## How Airplanes Turn

First, lets discuss the wrong explanation. Conventional explanation goes something like this. The airplane rolls into a bank. This transfers some of the vertical lift into a horizontal force. The horizontal force becomes the centrepetal force that pulls the airplane in a circular path.

The above explanation may sound reasonable, but at the very least it is inadequate and overly simplistic. This explanation also says nothing about why we need rudder during a turn.

Two separate motions are involved when moving along a circular path. First, there is an acceleration towards the center of the turn. The horizontal component of lift is the source of this acceleration. Second, the aircraft needs to rotate about its vertical axis (yaw axis) to keep pointing in the direction of travel. This is the axial rotation. Both of them have to occur in the correct manner for an airplane to make a turn.

To understand these two motions, lets consider the moon rotating around the earth. The earth’s gravitational force pulls the moon into a circular orbit. This orbit takes 27 days. In addition, the moon is also free to spin on its own axis at a different rate. It turns out that both these rates have exactly the same period of 27 days, producing what is known as synchronous orbiting. As a result, the same part of the moon faces earth all the time. This is not always the case with other orbits. For example, the earth goes around the sun in one year. During that time, the earth would have rotated on its axis 365 times. The reason the moon makes a synchronous orbit, but the earth doesn’t, has to do with a separate force known as tidal friction. There is no tidal friction between the sun and the earth, so the earth’s orbit and its axial rotation are completely different.

When an airplane makes a turn (i.e., orbit around a point), we want the same side of the airplane pointed towards the center of the turn. In other words, we want synchronous orbiting. The horizontal component of lift will produce orbiting, but it will not make the orbit synchronous. There has to be another effect, similar to the tidal friction, to make the aircraft rotate around its own axis (yaw axis).

Having said all that, we do know from experience that when we bank the airplane, the nose rotates into the turn (although momentarily it does turn away due to adverse yaw). In other words, it automatically makes a synchronous orbit. The horizontal component of lift does not impart any rotational effect on the airframe because center of lift and center of mass of an airplane are at exactly the same location. So what is the source of this “tidal friction”? That is the question we are exploring here.

It all has to do with the self-aligning tendency of a streamlined object, also known as the weather vaning effect. An aerodynamically streamlined object will always turn into the relative wind to reduce its drag. A more streamlined object will have a lower drag when pointed into the wind, as well as a shaper increase in drag with increasing yaw angle. This is illustrated in the adjacent figure. Whenever the nose of the aircraft is not pointed into the relative wind, the excess drag will produce a restoring turning force. This is the force analogous to the tidal friction on the moon.

So lets look at a more complete explanation for how airplanes turn. First, the airplane is banked. This produces a lateral force that pulls the airplane sideways into an orbital path. Next , due to the weather vaning effect, the airframe will rotate to align with the relative wind. If the airframe is highly streamlined, it will quickly align with the relative wind. A less streamlined airframe will need some extra help. This where rudder comes in. When an airplane does not align perfectly into the relative wind, the pilot has to use rudder to manually increase the rotation of the airplane. This is why the amount of rudder needed to make a co-ordinated turn varies from one airplane to another. Additionally, the weather-vaning effect is a function of speed. An airplane will quickly align with the relative wind at high speeds. As a result, we don’t need much rudder in a high speed turn. Similarly, an airframe that is highly streamlined will also not need much rudder during a turn.

So here is the takeaway from this discussion. Airplanes turn due to two fundamental forces. The first force is the horizontal component of lift when an aircraft is banked. This produces the orbital motion. The second is the rotational force on the airframe. This comes primarily from the weather-vaning effect, but it has to be supplemented by the rudder. For the purpose of this discussion, we have ignored engine and propeller related effects such as p-factor, spiraling slip stream and adverse yaw.

## Basic Theory

The basic rule of an aircraft engine is that each cubic inch of displacement produces roughly 0.5 horse power. But I have rarely seen how this number is calculated. So that is the purpose of this post. We will walk through the math so that we can see how the thermodynamic calculations lead to that answer, and what other factors affect the power output.

We will limit our discussion to reciprocating four-stroke engines. So this is not applicable to turbines and jets. For an engine spinning at an rpm of f , the weight (W_a) of the air intake per minute can be written as:

W_a = D \times \frac{f}{2} \times \rho\hspace{2cm}(1)

where D is the displacement volume of the engine and \rho is the density of air. The \frac{f}{2} accounts for the fact that only one half of the cycles breathe air in. In other words, at 2700 rpm, each cylinder will have 1350 suction (and compression) cycles per minute. The other 1350 are combustion (and exhaust) cycles.

Next, let’s add fuel to the air. This is typically done with a carburetor or a fuel injector. The stoichiometric ratio of air to Avgas fuel is 14.7:1 by weight. Other fuels will have different ratios. Let’s represent this ratio with the symbol S_r. Combustion at the stoichiometric ratio produces the most amount of energy. In practice, this is not the best operating point because it can make the engine run too hot and cause cylinder head damage. Engines are often operated with less fuel (lean of peak) or with more fuel (rich of peak) to reduce temperatures. However, lets just stick to the stoichiometric value for the purpose of this calculation.

The quantity of fuel added per unit time to the air to maintain the correct stoichiometric ratio becomes

W_f = \frac{W_a}{S_r}.\hspace{2cm}(2)

Next, we need to consider the energy released during combusion. This depends on the type of fuel. For gasoline (including Avgas), stoichiometric combustion results in 43 MJ/kg ( 14.8\times 10^6 ft-lb/lb). Let’s represent this value as Q_m. Therefore, the energy released from combusion per unit time (which we will write as P_t) will become

P_t = \frac{W_a}{S_r} \times Q_m.\hspace{2cm}(3)

P_t is the total power released as heat. Only a small portion of that will perform mechanical work. This depends on the heat engine efficiency, which we will write as \eta. It’s value can vary quite a bit, but most reciprocating internal combusion engines have values on the order of 25-30%.

Therefore, the crankshaft output power, P_c, becomes

P_c = \eta\times \frac{W_a}{S_r} \times Q_m.\hspace{2cm}(4)

Combining everything together, we can write this as

P_c = \eta \times D \times \frac{f}{2} \times \rho \times Q_m \times \frac{1}{S_r}. \hspace{1cm}(5)

The density of air at sea level is 0.0765 lb/cubic ft, or 4.4\times 10^{-5} lb/cubic inch. Assuming 2700 rpm, S_r=14.7, Q_m=14.8\times 10^6 ft-lb/lb, \eta=28\%, we can calculate the power from one cubic inch of displacement as follows:

P_c = 0.28 \times 1 \times \frac{2700}{2} \times 4.4\times 10^{-5} \times \frac{14.8\times 10^6}{14.7}=16,745 ~~{\rm ft\cdot lb/min.}

One hp is equal to 33,000 ft-lb/min. Therefore, 16,745 ft-lb/min is equivalent to approximately 0.5 hp/cubic inch of mechanical power, as expected. It is important to note that this value is valid only at 2700 rpm. If the rpm is lower, the power will be lower. Similarly if the rpm is higher, the power will be higher. But direct drive aircraft engines are typically limited to 2700 rpm due to propeller limitations. Therefore, 0.5 hp/cubic inch is a widely accepted number in aviation.

Fuel consumption is also easy to calculate. Using W_f = \frac{W_a}{S_r}, we can get

W_f = D \times \frac{f}{2} \times \rho\times \frac{1}{S_r}. \hspace{2cm}(6)

Using the same values as before, this works out to 0.004 lb/min, or 0.24 lb/hr for each cubic inch. The density of Avgas is 5.97 lb/gal. Therefore, we get a fuel consumption of 0.04 gal/hr/cubic inch of displacement. Again, this is true only when the rpm is 2700.

Additionally, the power output per unit weight of fuel is also easy calculate. If we divide crankshaft power P_c by the weight of the fuel per minute W_f,

\frac{P_c}{W_f} = \eta \times Q_m. \hspace{2cm}(7)

Using \eta=28\%, Q_m=14.8\times 10^6 ft-lb/lb, this works out to 4.14\times 10^6 ft-lb/lb. Dividing by 33,000 ft-lb/min gives 125.5 hp/lb/min, or 12.5 hp/gal/hr. This value is independent of rpm.

## O-320 & O-540 engines

Let’s take the O-320 engine as the example. It’s total displacement volume is 320 cubic inches. Using the values calculated earlier, 320 \times 0.5 gives 160 hp, which is the rated maximum output power for this engine. The fuel flow works out to 0.04 \times 320 = 13 gal/hr. For the O-540 engine, the corresponding numbers will be 270 hp and 21 gal/hr. All of these are consistent with the specifications of these engines.

## Automotive Engines

Automotive engines have smaller displacements, but run at higher rpm. A 2.5 liter (152 cubic inch) toyota engine is rated for a maximum of 6600 rpm. The heat engine efficiency is slightly higher due to electronic ignition controls and greater optimization. The combusion energy of autogas is nearly the same as Avgas. Assuming \eta=30\%, if we repeat the above calculation, we can get 200 hp. This value is equivalent to 1.3 hp/cubic inch, which is 2.5 times greater than the power density of a direct-drive aircraft engine. Again, this emphasizes the fact that 0.5 hp/cubic inch is specific to 2700 rpm.

## Rotax 912 Engine

The Rotax 912 is an aviation engine, but it is designed to run at 5800 rpm similar to an automotive engine. In order to drive a propeller at 2700 rpm, it uses a reduction gear. For the purposes of the engine power, 5800 rpm is what matters. Just like with the automotive engine, the higher rpm allows for a larger power output per cubic inch. The displacement of the Rotax 912 engine is 83 cubic inches (about 3.8 times smaller than the O-320). The heat engine efficiency of the Rotax is a bit higher, at around 31%. The power output works out to 1.2 hp/cubic inch. This value is more than double the power density of the direct drive engines such as the O-320. The fuel flow rate is 0.087 gal/hr/cubic inch. The total performance of the Rotax 912, therefore, is 83 \times 1.2 = 100 hp, and the fuel flow is 83 \times 0.087 = 7.2 gal/hr. These values are consistent with the specifications of the engine.

## Throttle Valve

In the above calculations we have assumed that the density of the intake air is the same as the outside air. This is true only when the throttle valve is fully open. So, what happens when we slowly close the throttle valve? Closing the throttle valve will cause the pressure of the intake air to decline. This is the pressure indicated by the manifold pressure gauge. Hence, the density \rho will also decline. Clearly, the outside air density remains unchanged. The blocking effect of the throttle plate creates a partial vacuum, which results in a lower pressure and lower density entering the cylinders. As \rho declines, the power output will decline. Assuming a fixed load, this will cause the rpm to decline. The decline in rpm will cause a further decline in power. This is a runway condition that can lead to the engine coming to a halt. The same thing can happen when the throttle is opened. The rpm will increase, which will increase the power and lead to dangerously high rpm values. In practice, however, loads do not remain constant with rpm. They typically increase with rpm. This will prevent the runaway conditions and stabilize the operating point. We will discuss this later in the discussion on propellers.

## Power vs rpm

As indicated by equation (5), the power will scale linearly with rpm at a constant manifold pressure. But it does not continue indefinitely. The power will reach a maximum, and then start declining at higher rpm values. This is shown in the adjacent figure. This is due to increasing friction losses and lower combustion efficiencies at higher rpm. This is usually the maximum permissible rpm of the engine. Similarly, power vs manifold pressure at a fixed rpm will also show a linear relationship. Manifold pressure is normally limited to atmospheric pressure, but in turbo boosted engines, it can go higher.

It’s also worth noting that it is possible to run the engine at higher rpms and higher powers than it is rated for, but it will most likely result in permanent damage. For example, if the load is too light and the throttle is fully open, the rpm can exceed the maximum limit.

## Torque vs rpm

Torque is the rotational force imparted by the crankshaft. It is related to power and rpm as follows:

P_c = T \times f. \hspace{2cm}(8)

Comparing this to equation (5), we can see that torque can also be expressed as

T = \eta \times D \times \frac{1}{2} \times \rho \times Q_m \times \frac{1}{S_r}. \hspace{1cm}(9)

All of these parameters are nearly constant at a specific throttle setting, which means torque should be constant regardless of rpm or power.

In practice, that is not exactly true. Torque increases slowly with rpm, though not as linearly as power increases with rpm. It reaches a maximum and then declines again.

## Aircraft vs Automotive Engines

As we previously calculated, the power density of direct drive aircraft engines is about 0.5 hp/cubic inch. Automotive engines have much higher power densities. However, there are other reasons why direct drive engines are used in aircraft. High rpm engines require a reduction gear (transmission). This adds weight and complexity. Direct drive engines do not need a transmission. As a result, they are actually lighter despite their lower power density. They are also more reliable because there are fewer moving parts. Additionally, the lower power density of direct drive engines allows is to be air cooled. Higher power densities require liquid cooling, which requires additional components and additional weight.

Instead of volumetric power density, we can also calculate the power to weight ratio. The dry weight of an O-320 engine is 270 lb including all accessories. That gives a power to weight ratio of 0.6 hp/lb. The O-540 weighs 390 lb, and the power to weight ratio is 0.7 hp/lb. The Rotax 912 weighs 125 lb including the reduction gear, which translates to 0.8 hp/lb. Automotive engines rarely specify weight, but they are typically significantly heavier.

The Rotax engine includes a reduction gear and liquid cooling without a significant compromise in weight or reliablity. As an added benefit, the higher rpm allows unleaded lower octane automotive fuels to be used in Rotax engines. Direct drive engines running at lower rpm need additives to increase the octane rating to prevent engine knocking.

## Summary

So, here are the takeaways from this analysis:

• Shaft power output is a product of intake air density (which is controlled by manifold pressure) and rpm. It does not matter if it is a constant speed prop or fixed pitch prop – power is the product of these two quantities.
• Direct drive engine are often limited to 2700 rpm. At this rpm, the power density works out to 0.5 hp/cubic inch of displacement.
• Automotive engines and Rotax engines use a gear reduction, allowing the crankshaft to spin faster. This allows the power density to be higher. In the Rotax 912, at 5800 rpm, the power density is 1.2 hp/cubic inch.
• The efficiency of most engines is about 30%. The energy content of most gasolines is about 20MJ/lb. The density of most gasolines is about 6 lb/gal. Combining all of these, we can say that 1 gal/hr of fuel flow should produce about 12.5 hp of shaft power.

It’s important to point out that crankshaft power is not the same as propulsion power. The propeller efficiency factors into how the crankshaft power is converted into propulsion power. We will look at this in the next article.

## Lap Shear Test Results of Araldite (Epibond) 420 Aerospace Epoxy

The Europa uses two different epoxies. Laminations are done using Aeropoxy PR 2032, and structural bonds are done using Araldite 420. The latter is also sold as Epibond 420 in the U.S. It is a pretty useful product not just for aircraft, but also as a general high strength adhesive. I’ve used it in my laboratory for a variety of needs.

The cost of Araldite 420 has gone up significantly in recent years (over $600 a quart). This is because heavy industries like Boeing have started to use this adhesive in their products. I had three quartz of Araldite 420 that was more than 20 years old, so it was unclear if it was still usable. It’s published shelf life is very short (12 months, I think). Usually, the expiration date is when the manufacturer will dispose their records, so it does not necessarily mean the product won’t work. But it was still important to find out. Mixing ratio of the resin and hardener of Araldite 420 is 1:0.4. The mixing ratio of the Aeropoxy PR 2032 is 1:0.27. I had a nagging doubt if some of the Araldite 420 bonds I had done years ago were mixed at the correct 1:0.4 or at the incorrect 1:0.27. So I decided to test both. ## Sample Preparation I bought a small 50ml cartridge of brand new Epibond 420 for comparison. Interestingly, this did not have an expiration date printed. The test coupons were prepared using 1″ x 6″ aluminum plates. After scuff sanding and rinsing with acetone to remove any oils, two plates were overlapped by one square inch area and were bonded together. They were held with C-clamps during cure. Testing was conducted roughly 2-3 weeks after the bonding. Eight test coupons were prepared as listed below: • Expired Araldite 420 mixed at the recommended ratio of 1:0.4 (two samples) • Expired Araldite 420 mixed at the incorrect ratio of 1:0.27 (two samples) • Brand new Epibond 420 mixed at the recommended ratio of 1:0.4 (two samples) • Aeropoxy PR 2032 mixed at the recommended ratio of 1:0.27 (two samples) ## Test Results The tests were run at one of my colleagues materials testing laboratory. The spec sheet for the new Epibond 420 states a lap shear strength of 3500 psi. My results were in the range of 3250-3350 psi, which is slightly lower than the spec. I could not find any specifications for the Araldite 420 manufactured circa 2000, but my measurement data was in the range of 2800-2900 psi. The lower number could be due to its age, or it could also be due to an older formulation used in the Araldite 420. In any case, the difference is only 15%. I do not believe this is a significant difference, and gives me confidence that it is still usable. A more surprising result is the mixing ratio. When the Araldite 420 was mixed at 1:0.27, the resulting strength showed no noticeable difference. The lap shear strength was in the range of 2650-2950 psi. Finally, I also tested Aeropoxy PR 2032. It’s lap shear strength was significantly lower, at 850-900 psi. This is the expected result because it is a laminating epoxy and not a structural epoxy. ## Failure Modes The images below show the bond interfaces after the separation. All of the failures seem to have occurred at the epoxy/aluminum interface, and it was roughly split in equal amounts from both interfaces. This result was fairly consistent across all samples. From this observation, I concluded that the weakest part of the bond is the interface. That means, better surface preparation could result in a higher shear strength.  Araldite 420 (expired) 1:0.4 Sample #1 Araldite 420 (expired) 1:0.4 Sample #2 Araldite 420 (expired) 1:0.27 Sample #3 Araldite 420 (expired) 1:0.27 Sample #4 Epibond 420 (new) 1:0.4 Sample #5 Epibond 420 (new) 1:0.4 Sample #6 Aeropoxy PR2032 1:0.27 Sample #7 Aeropoxy PR2032 1:0.27 Sample #8 ## Fuel Efficiency of Airplanes First lets get a few facts straight: Fuel efficiency and speed are inversely related. It doesn’t matter if it is a motorcycle, car or an airplane. You pay for speed with reduced efficiency. You also pay for weight. These are fundamental facts. The only place where those rules don’t apply is in outer space (no gravity and no air). Therefore, it is meaningless to talk about fuel efficiency without considering speed and weight. Psychologically people have accepted driving at 65 mph as an acceptable tradeoff between speed, weight, and fuel. But that is an arbitrary choice. If you really want the best fuel mileage, nothing beats walking, bicycling or riding a horse. All of these produce more miles per unit energy than other modes of transportation. So ultimately this is all about tradeoffs – how much fuel efficiency are we will to tradeoff to move faster and carry more weight. General aviation (GA) often gets a bad rap because at first glance the gas mileage looks worse than cars. But the truth is, GA is significantly more effective than cars once you factor in speed and weight. Assuming internal combustion engines, the differences between engine efficiency is negligibly small. They all have more or less 30% thermal efficiency. Wind resistance and rolling resistance are the biggest variables. Wind resistance increases as the square of the air speed. Rolling resistance depends on the type of wheels. Cars are worse than trains because rubber wheels have greater rolling resistance than steel rollers on tracks. But it is safe to say that airplanes don’t have rolling resistance. Additionally, transportation is all about moving a load, so weight has to be part of this discussion as well- you can’t compare the fuel efficiency of a cement truck with a motorcycle without considering how much weight is being carried. We need to combine these three factors (gas mileage, speed and load) into a single parameter that represents the efficiency of movement. We will define a transport effectiveness parameter as the product of gas mileage, square of the speed, and the useful load. We will then normalize it against an automobile as our benchmark. This number is basically an indication of how aerodynamically efficient a vehicle is compared to a car. A number larger than 1 means it is better than an automobile.  Type Useful load True Speed Fuel Burn Fuel mileage Transport Effectiveness Typical sedan 1000 lb 65 mph 1.9 gal/hr 35 mpg 1 Cessna 172N 900 lb 124 knots (142 mph) 8 gal/hr 18 mpg 2.2 Cessna R182 1350 lb 155 knots (178 mph) 14 gal/hr 13 mpg 3.7 Mooney M20J 900 lb 160 knots (184 mph) 12 gal/hr 15 mpg 3.1 Mooney M20K 900 lb 190 knots (218 mph) 12 gal/hr 18 mpg 5.3 Motorcycle 350 lb 65 mph 1.5 gal/hr 45 mpg 0.4 Boeing 737 30,000 lb 460 knots (529 mph) 950 gal/hr 0.7 mpg 40 Freight Train 1000,000 lb 80 mph 160 gal/hr 0.5 mpg 22 Walking 200 lb 3.5 mph 0.01 gal/hr 340 mpg 0.005 Bicycling 200 lb 15 mph 0.01 gal/hr 1150 mpg 0.35 As we can see, general aviation airplanes perform 2-4 times better than an average car after you account for their speeds and useful load. A Cessna 172 is more than twice as effective as a car. The Mooney M20J is almost three time as effective. The R182 fares even better, primarily because it is carries more load. The M20K is at the top because it is turbocharged and can fly faster at higher altitudes where the air is thinner. Interestingly, motorcycles do poorly in this calculation even though they are generally thought of as very efficient. Not surprisingly, walking comes last. Although walking is not powered by gasoline, one can calculate an equivalent mileage, which has been estimated to be about 340 miles per gallon. Mass transportation and personal vehicles serve vastly different purposes, so any comparison must be taken with a grain of salt. But if we do the same calculation, we find the Boeing 737 to be a whopping 40 times more effective than a family sedan. The surprising thing is trains. Despite how trains are promoted by some people, they are only half as effective as an airliner. But they are still significantly more effective than a car. These numbers are for freight trains. Passenger trains are probably worse because you can’t pack passengers like you can with freight. Electric trains may do slightly better, but ultimately electricity needs to be generated too, and that efficiency is not much higher than the internal combustion efficiency. One might argue that using the square of the speed unfairly tips the scale in favor of faster modes of transportion. But this was not an arbitrary choice. It is driven by fundamental physics – drag increases as the square of the airspeed. If you drive your car at twice the normal speed (130 mph), assuming all other factors remain the same, your gas mileage will be four times worse. The only place where this rule does not apply is in outer space. Nevetherless, for argument’s sake, we could repeat the same calculation with a linear speed dependence. This would represent the cost of time instead of the cost of propulsion. This calculation results in nearly the same ordering, except for a few changes. Bicycling comes out ahead of driving, and the freight train comes out ahead of the Boeing 737. GA airplanes still remain ahead of driving. The fundamental reason airplanes and trains are able to do much better is because they are more aerodynamically shaped. They have a much smaller frontal area for the volume they occupy. Airplanes also benefit from flying at higher altitudes where the air density is smaller so they encounter less resistance for the same speed. They also do not have rolling resistance. Cars and trains can’t avoid air, and they can’t move without wheels (except the Maglev which has no wheels, and Elon Musk’s Hyperloop which runs inside an evacuated tube). And lets not forget that airplanes can fly point to point along the shortest distance, while everything else has to follow a longer ground route. Even from an infrastructure perspective, airplanes do better. Construction of highways and railways are enormously expensive projects and have huge environmental impacts. An airport needs just a one-mile long strip of pavement. Of course, air traffic control and radar are part of the infrastructure too, but they are optional safety enhancements, not a fundamental necessity. On the down side, however, airplanes can only fly between airports, whereas cars can go door to door. That convenience should not be overlooked, and it does offset some of the benefits of airplanes and trains. All of the above calculations assume you are carrying the maximum rated load. If you are not carrying the full load, then these numbers will be lower. Fuel use does not scale proportionally with payload. This is because every vehicle has an empty weight. You still have to pay to transport the empty weight of the vehicle. This is why airlines try to fill every seat, and why we have carpool lanes on highways. Bottom line is this. Just talking about miles per gallon is nonsense. If we want the most energy efficient transportation without any regard to speed or weight, we should just walk or ride a bicycle. But transporation is about moving heavy things fast. In that respect, airplanes are one of the most efficient machines we currently have. With mass transit, airlines do better than trains. With personal transport, GA airplanes do better than cars. ## What exactly does mixture control do? Carburetors are supposedly volumetric (i.e. they’re supposed to deliver a constant air:fuel ratio by volume). As a consequence of the constant volume ratio, the mixture will automatically become richer when the air density decreases. Therefore, the mixture knob is used to restrict the flow of fuel to maintain the same mass flow ratio between fuel and air. This is how nearly every pilot is taught. But that explanation is not quite correct. Carburetors do not maintain a constant volumetric ratio of fuel and air. The fuel flow rate is actually related to the density of the air. As a result, the fuel flow actually declines as the air density declines. The problem is that it declines slower than the air density; this is what makes the mixture richer as we climb (or when reduce throttle). Mathematics As air flows through the carburetor’s constriction, the drop in pressure can be written as \delta P = \frac{1}{2}\rho_a {v_a}^2 \hspace{2cm}(1) where \delta P is the pressure difference (compared to ambient), \rho_a is the density of air, and v_a is the velocity in the constriction. This pressure difference \delta P is what forces the fuel from the bowl into the venturi. Next, we need to relate \delta P to the fuel draw rate. For this, we need to use the orifice plate equation, which states Q_f = K\sqrt{2\delta P \rho_f}\hspace{2cm}(2) where Q_f is the gravimetric fuel flow rate, \rho_f is the fuel density and K is a function of the geometry of the orifice. Combining the above two equations, we can get Q_f = K\sqrt{\rho_a \rho_f}v_a.\hspace{2cm}(3) The velocity of air v_a is a function of engine rpm, engine displacement and the carburetor’s diameter. We can write this velocity as: v_a = \frac{V f}{2D}\hspace{2cm}(4) where f is the engine rpm, V is the engine displacement volume, and D is the carburetor’s diameter. As a result, we can get Q_f = \frac{KV f}{2D}\sqrt{\rho_a \rho_f}.\hspace{2cm}(5) The mass flow rate of air is Q_a= \rho_a v_a =\frac{V f\rho_a}{2D}.\hspace{2cm}(6) Therefore, the ratio between the fuel flow rate (in mass) and the air flow rate (in mass) is \frac{Q_f}{Q_a}= K \sqrt{\frac{\rho_f}{\rho_a}}.\hspace{2cm}(7) The square root dependence makes the ratio between fuel and air nonlinear with altitude. We can assume that the fuel density remains more or less constant (although it does change slightly with temperature). Therefore, the only two variables here are the air density and the orifice geometry. Example 1 Consider an aircraft climbing from sea level to 8000 ft with full open-throttle. The air density at 8000 ft is about 25% smaller than at sea level. Not accounting for temperature changes, the manifold temperature will drop by approximately 25%. From equation (7), assuming you leave the mixture setting unchanged (K remaining unchanged), we can see that the mixture will become richer by 15% (which comes from \sqrt{\frac{1}{0.75}}). We can restore the mixture by making the orifice smaller (which would make K smaller). This is exactly what the mixture knob does. Notice that if the carburator had maintained a constant volumetric ratio of air to fuel, the mixture would be richer by 25%, not 15%. Example 2 Next, lets look at a change in throttle setting at the same altitude. An ideal example of this is taxiing vs takeoff. Looking at equation (7), we might be tempted to conclude that throttle setting has no relationship to the mixture setting. But the important point to remember is that air density \rho_a is related to manifold pressure. \rho_a will be equal to ambient density only when the throttle is wide open. With the throttle at a low setting, the intake manifold pressure will be low, leading to a lower air density value \rho_a. For example, taxiiing at 10″ of manifold pressure is equivalent to flying with a wide open throttle at 28,000 ft. Following the same argument as before, this would lead to a richer mixture. For example, if the mixture is set correctly for takeoff power at sea level manifold pressure, during taxiing at 10″ of manifold pressure, the mixture will be richer by 70% (which comes from \sqrt{\frac{29}{10}}). Assumptions In the above discussion, we have assumed a single value of air density \rho_a. In fact, \rho_a in equation (1) is actually the air density in the venturi, and the \rho_a in equation (6) is the air density in the intake manifold. These are not exactly the same. The air density in the venturi will be higher than in the manifold. We are also assuming that our goal is to maintain a fixed air:fuel ratio. This is not always the case. The stoichiometric mass flow ratio for complete combustion is 1:14.7. That is, we need 14.7 grams of air for each gram of fuel. However, due to other factors such as cooling and combustion efficiency, the ideal mass flow ratio is not always 1:14.7. At very high power outputs, it is better to use something like 1:12 (which is known as rich of peak) and at low power settings it is more efficiency to use something like 1:16 (known as lean of peak). As a result, even if there is no change in air density, the mixture should be adjusted whenever there is a change in power. On takeoff, the mixture should be slightly enriched. Once the power is reduced after take-off, the mixture can be leaned. ## Stratus3 and open GDL Stratus3 ADSB-in receivers are marketed as having “open-GDL” mode, meaning they can be used with any EFB app. While that is technically correct, Appareo (the manufacturer) is not being entirely honest in this claim. If anyone in the vicinity of the Stratus3 attempts to connect to its wifi signal using Foreflight, then it will automatically switch to “Foreflight-only” mode. You can’t undo this even with a reboot. You have to install the Stratus Horizon Pro software to re-enable the open-GDL mode. Unfortunately, the Stratus Horizon Pro app will only run on Apple iOS. So if the reason you don’t use Foreflight is because you are not a fan of Apple, this turns the$700 Stratus3 into an expensive paperweight. All of this can only be interpreted as Appareo implicitly forcing their customer towards Apple and Foreflight.

It also seems Appareo has shared information with some other commercial EFB developers how to switch the Stratus3 back to open GDL. But they appear to be guarding this information closely. The truly open source EFBs like Avare are left without any help, even though Appareo continues to market its product as compatible with open-GDL.

Avare users are not “customers”. They are a community. They are also not afraid to try something new. As a community member, I wanted to find a solution to this problem. After all I believed Appareo’s claims and paid good money to buy their Stratus3. With a borrowed iPAD, I was able to run a wifi snoop to detect the command strings that were being exchanged. If you need that information, please contact me directly, or look in the Avare forum on googlegroups.

The long and short of it is, I was able to write a small Android app that can toggle the Stratus3. It is a pretty basic app that sends the command strings and then looks for the ADSB data packets. You can find this app on Google Play.

## Modifying Xplane cockpits using Blender/Gimp

For pilots using Xplane for maintaining proficiency or for flight training, it is important to have a cockpit layout similar to their real airplane. Unfortunately, Xplane does not make this process simple. Creating the same look and feel of your own airplane requires building new instruments and applying custom textures. Documentation on how to do this is sparse, and in many cases they simply don’t exist. It took me quite a while to figure this out. You have to get into the nuts and bolts of how Xplane runs. In this post I will attempt to summarize my experiences in the hope that it can alleviate some frustration for those in a similar situation.

#### Software

For 3D modeling I use Blender (version 2.82), and for editing 2D images I use Gimp (version 2.10). Of course there are other options, such as AC3D and Photoshop, but Blender and Gimp are free. These are powerful tools to have in your back pocket, regardless of Xplane. A forewarning, though: they are not easy to learn. I strongly recommend you follow one of the many comprehensive tutorials available for Blender and Gimp. Trying to figure out Xplane without a good knowledge of Blender is guaranteed to be a frustrating experience.

#### Xplane’s file structure

The nice thing about Xplane is that all of the aircraft-related files are in plain text form. They can be opened with an editor like notepad or vim. The root file of each airplane has the extension .acf. This file contains all of the aerodynamic definitions as well as the names of the 3D objects that make up the visuals. One important thing to realize is that the flight model and the visual model are completely decoupled from each other. The 3D objects are for visual effects only, and have no impact on the flying characteristics. In other words, you can make the airplane look like an elephant, and still make it fly like a glider.

Even though .acf is a text file, it is meant to be opened only with Xplane’s Plane Maker. When you open this file in Plane Maker, you will be presented with an external view of the airplane. You can go into the Object menu on the left panel and check all of the various objects that make up the airplane’s visual models. To see the cockpit panel, you will have to uncheck the fuselage, seats and other objects that are in the way, and zoom up real close (use “=” for zooming in).

The flight model is in separate menus on Plane Maker. This is where you can set engine and propeller information, wing dimensions, fuselage cross sections and a whole lot of information that determine the flying characteristics. Changing these parameters will have no effect on the visual representation. Modifying the flight parameters is relatively easy, so I won’t discuss it here.

The acf file references a bunch of other files, but the 3D objects are the ones I will discuss here. These files are under the directory objects/. There will be sub-directories as well, and each panel instrument is likely to be in its own directory. Each 3D object has an extension .obj. Examples of 3D objects include altimeter, radios, GPS, yoke, etc..

#### Xplane2Blender

This is a plugin for Blender that allows one to export from Blender to Xplane’s obj format. Here is a snapshot of my plugin panel.

Unfortunately, despite what its name might suggest, this plugin does not import Xplane’s objects into Blender. It is strictly a Blender-to-Xplane exporter only. If you are looking to modify an existing airplane in Xplane, this is where you will hit the first major obstacle.

However, not all is lost. If you google obj file format, the first ones that come up are the wavefront obj. Wavefront is also a 3D file format, and is surprisingly similar to Xplane’s obj file structure. It is relatively easy to write a script to convert Xplane’s obj into wavefront obj, and then read it into Blender. However, all of the Xplane animations and commands will be lost during this translation.

There are other 3D programs like AC3D and Sketchup that have import modules for Xplane objects. As far as I know, none of them will preserve the animations and manipulations. In my case, I decided it is best to start by learning Xplane’s obj file format and see if it can be manually imported.

#### Xplane’s obj file format

As mentioned earlier, this is a plain text file. The first block contains the name of the texture files used to wrap the object. If you don’t know what a texture file is, you should review the concept elsewhere. It is widely used in Blender as well as in any 3D modeling software. Texture files are typically in PNG or DDS format. Three texture files are used in Xplane: a default texture, a lighted texture (parts that glow in the dark) and a normal map texture. The default texture is sufficient for now. I’ll say more about the others later.

The next block is a large table of vertices. Each line is a vertex, and begins with the prefix “VT”. It contains the x,y,z co-ordinates of the vertex , its vertex normal (which is also x,y,z) and the u,v texture co-ordinates for that vertex. So there is a total of 8 numbers for each vertex.

The next block references the vertices that form the individual triangles of a mesh structure. Each line begins with a prefix “IDX”. This is basically the position of each vertex in the previous vertex table. So “0” refers to the first item in the vertex table, “1” refers to the second item and so on. For brevity, these are arranged in blocks of 10, using the prefix “IDX10”. In the example below, the first triangle is created by the 0th, 1st and 2nd vertices in the vertex table.

The next block is where the mesh structure is created. The prefix is “TRIS”, and it has the starting IDX number and the number of vertices that form that mesh. Since a mesh is created from triangles, the number of vertices here must be a multiple of 3. Prior to the TRIS command, a number of Xplane-specific attributes are specified. Manipulators specify an action, such as a push button, a throttle lever, or flip switch, etc.. They will also include the Xplane’s internal variables connected to that manipulation. Animation specify how the part moves in response to an internal variable of Xplane. It is not important to understand the exact format of these attributes since Xplane2Blender will take care of this for the most part.

#### Wavefront obj file format

This is also a text file. Although conceptually very similar to Xplane’s obj, it is not exactly the same. In this case, the first block contains the x,y,z co-ordinates of the vertices using the prefix “v”. The vertex normals are listed in the next block with the prefix “vn”. The next block contains the u,v texture co-ordinates, using the prefix “vt”. So, instead of listing everything in one block, they are presented in three separate blocks of data. Then the “o” prefix is used to name the mesh, followed by all the triangle faces that make up that mesh. The triangles are specified with the prefix “f” (for face) followed by three groups of numbers “a/b/c”, where “a” is the vertex index, “b” is the normal index and “c” is the texture co-ordinate index. The texture file is specified in a separate file, which is referenced in the obj file with the command mtllib (for material library). Wavefront obj is an open format, and further details can be looked up from Wikipedia.

#### Converting Xplane obj to Wavefront obj

My first task was to write a python script to convert Xplane’s obj to wavefront obj. This was surprisingly easy, and it worked within a few tries. However, as mentioned earlier, the manipulators and animations cannot be converted because wavefront has no concept of these. So you will basically end up with a 3D structure without any of its manipulators or animations. They would had to be added later by hand in Blender. As far as I know, there is currently no way to import these functions into Blender. But in principle, this should be doable (because once you add these functions by hand, they are preserved within Blender, so there is no reason why they cannot be imported). In any case, I am not familiar with Blender’s file format to attempt this task. Hopefully someone else will.

My python code for converting Xplane’s obj to wavefront is here. This code was thrown together with just a basic knowledge of python. I am not a computer programmer, and my code by no means is complete or complies with standard coding techniques.

To run the code, invoke the script with the obj filename as the first argument. This is going to depend on your operating system, so I can’t provide exact directions. On linux, this is how you would run it. First, download and save the python file as xplane2obj.py. Make it executable with chmod +x xplane2obj.py. Then in the command prompt window type ./xplane2obj.py myfile.obj where myfile.obj is the filename of the Xplane object. It should run with no screen output. If there are any printed messages, chances are something is wrong. Upon completion, there will be two other files created in the same directory. The first is myfile_WF.obj. This is the wavefront object. The second is myfile.mtl. This file contains the reference to the texture file. It is assumed the texture file has the same name as the obj file, in a DDS or PNG format (i.e., myfile.DDS or myfile.PNG). If the name of the image file is different, or its format is different, just edit the mtl file and insert the correct names.

Next, open up Blender and import the wavefront obj file. If the texture file is in the same directory, you should be rewarded with the 3D object exactly as in Xplane.

Shown here is the airspeed indicator from the Xplane’s default C-172 aircraft, loaded into Blender.

#### Understanding Datarefs and Commands

A dataref is an internal variable of Xplane. For example, sim/cockpit2/gauges/indicators/airspeed_kts_pilot is the variable for the indicated airspeed. A complete list of datarefs can be found in the Resources/plugins directory of Xplane. There is also a searchable website, but I have found that the information there is sometimes different from what is in my Xplane. In any case, there is very little documentation on what each variable does. You have to guess based on its name. You can also use a dataref monitoring plugin (DataRefTool is a good one) while running Xplane, and see what values are contained in each dataref and then make an educated guess from there. Some variables are writeable, meaning you can use it to send information to Xplane. Some are read-only. Even the writeable ones don’t always stick. They may get overwritten by Xplane.

Commands are supposedly different than datarefs. They are meant to perform an action in Xplane. For example, sim/engines/throttle_up will increase the throttle up a bit. But you can also write a value to the dataref sim/cockpit2/engine/actuators/throttle_ratio[0] to do the same thing. The difference between writeable datarefs and commands is still unclear to me. The recommendation seems to be to use a command whenever possible instead of writing to a dataref. The complete list of commands can be found in Resources\plugins directory, but also on a searchable website (again, I have seen difference between what’s on that website and my Xplane).

#### Animating an object

Once the object is in Blender, animation is easy. For example, if you want to make the airspeed needle move, you need to allow it to rotate based on a dataref value. Here is how to do it:

First, you need to separate the airspeed indicator into two different mesh structures – the body and the pointer. Then, place the origin of the pointer at the pivot point of the required rotation (you need to look up how to do that). On the animation tab, select an animation keyframe number (we typically select 1 for the first keyframe, but it really doesn’t matter which number you select). Rotate the needle and place it where it should point when the airspeed is zero. Then save this keyframe position.

Find the Object Properties tab, and expand the Xplane properties. Click on Add Dataref. Then put in the dataref for airspeed. In this case, it is sim/cockpit2/gauges/indicators/airspeed_kts_pilot. Next we need to select the type of animation. There are three types of animations: Transformation (which is a movement), Show (which makes the object appear) and Hide (which makes the object disappear). Here we want Transformation because rotation is a transformation. Making sure the keyframe is in the first position, type in 0.0 in the Value box. Then click on the Add Dataref Keyframe button (just hitting return is not enough). The color of the value box should change as soon as it is accepted. Now we have assigned 0.0 knots to the first keyframe. Then add a second keyframe, rotate the needle to a different airspeed value, and type in the appropriate airspeed for that keyframe. Two keyframes should be sufficient for objects that behave linearly. For nonlinear motions, or for a more accurate representation, more keyframes are better.

That’s pretty much it. We now have animated the airspeed indicator. When this object is exported, the obj file will contain the appropriate ANIM attributes to correctly display the airspeed.

#### Exportable Collections

Ideally, we should have a single .blend file for the entire airplane. This way everything can be lined up and visualized prior to exporting it to Xplane. To keep each object distinct, they should be placed in a different collection. A collection is a concept unique to Blender. Think of it as a folder within the blender file. Each collection will produce a separate obj file when exported.

Not all objects need to be exported. Some might be there just for your own reference when designing in Blender. There is an option in the Scene Properties tab to specify which collections should be exported. So check the boxes next to all the objects you want exported. Regardless of what you specify here, only the visible collections will be exported. That means you can always hide a collection (by clicking on the “eye” icon next to the collection) and that collection won’t be exported.

Under the Exportable Collection box, there is a separate pull-down menu to specify if this object is an Aircraft Part, Cockpit Object or Scenery Object. An airplane can have many Aircraft Parts, but can have only one Cockpit Object. Obviously, Scenery is not relevant for our discussion. Manipulators (clickable objects) can only exist in a Cockpit Object. Assigning a manipulator to an Aircraft Part will produce an error during export from Blender. Additionally, even though Blender will allow you to tag multiple objects as Cockpit Objects, only one will be eventually designated as Cockpit Object in Plane Maker. This is a potential area of confusion. I’ll say more about this later.

#### Replacing textures or redesigning an object

After importing the airspeed indicator into Blender, you may want to replace its texture image, or scrap the whole object and redesign from scratch. In either case, take an actual photograph of the airspeed indicator, and UV wrap that onto the object. This is where having experience in Blender comes in helpful. I am not going to describe how to do all that. It is standard fare in Blender.

The image files should be in PNG or DDS form. Supposedly, DDS format renders faster. Both formats work with Xplane, and both can be edited with Gimp. The width and height of the image must be scaled to a power of 2, such as 512 x 512, or 512 x 1024 etc.. Of course, smaller images are better for speed. A lot of work is needed at this stage. For the example with the airspeed indicator, the pointer needs to be inconspicuously erased. We can place the erased portion in a separate location to texture the new pointer, or simply create a white rectangle as the new texture. It depends on how fancy you want to get.

Also worth mentioning is that each object does not need to have a separate texture file. The same texture file can be shared across different objects. For example, the body of the airspeed indicator and the pointer (which are different objects within the same collection) can share the same texture file. It is common practice to assemble multiple images together, like a collage, into a single texture file.

As mentioned earlier, Xplane uses three separate texture files. These should be put in the Scene Properties tab (this item is under the same place where you check the Exportable Collection box). This value has no impact on how Blender displays the objects. This is strictly for inserting the appropriate file names when Blender exports these objects.

#### Manipulators and the Cockpit Object

Manipulators are objects in the cockpit that you click, drag or rotate with a mouse. Examples are throttle control, yoke, switches, etc… If you have joystick controls for all functions and don’t intend on using a mouse at all, then these manipulators may not be necessary. However, even with an external yoke/rudder/throttle quadrant, we may still need to push buttons to program the GPS, or autopilot etc..

Since all of the manipulators were lost in the Xplane-to-wavefront conversion, we need to recreate them. The default Cessna 172 has hundreds of manipulators, and recreating them in Blender would take a lot of time. But as a pilot, I don’t really care if the simulator has every little switch and control knob. Light switches, door knobs and even master switches are not necessary for my purpose. This eliminates nearly 80% of the manipulators from the default Cessna 172.

A manipulator is assigned in Blender the same way as an animated dataref. As stated earlier, only the Cockpit Object is allowed to have manipulators, and there can be only one Cockpit Object. As a result, all of the manipulators are combined into a single object. On the default Cessna 172, this file is Cessna_172SP_cockpit.obj, which can be found in the root directory of the aircraft folder. Every push button, lever, knob etc.. has an associated clickable object in this file. They are rendered with an invisible material, so they won’t appear on Xplane.

If you open the file Cessna_172SP_cockpit.obj with a text editor you will see that it has no associated texture file. That’s because nearly everything in it is a hidden object. (Actually, there can be a few visible objects in this file, which will be wrapped with an internal texture file cockpit_3d\-PANELS-\panel.png. I’ll discuss this in detail later). If you convert this obj file to Blender, it will show a 3D cockpit layout, but it will look a bit weird. Most objects here have simple shapes – circles, rectangles, cubes etc.. Every object here exists only for the purpose of capturing the mouse clicks. The Blender view of this file is shown below.

Let’s consider the throttle lever. If you display it along with the actual throttle lever (which is part of the cockpit_panel.obj), it will look like shown below.

In this example, the grey cube overlaying the throttle lever is the clickable object for the throttle. It is set as a Drag Axis (push-pull) manipulator. The Hand setting tells it to display a hand icon (in Xplane) when the cursor is over it. The dataref for this manipulator is sim/cockpit2/engine/actuators/throttle_ratio[0], which is a writeable dataref. The other values in the manipulator setting specify the range of values to assign to this dataref when the throttle is moved. The clickable object has to be animated as well (using the same dataref), because it needs to move as the throttle is pushed in. The actual throttle should also have the same animation using the same dataref, so both the clickable object and the real throttle always stay together.

Not all clickable objects need to be animated. The clickable object for a push button, as shown on the autopilot below, is a simple rectangle sitting over the actual button. The button itself is animated (to show a pressed state), but the clickable object does not need to be animated because the button does not move very far when pushed.

All of the manipulation objects in the Cockpit Object collection should be drawn with a single material type that should be designated as invisible. This is done in the Materials Properties panel by unchecking the “Draw Objects with this Material” as shown below. If it is checked, then all these grey objects will show up in Xplane, making a very ugly panel.

In Xplane, all of the clickable objects should show up in green if the View->Show Instrument Click Regions is enabled. This is shown below.

#### Cockpit Display Screens

Cockpit instruments that contain a screen, like the GNS430 or the G1000 are a different object type. Their screens should be drawn as rectangles in the same Cockpit Object collection, but using a different material that is not hidden. This material should also be designated as “Part of a Cockpit Panel”. These objects will ultimately get textured in Xplane by an image file located in cockpit_3d\-PANELS-\panel.png. We don’t need to specify this texture file in the export collection parameter list. Xplane will automatically do that.

When Xplane runs, it will draw the various screens to panel.png during every frame cycle. Actually, the panel.png file is just a template. It doesn’t actually get overwritten during every frame cycle. Instead, the file contents are held in memory and updated during every frame cycle to show the screens.

The code for producing the displays such as GNS430, GNS530, G1000, and a large number of other instrument displays are in the Xplane’s main engine. But a custom display can also be written with an external plugin. For example, in my cockpit, I have two G5 screens (purchased from AFM), GNS 430 (purchased from RealityXP), and Avitab for the iPAD tablet. I opted for RealityXP’s GNS430 because it more closely resembles the real thing than Xplane’s internal GNS430. The default Cessna 172’s panel.png size is 1024 x 1024. This was too small to fit all of the above screens. So I increased it to 2048 x 1024. All you have to do is to create a new blank panel.png file of the size you want. But like any other texture file, the size must conform to the power-of-2 rule.

We can get the contents of the panel.png memory by executing the command sim/operation/make_panel_previews (using the DataRefTool plugin). This will write the image to a file named Panel_Preview.png in the cockpit_3d\-PANELS-\ directory. Every cockpit screen should write to a different area of the image. Overlapping images will obviously screw up all the display screens. Avitab has an option to specify the pixel location of its image within the panel.png file. RealityXP also has an option to specify its image location. The snapshot image is shown below. For some reason, the G5 screens were not showing, but I had to do some trial and error and figured out it was actually being written to the lower left corner.

In the C172’s acf file, we also need to disable Xplane’s own GNS430 screen as well as the GNS530 screen. Even though I had deleted the GNS530 object from the Cessna 172’s avionics stack, Xplane will continue to write its screen output in panel.png. This is obviously unnecessary and will only slow down Xplane. This can be easily removed from the acf file with a text editor. In fact there is another group of objects labelled RUBBISHBUTNECESSARY, which as far as I could tell, is a bunch of annunciators that serve no purpose, so I removed all of them as well.

The Panel_Preview.png file can be used to UV map the displays to the correct areas of the file (panel.png file cannot be used because it is a blank file). Even though we are using Panel_Preview.png, Xplane will actually use its internal panel.png to texture the object during runtime.

#### Using Planemaker to add screens to panel.png

Planemaker has built-in instruments that can be placed on the panel.png texture, and then UV mapped to an object. This menu is under Standard-> Panel: 3D. There are a large number of these instruments, ranging from simple light indicators to EFIS panels. Below is an example of placing an EFIS on to panel.png in Planemaker.

In the above example, we could map the image of the EFIS to a cockpit panel.

#### Designing the GFC-500 Autopilot

In this section, I will describe the steps for designing the GFC-500 autopilot. This autopilot does not come with Xplane, so it is a useful learning exercise.

Using the cockpit panel in Blender as the backdrop (which is cockpit_panel.obj), use a primitive cube to create a box of the correct size and and place it in the desired location in the avionics stack. Place this cube in a new collection called GFC500. One could also create the bezel around the front face to give it a more realistic look, but I didn’t. The best time to make such modifications on the cube is now, before UV unwrapping it. Its hard to make structural changes later.

The next step is to take an actual photograph of the unit and use it to UV wrap onto this cube. A texture is needed for the side faces as well, which can be a simple patch of black on the image. At this point, all the buttons and knobs are just images, not actual objects.

Then create a few primitive cubes and place them over the buttons, making them project slightly outwards like a real push button. Make sure these cubes are all in the same GFC500 collection.

The next step is to apply textures to the small cubes. The same texture file as the body can be used for this. Repeat this for all of the buttons on the panel.

The next step is to create a clickable object for each button to serve as manipulators. You can simply duplicate the cubes, or draw clickable rectangles on the faces of the buttons. Make sure to move these clickable objects to the Cockpit Object collection. These clickable objects should be assigned the same invisible material as the other manipulators.

Next we need to assign commands to the clickable objects. For example, the ON button on the autopilot should engage the servo motors. The command for this function is sim/autopilot/servos_toggle.

Next, the button (not the clickable object) should be animated to show the pushing action. Hide the cockpit object collection out of the work space, and create two keyframes for the button. The first keyframe will be the normal state (sticking out a bit), and the second keyframe should be in the pushed state (flat with the panel face).

Then a dataref has to be attached to this manipulator. We could use the dataref sim/cockpit2/autopilot/servos_on but we can also do it differently. We can use a temporary dataref derived from the command. This can be done with CMND=sim/autopilot/servos_toggle. This dataref will produce a value of 1 when the command is being invoked (button pushed) and 0 when the button is not being pushed.

The above steps should be adequate to make the push button work, but we should also create the annunciator corresponding to that button. On the GFC500, a white triangle pointer lights up when a button is pushed, and it extinguishes when the button is pressed again.

Draw a simple triangle above the button, and use the same texture file used for the autopilot with a small white patch to color it.

This triangle has to be animated, but it does not need keyframes because it does not move. It simply appears and disappears. This can be done in the Object Properties tab – the same place where we assign dataref values for animated objects – except this time choose Show as the animation type. Then select sim/cockpit2/autopilot/servos_on as the dataref and assign the conditions when it should be shown and when it should be hidden. Some of these values are not clearly documented, so you would have to run DataRefTool inside Xplane to find out.

We have to repeat this for all buttons on the panel. We also have two rotating knobs for changing altitude and headings, push buttons to synchronizing current altitude and heading, and a wheel for changing vertical speed. All of these need appropriate manipulators, animations, and keyframes.

I also chose to add a tiny LED screen on the GFC500 to show the requested vertical speed. This display does not exist on the real GFC500. In Planemaker (under Panel: 3D), I placed an object named EFIS_disp_VVI.png in an unused parts of the panel.png. In Xplane, I took a snapshot of Panel_Preview.png. Then in Blender, I created a tiny display screen on the face of the GFC500 (in the cockpit objects collection) and used the Panel_Preview.png to UV wrap this screen.

You can download my fully completed GFC500 autopilot object file for Xplane here, and the blend file.

#### Exporting objects from Blender

Click on File->Export->Xplane (obj). The file name is not relevant. Blender will export all visible exportable collections using the names of the respective collections. Alternate names can be specified for each collection in the Exportable Collections panel. If there are any errors, it will be in an internal log file named xplane2blender.log. Blender uses internal files (i.e these are not written to disk). You can access this with the Blender’s text editor.

Next, copy the obj files and their texture files into the Xplane aircraft directory. You could create a separate directory named objects/custom to keep your objects separate. Then fire up Plane Maker.

#### Importing objects into Plane Maker

Make a copy of the acf file you are modifying, and open that file. Under Standard->Author, write the appropriate description of this airplane so that it is recognizable in Xplane.

Next, go into Standard->Misc Objects. This is where all the 3D objects are assembled. If the object was placed in the desired location in Blender, there is no need to adjust the X,Y,Z position or rotations here. They could all be set to zero, and the objects should be in their correct positions.

The Int Cockpit is the radio button that indicates it is a Cockpit Object (the one that contains manipulators). Hi-res should be checked for instruments that require higher resolution rendering. The Inside/Outside/Glass Inside/Glass Outside control how these items are displayed, and there is a pop-up help available for these options.

Once all the objects are added to the list, go to the front page of Plane Maker, hide all the items except the ones related to the panel. Zoom in close using the “=” key. It should look something like the figure below. If it does, then the next step is to open it in Xplane.

#### Check it out in Xplane

The last step is to open the airplane in Xplane and check for the expected look and functionality.

The image below shows a new airplane I created to mimic my club’s Cessna 182R, starting from Xplane’s default Cessna 172. In addition to the instruments, I had to add a landing gear switch, fuel pressure, manifold pressure, cylinder head temperature and a bunch of other things. I tried texturing the panel based on an actual photo. The propeller and engine specifications were changed to match the 182. Overall, it flies nearly identical to the real 182, and it will serve as a great training tool for maintaining proficiency.

#### Lighted Textures and Normal Textures

Objects are displayed using the default texture whenever there is ambient light. As the ambient light declines (at dusk or at night), the default texture slowly disappears and is replaced by the lighted texture. The lighted texture is basically the portions that should glow in the dark.

A lighted texture can be created by modifying the default texture in gimp. It is important to start from the same texture file because the same UV co-ordinates are used for both textures, so every pixel’s position should remain at the same location. There is also a nifty light filter tool in gimp that can be used to create the illusion of a light bulb. The layering concept in gimp is a great way to cut different parts of the image and modify them separately.

While the default texture is allowed to have an alpha channel (transparency setting), the lighted texture should be opaque. In other words, all non-emissive areas should be drawn in black. This can be easily created in gimp by creating a layer with a black fill, and then laying the portions that should be emissive on top of it.

Normal maps allow surfaces to be rendered with fine structural details without adding extra vertices. These can be created in Blender by first creating a high-resolution object with lots of features, and then mapping those features to a low-resolution object using a process known as baking. Among other things, baking can be used to create a normal texture file. When applied to a low resolution object this will make it look similar to the high-resolution object.

## CNC hot wire foam cutter

This CNC foam cutter was built from a kit by https://rcfoamcutter.com. It basically consists of two carriages for the horizontal translations and two towers for the vertical translations. I’ve built two prior CNC foam cutters (not using this kit), and the main challenges with those DIY designs were uneven sliding friction and wobble. These problems have been mostly solved in this kit by using plastic bearing sleeves for friction reduction and two linear shafts per axis to reduce wobble. However, it became clear later that the wobble is primarily due to lack of straightness in the acme lead screws. Any small bends in the screws will producing a rocking motion of the carriages, which will show up as ripples in the foam edges.

The stepper motors are 6-wire NEMA 23 motors with 2A drive current. The driver board was built from a kit by Hobbycnc (Model #4AUPCWHC). This board includes PWM control of the cutting wire temperature . Unfortunately it appears that they don’t make this board any more.

The control signals are sent via a parallel port connector. The motors need a hefty power supply (up to 8A max), and the hot wire (30-gauge NiCr) also needs a separate power supply.

Most computers nowadays do not come with a parallel port. Although there are USB-to-Parallel converters, they will not work for CNC control because it is impossible to deliver accurate timing signals through the USB port. The solution is to get the UC100 CNC motion controller. It looks like an ordinary USB-to-parallel converter, but it is not. It has embedded circuitry and software drivers to produce the precise signals required for CNC motion control. This allows any laptop with a USB port to be used to drive the CNC. The UC100 is best used with the Mach3 software, which is one of the most widely used CNC software. However, it is a generic CNC software, so some customization (known as “screens”) is necessary. The screens for foam cutting setups can be found in many online forums. I bought mine through Ebay from http://www.foamwings.ru/f-scr_eng.php.

The input commands for the Mach3 software are written in G-codes. These are ascii commands that tell the motors how far to move, and how fast. Some drawing packages such as Inkscape allow saving the vectors as G-codes, but none of them work straight out of the box because the foam cutter drivse two pairs of axes – two left axes (X & Y) and two right axes (A&B). Most conventional CNC systems use a single pair of X & Y axes with a Z axis for the height of the cutting tool. There are several software specifically made for foam cutting that can produce four axes G-codes (such as devFoam, Foamworks, Jedicut). However, G-codes for simple non-tapered designs can be easily created from Inkscape, or even from an Excel spreadsheet. The codes can be viewed using a variety of software, such as Camotics.

The moving hot wire melts the foam by convective and radiative heat transfer. Therefore, the width of the cut will be larger than the wire diameter. This is known as Kerf, and must be compensated in the design. Kerf is a function of wire diameter, wire temperature, cutting speed and foam type. The best way to determine wire temperature is by using an ammeter to measure the current through the wire. For a given foam type and foam thickness, the temperature is directly related to the current. Low density foam will cut easily and will produce a larger kerf. Slower cut speed will result in a larger kerf. Therefore, the optimum cut speed and temperature has to be determined for each foam type. The thickness of the foam also matters. A thicker foam will draw more heat away the wire, and will require a higher current to maintain the same temperature.

### A short tutorial on creating G-codes using Inkscape

This example uses characters, but the same procedure can be used to create cuts from line drawings as well.

• Using inkscape, write the text. A thicker font will be better to give the foam more meat.
• The letters have to be connected, otherwise they will not stay together after the cut. In this example we can place thin rectangles (bars) between the letters to connect them.
• Then switch to outline view. This will show the connecting rectangles as outlines, but the fonts will stay solid. This is because the fonts are lines, not shapes.
• The next step is to convert the letters to shapes, and also combine the letters with the rectangles to create a single structure. This is done by the Union function. Select everything and then click Union. This will produce an outline of the entire object.
• We also need to make access points for the internal holes in the letters O and A. Place small rectangles to make these access cuts.
• Unlike the connecting rectangles, these rectangles need to be subtracted from the main object. Select one rectangle, then the main object (with shift-select), and click Difference. Then repeat for the next rectangle.
• There is still one more thing to do. The entry point for the wire has to be defined. By default, the wire will enter from the topmost point in the design, which right now is the top of the letter “A”. I want the wire to enter from the top left corner of the letter “F”. To make this happen, draw a very thin rectangle above F to make it the highest point in the structure. Then combine it with the trace using Union. If this rectangle is very skinny, it won’t show up in actual final cut.
• Next, select Tools library under the Gcodetools extension. Select the default tool and click Apply.
• This will create a table of parameters for the Gcode generation. We don’t need to modify anything here because none of the settings are relevant for a four-axis foam cutter. We will have to manually edit the gcode file afterwards.
• Move the parameter box out of the way. The (0,0) point is on the lower left corner of the page. I typically like the cut to start from the top left of the shape, so I move the shape below the bottom left corner of the origin as shown below.
• Under the Gcodetools menu, select Path to Gcode. Accept all the default values except the directory where you want the file to be written, and the file extension (change the .ngc to .gcode). Remain on the Path to Gcode tab and select Apply.
• After the Gcode is created, the trace will change to include small arrows to show the direction of the cutting tool along the trace. The file will have the extention .gcode
• The file will have to be edited with a text editor and modified to match the foam cutter requirements. I usually delete all the preamble and add the following lines:
G17    ( PLANE SELECTION = XY )
G21    ( UNITS = MM )
G90    ( DISTANCE MODE = ABSOLUTE )
M3     ( HOT WIRE = ON )
S30    ( HOT WIRE POWER = 30% )
G4 P5  ( DWELL TIME = 5 SEC )
F150   ( CUTTING SPEED = 150MM/MIN) 
• The main section will begin with G00 (rapid movement) in the Z axis to feed the cutter into the work piece, and then another G00 along XY to the first point on the trace. I delete all Z axis movements, and replace the G00 with G01 for a slower translation.
• The main section of the cut trace contains the X, Y and Z axes for linear translations. The two additional I and J fields for curves. On the foam cutter, we have two towers with X, Y, A and B, but we are assuming that A and B slaved to the X and Y. The Z axis is not relevant in this case.
G01 X1.232711 Y-4.768690
G01 X1.232711 Y-7.792300 Z-0.125000 F400.000000
G01 X0.786227 Y-13.993470 Z-0.125000
G03 X1.843255 Y-14.379883 Z-0.125000 I1.879872 J3.503417
G03 X3.365914 Y-14.539170 Z-0.125000 I1.522659 J7.198067
G03 X4.855470 Y-14.401778 Z-0.125000 I-0.000000 J8.143328
• The end of the file must contain the following lines:
G01 X0.0000 Y0.0000
M5    ( TURN OFF WIRE HEAT)
M2    ( END OF FILE )
• Open the gcode file using CAMotics. This will show an animation of the cutting process.
• Load this file into the Mach3 software and execute the cut.

## Dayton Daily News Article

This is an article I wrote to the Dayton Daily News, which appeared on Saturday May 5 2012.

Tom Hausfeld, the pilot of the ill-fated flight on April 1, might be alive today if not for the poor decisions to erect buildings on the approach path of incoming airplanes. While fear is being raised about the possibility of airplanes falling off the sky on innocent people, the true hazard is actually the other way around. When Tom lost engine power, he was required by the Federal aviation regulations to maneuver the airplane away from persons or property on the ground. This is exactly what he did. Not a single piece of metal fell on anyone outside the airport fence. It is also evident that he struggled to hold the airplane high enough to clear the roofs of the buildings that were on the approach path, which robbed him of the precious last few knots of airspeed that is so essential for staying airborne.

The foremost tragedy in this story is that we lost a fine citizen and a fine aviator of our community. The second tragedy is how this is being spun to advance the interests of businesses and other groups. The pilot and his passenger were the victims here. The hazard was the building. How anyone can turn that story around is amazing to me. Munroe Muffler built a shop at the very edge of the runway, and then goes on the news media complaining about low flying airplanes.

The fact that airplanes fly low just prior to landing is not a new phenomenon. This is how airplanes were flown since Orville and Wilbur. The FAA and the laws of physics require airplanes to fly in a shallow 3-5 degree glide angle during approach. At Wright Brothers airport, this means the airplanes have been crossing the fence at roughly 75 ft altitude for nearly half a century. Several years back I recall looking down during a final approach, at the construction site where the gas station and the Munroe shop now sits, wondering why in the world anyone would choose to build there knowing the risk it poses to aircraft. That choice ended up costing the lives of two innocent people.

Residents are understandably concerned about the possibility of airplanes crashing into their homes. However, it can be verified from the NTSB records that statistically this is an extremely unlikely event. Nevertheless, public perception is still important, and communities and airports need to work together to create a mutually safe environment. But that is a two-way street. Erecting buildings with no regard to aircraft safety, and then accusing pilots of flying too close to those buildings is not an environment that creates mutual trust. Communities such as Settler’s Walk can write their own rules on how airplanes should fly, but unless such rules are incorporated into the Federal registry they will have little or no effect. Airport operations are not regulated by city, state or residential communities. Airports are part of a vast national network, and operate under federal regulations. Airplanes flying here from Florida or Texas or even just from Cincinnati cannot be expected to know about the covenants of Settler’s Walk or the opinions of Munroe Muffler.

Andrew Sarangan

Professor

University of Dayton

Let me start with a disclaimer that I am not the expert on international flying. My experience comes solely from having made several trips between Ohio and southern Ontario to visit friends and family. When I first checked into this, I received all kinds of totally irrelevant information, such as international flight plans, radio licenses, HF radios and wilderness survival gears. Even AOPA’s write-up did not help much.

This article is written in the hope that it might be of some use to pilots looking for first-hand information about flying to Canada. This is probably the easiest international flight any pilot could make. Canadian aviation is almost identical to ours, except for a few minor differences.

The first airport of landing in Canada must be a designated airport of entry, and you must arrive during their normal operating hours. Most Canadian airports near the U.S. border as well as larger ones further north are most likely to be designated airports of entry. Canada Customs operating hours varies from one airport to another. Smaller airports might only offer weekday service, but busier airports will have customs service at all hours including weekends. A complete listing can be found in the Canada Border Services Agency website. There is also a special program called CANPASS which allows pilots to land at additional airports outside normal operating hours, but that requires a special application and an annual fee, and is really only intended for frequent travelers.

Flight plans are mandatory and the aircraft must remain in contact with ATC with a discrete squawk code while crossing the border. Filing IFR is the best way to go. IFR flight plans are handled seamlessly across the two countries regardless of where you file. I am told that VFR flight plans are not handled the same way, and may require two separate flight plans to be filed with each country, with separate activation and termination as you cross the border.

Obtaining aeronautical charts is the most frustrating part. Canadian charts are not available on the internet due to copyright rules. I am not even aware of any paid service where you can download their charts. It is a major pain in the neck. If you are planning the flight the night before, as I often tend to do, you will be out of luck. But you can get away without buying Canadian charts if you are willing to take the unofficial route. All areas of Canada below the 49th parallel are covered by U.S. charts. That includes Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, and the entire provinces of New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. What a deal! The FAA has a disclaimer that the information outside the U.S. may be unreliable, but that is up to you. However, if you insist on buying Canadian charts, it is cheaper to get them mailed from a Canadian store. In addition, U.S. FBO’s near the border might also be a potential source for Canadian charts.

Before departing from your home airport, call Canada Customs on their toll-free number 1-888-CANPASS. You will be asked for an ETA, passenger names, citizenship and dates of birth. Once you depart, it works just like any other domestic flight. The Canadian and U.S systems are virtually transparent under IFR. You won’t even know which country’s airspace you are in. It was interesting that most of southwestern Ontario is under Cleveland Center’s airspace. You will be flying in Canadian airspace talking to a U.S. controller. Go figure. Handoffs were a nonevent. Cleveland hands you off to Toronto Center somewhere near London, Ontario.  Toronto Center might hand you off to Montreal Center if you are going further east. There are some minor differences in the ATC language. They say “radar identified” instead of “radar contact”. They call “Terminal” instead of “Approach”. Canadian aircraft identifiers begin with a “C” followed by four letters and contain no numbers.

Upon landing, you call the same 1-888 number to report your arrival. It is best to do this from the aircraft with a cell phone. They will give you an arrival record number which you should keep in a safe place. I’ve been told that customs agents make random inspections and may show up to check your documents. However, of all the times I have landed in Canada, I have never seen a customs officer.

Canadian rules require VFR flight plans for all flights greater than 25 NM. The format is quite different from ours and it could be very confusing. The best thing to do is confess to FSS that you are not familiar with the format. They were more than happy to talk me through the flight plan. There are other differences. Tower will automatically open and close VFR flight plans. At non-towered airports, unless you tell the briefer otherwise, the flight plan will be activated at the proposed time. If you do not depart as planned, it is important to call FSS and amend or cancel the flight plan. They are very serious about search and rescue up there.

Airspace designations are somewhat different too. Class C airspace is treated like our class B. Class D looks much like our class C. They also have a class F. It can get pretty confusing. On the plus side, they don’t appear to be as rigid about the airspace rules as we are here. It was a more relaxed atmosphere. We filed IFR as much as possible, so this was not an issue for us. An interesting observation is that I was able to file using DUATS and still get my clearance from the local ATC.

If you are flying in the Toronto area, a visit to the City Center airport is highly recommended. It is a magnificent airport on an island just walking distance from downtown. It has a landing fee, but it is cheaper than parking a car in downtown. The view of the downtown area with its famous CN tower is breathtaking, and you can circle over the city without being pursued by fighter jets.

Coming back into the U.S is a much more serious affair. Similar rules apply, such as having to land at designated airports of entry during their business hours. There is no central toll-free number for U.S customs. You have to contact the individual customs office listed in the CBP website. There are two kinds of airports: international airport of entry, and customs landing rights airport. I am still unclear on the practical difference between these; they both seem to be the same. To avoid complications in case of a diversion, delay or emergency landing, it is important to clear customs as soon after entering U.S airspace as possible. We normally land at Sandusky, OH for two reasons: it was very close to the Canadian border, and it has an on-site customs office. We were told that on-site officers are more relaxed and less cranky than off-site officers who would have to drive to meet us. Upon landing, it is imperative that you stay in the airplane until the officer comes to meet you. There is a customs declaration form, and is best to have this form filled out ahead of time. The officer will ask for passports, aircraft registration, pilot certificate and medical. We found the officers at Sandusky to be friendly and courteous, but I have heard horror stories about other locations.

There is a $25 per calendar year fee for U.S customs services. You can pay this online, and you will receive a decal in the mail which should be attached to the aircraft door. If you don’t have time to wait for the decal to arrive in the mail, you can bring the printout of the online receipt as proof. In some cases, you can purchase the decal directly from the customs inspector, so it is best to check all of this ahead of time. If you are paying the inspector, it is best to have the application form filled out and have exact change before you arrive. One last thing. NavCanada will send you a bill for ATC services. It is about$12, and is good for three months.

## VOR as a course Instrument

By: Dr. Andrew Sarangan (October 2003)

The vast majority of pilots use the VOR as a command instrument – turn left when the needle deflects left, and turn right when the needle deflects right. Then they learn about reverse sensing. If the OBS is set to the reciprocal course, the commands become reversed – turn right when the needle deflects left, and turn left when the needle deflects right. Naturally, most prefer to stay away from reverse sensing. As a result, they do a lot of knob twisting to keep the desired number at the top of the OBS. Those who use the five-T’s mantra would recall that one of the T’s stands for twisting the OBS knob. This technique works fine for the most part, but there is a simpler and more elegant way.

It is a less known fact that the original VOR receiver was designed as a course instrument. It was not designed as a “fly left” “fly right” indicator. This is why the needle was called a Course Deviation Indicator. This is also why there is a full circle of numbers on the face of the VOR. The needle points to the hemisphere where the selected course lies. The triangle pointer (also called the TO/FROM flag) points to the hemisphere where the station lies. Together, they point to a quadrant of headings that will intercept the desired course. Perhaps this is best illustrated through a few examples.

Let’s say we are flying a VOR approach, and the final approach course is 210. And let’s also assume that the VOR station is on the field. You want to intercept and fly the 030 radial, then reverse course and fly inbound along the 210 radial. When we select 210 on the OBS, the needle deflects as shown. Which heading should we fly to get to the station? Pause for a moment and think about how we normally do this. Most pilots would turn the OBS until the needle centers, get their current radial position, form a mental image of their relative position to the station, and then determine which heading to fly. This works fine, but it is a lengthy process and takes too much mental effort. The alternative method is a lot simpler, and requires less handwork and brainwork. Look at all the numbers along the needle-side (left-side) of the VOR face. The needle is pointing to a hemisphere of headings between 030 and 210. Turn to any one of those headings, and the needle will eventually center. Yes, it is really that simple! The fastest way to get there of course is to fly 120, which is directly against the needle. This will make a 90-degree intercept to the desired course. All other headings will intercept the course at a shallower angle. Now look at the triangle pointer. It points to a hemisphere of headings between 300 and 120. This is where the station lies. In order to fly towards the station and intercept the selected course, we need to pick a heading from the bottom left quadrant of the VOR. For example, 080 would be a good heading to fly. Once the needle centers, its hemisphere collapses to just two numbers – 030 and 210. Of these two numbers, only 030 lies in the direction of the station. This is the heading we need to fly to track the course towards the station.

Let’s look at a second example: We want to intercept the selected course and track outbound from the station. This time we have to look at the needle and the tail of the arrow. They point to a quadrant of headings between 280 and 010. Pick one and fly it. Whether we turn left or right is immaterial. What matters is that we turn to the desired heading. When the needle centers, fly 280 to track outbound.

Notice that it doesn’t matter which number we put at the top of the OBS. We could put the desired course, or its reciprocal, and the indications will not change. There is no reverse sensing.

Here is another scenario. We are cruising along an airway. VOR1 is set to the airway radial, and VOR2 is set to an intersecting radial from another VOR. We want to know whether we have passed that intersection or still headed towards it. Here is how to do this in less than 5 seconds. Take a look at the panel. Our present heading is 060. That number is on the needle-side of VOR2. Therefore, we are still flying towards the intersection. Bingo. There is no need to twist any knobs, do any math or visualize our position. Why work hard to find the answer that is already written on the instrument?

The next example highlights the most valuable use of this method. Let’s say we want to fly to an intersection of two VOR radials as shown below. We tune both NAV radios and set the OBS to the required radials. Both CDI needles hit the stop. What heading should we fly to get to the intersection? Using the conventional method, this would take several minutes of OBS-twisting and mind-bending visualizations.

Here is how to do this in less than five seconds. Look at all the numbers on the needle-side (left-half) of VOR1. Then look at all the numbers on the needle-side (right-half) of VOR2. Find a number that is common to both. How about 360? Fly that heading. No mind-bending visualizations are necessary. If VOR1 centers before the VOR2, we are left with only two choices – 330 or 150. Only one of these is still on the needle-side of VOR2. That would be 330. Fly that heading, and eventually both needles will center. Like before, it doesn’t matter whether we put the radials at the top of the OBS or at the bottom. The results will be the same.

The same technique works on a localizer. Put the localizer front course at the top of the OBS and fly it like a course instrument. Interpret the top numbers for the front course and the bottom numbers for the back course. There is no reverse sensing. Our brain will be free to attend to more important matters. The same technique works on CDI’s driven by a GPS. On the Garmin 430/530 unless you set the OBS to the selected track, it will keep popping up a reminder message.

Notice that we did not have to figure out our current position in any of these examples. We instantly knew where to point the airplane without twisting any knobs or doing any math. Once the airplane is headed in the right direction, we can leisurely attend to the task of locating our current position. This embodies the true utility of the VOR receiver. It presents the information in the order of their importance – heading first, position later.

Given the simplicity of this technique, it is somewhat mysterious why this is seldom taught during flight training. Most pilots are taught to turn towards the needle and ignore its numeric indications. This method works only when the heading indicator is aligned with the OBS. If they are different, the indications will produce meaningless commands. Additionally, turning towards the needle is more likely to promote needle chasing, especially when the pilot is under pressure. When the VOR is used a course indicator, the pilot must read the numbers and respond with an appropriate heading. It reinforces the importance of finding and holding a constant heading. Pilots trained under this system are more likely to be disciplined about their headings.

It is unfortunate that some avionics manufacturers have failed to recognize this important VOR feature. Some have dropped the station arrow and replaced it with the TO/FROM flag. Some displays have all the numbers tucked behind a plastic sleeve except the top and bottom numbers. The worst ones are the digital VOR displays. They have an LCD bar scale to simulate the needle deflection. There is no compass rose on the face of the instrument. It is interesting to note that technological improvements have actually made the VOR more difficult to use. There might be a lesson in this. Some things are better left the way they are. The VOR system might be a 50-year old technology, but it is one of the greatest inventions in aeronautical navigation. It is really too bad that we won’t have them for much longer.

Reference

The VOR” by Joe Campbell, December 1995. Unpublished article available from http://www.campbells.org/Airplanes/VOR/vor.html