I don’t think you’re getting it. They know in theory what the instruments are telling them, it’s just that the sensations produced by the body that are in complete disagreement with the instruments are overwhelmingly powerful. Ground school doesn’t help that, exposure and training does.
Yes you do. It is only in a very steep turn that you need to increase throttle. In a medium turn you just lose a few knots of airspeed if the power stays the same, no big deal. You compensate by the reduced vertical component of lift by pulling back a bit on the controls which increases the angle of attack and increases the lift. It also increases the drag hence the slight loss of airspeed.
I was explaining why a pilot who banks a plane ends up on the ground - not that it is impossible to compensate for the loss of lift; that, all other things unchanged, the bank causes loss of altitude.
If ALL you do is bank from a power setting just adequate to maintain straight and level, you will no longer have enough horizontal lift to support the craft.
This is simply vector analysis, for the physics crowd. When level, 100% of lift is upward. At 45 degrees, 50% is upward, 50% is to the side. Too lazy to calc what a 10 degree bank will produce.
This is what the standard general aircraft turn coordinator looks like - notice the “2 Min” notation and the small marks off-level beside the wingtips - if the plane is banked so the wingtip aligns with one of those marks, it will go through a 360 turn in 120 seconds (hence, “2 mins”). It really doesn’t take much off-level to dump lift - why the college students averaged 8 SECONDS to earth.
When you have less than 10 seconds to live, you had damned well better know AND TRUST those instruments.
It’ll be closer to 70% up actually. In a bank, the horizontal and vertical components of lift don’t add up to 100%. To get the vertical lift down to 50% you’d need to bank 60º. A 10º bank causes less than a 2% loss of lift and a 30º bank causes a loss of 15% of vertical lift.
That’s only part of why VFR pilots crash in cloud though. They don’t even know they are banked. They think they are wings level (don’t look at or don’t trust the AH). They do notice the altimeter winding down, but instead of correcting it by levelling the wings first they don’t control for bank and pull back which results in a steepening disorientating spiral dive. Full throttle doesn’t help much in this scenario.
The big problem people have with flying with no visual reference is that the body only senses accelerations. And subtle accelerations can go unnoticed. If you bank into a turn you will feel the initial bank but once stabilised in the bank for a while the body gets used to it and doesn’t perceive the bank any more. When you then roll wings level the body perceives this as a bank from level in the opposite direction. A pitch up feels the same as accelerating level. Pitching down feels the same as decelerating level.
8 seconds to live doesn’t sound right by the way. The popular study that tends to get quoted states 178 seconds on average for student pilots to lose control.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/publications/en/tp2228/pdf/hr/tp2228e_1.pdf is an example.
You are quite correct that you need to know and trust your instruments. Better yet, stay out of the cloud in the first place.
Just back to add that if your ground school & instructor did not cover this, then you got ripped off.
While working on my PVT ticket, I had to do a certain amount of instrument work because recovery to straight & level flight from unusual attitudes was part of the PVT flight exam.
Talking back in the early to mid 1960"s.
IMO, one of the few things I agree with is the requirement for a tail wheel endorsement.
Tail wheel aircraft seem to be used less & less for training so new pilots who do not buy a tail wheel aircraft of their own are seldom exposed to them. 
I’m not sure what the syllabus is these days, but when I did my private licence in New Zealand it included several instrument flight lessons including turns using the compass, recovery from unusual attitudes, flight on a partial instrument panel, climbing and descending turns, and tracking using the ADF.
Ah Hah!!
Either you are older than I thought or you had a great place & people to learn with.
I still had the old low freq sectionals with just a few VOR stations for the Central SW US when I started my training. They were the hand me down’s from when Dad got his new ones. They had the ranges with the A & N shown for each beacon station.
Wish I had kept them now.
IIRC, the ground school books had, at least, descriptions and images of the flight instruments, including the gyros. Maybe one session of class would have touched on AH and DG, with emphasis on altimeter and airspeed. Tach was covered briefly (as “this is what your are paying for”, if nothing else).
As mentioned, flight instructors were all over the place - some didn’t want me looking inside, another wanted to fly by specifying numbers (heading, airspeed, altitude).
I’m too old, poor and crippled to do any flying.
For those still around flight instruction:
How’s the Light Sport segment coming?
I’m guessing the CFI’s like it about as much as their grandparents liked the Ercoupe - too simple and easy; no money to be made when a person can solo in xx hours.
“We train real pilots - take your silly-ass toy somewhere else”
Yes a horizon display on the front screen would be possible and be very useful…
The Air France airbus things… The computer could have said "rapid descent occuring - 4 to 1 - do an anti-stall maneuver - " Or HID’d that warning onto the screen… The 4 - 1 refers to 4 instruments out of 5. GPS, radar , altimeter, gyroscope. (the pilots assumes engine power setting and pitch ensured they were not descending.)
So the HID could give its advice on what could be the biggest problems at the time
Four tricks
-
pitching into down
-
stall
-
pitot tube - no engine thrust.
-
Terrain is rising (can’t it report that is Unexpected, given the pilot is not matching it with altitude increase ? )
“warning: 4 to 1, you are in a stall.”
“warning, pitot tubes not working”… If the engine fuel rate falls out of parameters - if the engines aren’t getting fuel, how can they produce thrust ??? - the computer can know that “auto-cruise” engine power system is not working - the pilots can go for engine thrust - fuel pumping rate - manually - just like the throttle pedal on car - . they don’t need pitot tubes if they set the engine thrust manually.
The latter I think. I had instructors who wanted to teach me to fly properly and I live in a part of the world where NDB approaches are still a common thing. I would recommend my old instructors in a flash.
As I suspected:
Light Sport does not exist, according to 4 of 5* flight training schools in the Sacramento area.
- Only the 4 which demand Private as the minimum acceptable (must have 3rd class medical, no mention of LS aircraft or rating) still have active websites. The 5th, “Light Sport West” (a promising name, at least), gets a 404.
Nearest active LS training is in Lodi, and offers a 20 hour block at the low, low price of $3269. This is a great savings, given the hourly rate is $155. (155 x 20 = 3100). This is for Challenger aircraft (also seen on Northern Exposure)