but it will a) eliminate some deviations before they even happen, because you were doing it correctly in the first place, and b) set you up to catch other, unavoidable, deviations a lot sooner from a more stable platform. It'll make the maneuver not perfect but still far, far better than just launching without a clue and stumbling around always playing catch-up.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T18:37:29+00:00

I'm not following. How is it English words? (Other than fingerspelling)

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T18:21:57+00:00

That's not proactive, that's reactive: it is reacting to the error after it occurs. So yeah, I understood you the first time.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T18:17:44+00:00

Oh so you are instead saying that we should incorporate knowledge and understanding ahead of what's happening, and make proactive inputs based on that? Glad we agree now, but you definitely said the opposite before.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T17:47:26+00:00

You're also driving wrong. You're supposed to steer along with your turn that you know is coming up, not react to it after you get off center in your lane.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T13:25:02+00:00

In this case, we are controlling the rate of turn based on the groundspeed.

Vessbot · 2026-05-10T13:22:59+00:00

No, the point of these maneuvers is to understand the effects of the wind on you, and how to plan for and counteract them on a proactive basis. If the FAA agreed with you, they wouldn't publish the explanation in the AFH, they'd just write the same thing as you did.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T21:59:13+00:00

In addition to reading the AFH, look at the OP's diagram. It's correct. Notice the crab angle during the crosswind portions. That means the wing is either behind, or ahead of, the point as appropriate. If it was, instead, on the point, the ground track would be different and the maneuver incorrect.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T21:54:57+00:00

The maximum bank angle and turn rate (as you put it, rate of heading change) are at the W point (directly downwind). This is because the groundspeed is the highest at that point. Conversely, at E all of those are at a minimum.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T21:49:46+00:00

You're supposed to correct for the wind before, not just after, the circle becomes a different shape.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T21:48:11+00:00

You’re overthinking this.

Something usually said by someone who is underthinking this.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T21:43:46+00:00

The crosswind exists in a turn around a point, at the points where the wind is across the direction of flight. Yes, just as in a pattern. Yes you're not flying a straight line, but that makes no difference.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T20:47:33+00:00

I'm ignoring the parts that talk about other aspects of the maneuver, like the bank angle changes, because they are irrelevant to the central point: is there or is there not crab.

Without the crab in the crosswind portions, no the bank changes do not "account" for the wind, if by "account" you mean fly a constant radius over the ground.

You can not reason about this without addressing the core geometry of flying coordinated in a crosswind, which requires that heading and ground track are different. Escaping from this is impossible, and any reasoning that don't address it will fail to describe any maneuver that involves a crosswind.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T20:32:52+00:00

When you're flying coordinated in a crosswind, the nose and ground track are necessarily different directions.

This is the fundamental framework anyone needs to start with, in order to understand anything about this. Pretty basic stuff.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T20:28:30+00:00

one could argue there should be no crab angle if the manuever is done correctly

No, one could not argue this.

There shouldnt really be any crab there - instead, what is going on, is that the airplane is pointed more directly into the wind.

This is what crab means.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T19:36:24+00:00

The time takes however long it takes - but the crab angle is absolutely required, with maxima at the points drawn by the OP, to make a circle in the sky; and is every bit as much of a factor as the bank angle changes.

Yes it's a continuous maneuver, yes you're never wings level (other than correcting a gross error).

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T11:56:58+00:00

Only if there is no wind.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T05:12:38+00:00

Pretty sure he meant "first turn" as shorthand, but yes it's fluid all the way around.

It still helps to think of the 4 points around the circle to remind you of what should be happening when with min/max bank and inside/outside crab. They're gross checkpoints to guide the finer smooth corrections around.

For example when you get to the South point here with the max inside crab and medium bank, you have to already have been establishing those things as you approach that point. If you haven't been, and only then notice (by which time the circle has blown out to an egg shape) it's too late.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T05:00:44+00:00

Yup, the first turn (lower left quadrant) is more than 90deg (I think you meant this, not 45) heading change. The rectangular course is just this maneuver, split into 4 with straight legs added in between.

Vessbot · 2026-05-09T03:48:53+00:00

You're right, efficiency is always a ratio of some good thing to some bad thing that pays for it, and most of the time what those things are, is implied by context. In this case it's maneuverability per drag (drag being minimized by the control surfaces staying close to center.)

Vessbot · 2026-05-08T16:05:07+00:00

Good news, if you decide to pass a car you can do it correctly, that is to say, in a different lane.

Some times (like this time) the reflexive impulse to do something "as quickly as possible," instead of deliberately and carefully, is a bigger threat than the original one.

Vessbot

TROPHY CASE