If nothing else, rudder coordination is just good airmanship, and is an indication of meeting our own high standards - right?
It can be more than that. Some aeroplanes will readily flick if stalled while out of balance; one of my aquaintance is the Yak 52. I was pulling hard in the second half of a loop in a Yak when it 'let go'. Wham! We were 90 degrees off heading in an instant by the time I'd relaxed the back pressure to unload the wings! Same thing will happen in a steep turn in that aeroplane unless that ball is centralised!
Presumably, one sets the rudder trim (whether this is an in-cockpit adjustment or bending tabs whilst on the ground) to allow 'feet off' flying in the cruise?
Rudder in the climb or any high power situation - fine.
I've not many hours and I've still a lot to learn, but the use of rudder during turns (on the types I fly anyhow) still mystifies me with the infinitesimally small touches that are needed. Whilst a turn without using the rudder feels a little different, it doesn't necessarily feel 'bad' or uncomfortable.
On the GA types I have flown to any degree (C150, C152, PA38, PA28, TB20) one doesn't touch the rudder during cruise.
One does need to use it during climb, during slow flight, and during stuff like chandelles and lazy eights.
If one has a rudder trim, trimming it so the ball is exactly in the middle, can get you another knot or two. But that assumes that the plane is also trimmed in roll e.g. if flying alone, the LH tank is run down a bit more than the RH tank so for level flight the ailerons are equally deflected, and only then should one trim the rudder.
Whilst a turn without using the rudder feels a little different, it doesn't necessarily feel 'bad' or uncomfortable.
That's because reasonably modern powered aircraft (from about the 1960s onwards) have various features integrated in them that diminish or eliminate adverse yaw. For instance differential ailerons, offset hinges, frise ailerons, or even an aileron/rudder coupling.
Get a trial flight in a modern glider and you'll know what the rudder is for.
infinitesimally small touches that are needed
Yup, a lot of flying is about small touches. What is a small touch on a small plane will likely be a larger touch, and more necessary on a larger plane. The people who train, and set the standards, are happily not training you to just fly little planes, but to also have the mindset to be ready for type training on larger, or more demanding ones.
Many pilots I train on type new to them, say "oh, this is sensitive!". Yes, it is - it demands more precision - that' why I'm training you in it. You can get away with a bit of slop in most training aircraft, and yes, you might not even notice half a ball out. But, if you touch down a float plane level on the water a half ball out, you're probably going to get wet very quickly.
I'm a believer that every fixed wing pilot should fly a helicopter for an hour or two. The need for small touches and reaction to the ball would become more clear.....
One of the reasons that many (mostly American types known as 'spam cans') have such soggy handling is that they have had a lot of things like adverse yaw designed out of them. As Brian Lecomber noted in one of his novels ('Talk Down' IIRC), they have also had the airman's art designed out of them.
Me? I'd rather have nice-handling aeroplane that demands you use your feet!
On a conventional twin, with asymmetrical thrust, if the ball is kept in the center with wings level, the airplane will be in a side slip. The airplane wants to yaw towards the lower power side and is in a side slip towards the lower power side and rudder is used to counter the turning and yawing tendency. To demonstrate this, we put a tuft of yarn taped to the nose in front of the windshield. This is a high drag configuration and if the asymmetrical thrust is due to an engine failure, the airplane is banked into the good engine to utilize an offsetting lift vector to counteract the slip. With a bank, but in steady level flight, the ball will be off to one side when there is no side slip. Typical angles of bank to counter the side slip are around 1 to 3 degrees with the ball about a half a ball's width out of center, towards the operating engine, because it is being held low. This is one time you do not want the ball in the center.
One of the reasons that many (mostly American types known as 'spam cans') have such soggy handling is that they have had a lot of things like adverse yaw designed out of them.
The 'Aerial Sedan' types you describe were given the nonthreatening handing you describe by design - it wasn't an unintended artifact. And coming from the other direction, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a pilot who would describe the adverse yaw free handling of a modern aerobatic aircraft as soggy. I understand a CAP 231 requires almost no rudder on the takeoff roll, due to the engine being canted, and almost no rudder in non-aerobatic flight.
And coming from the other direction, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a pilot who would describe the adverse yaw free handling of a modern aerobatic aircraft as soggy. I understand a CAP 231 requires almost no rudder on the takeoff roll, due to the engine being canted, and almost no rudder in non-aerobatic flight.
I have limited experience in high-end aerobatics aircraft, but I don't think their designers went to great length to design adverse yaw out. And if you think about it, that's actually a good thing. Because some of the tricks that are employed to combat adverse yaw (frise ailerons, ailerons with offset hinges, differential aileron) would greatly increase adverse yaw when flying inverted. Not a good thing. You will want an aerobatics aircraft to fly equally well right side up as upside down, and that in generally means that airfoils, ailerons and such need to be symmetrical.
On the other hand, some of the design features of your average spamcan that enhance stability (like dihedral) also increase the secondary effect of adverse yaw. And these stability-enhancing features are typically not present in aerobatics aircraft.
Having said that, I can well imagine that aerobatics aircraft seem to suffer less from adverse yaw than other types. First, the wings are relatively short so there is not a lot of adverse yaw (-moment). And second, they have comparatively large rudders, which are often aerodynamically balanced as well. This makes the effort to combat adverse yaw relatively minor.
The 'Aerial Sedan' types you describe were given the nonthreatening handing you describe by design - it wasn't an unintended artifact.
I wouldn't call it non-threatening handling. More lazy handling. I've had times in spamcans at low speed in climb-out when the near-inneffective ailerons take forever to pick up a gust-induced wing drop, by which time you've had a couple more! You wonder if you are flying the aeroplane or it flying you!
That's 'threatening' handling when you're used to an aeroplane where the ailerons work effectively with nicely co-ordinated rudder so the wing drop is corrected almost before it starts.
The highest performance aerobatic aircraft I have experience of is the Yak 52, so not up there with Extras and MXs etc. But I don't see how you can eliminate the need for rudder on take off by canting the engine without affecting the aeroplane's handling in normal flight. Otherwise I'm sure R J Mitchell would have simply canted the Merlin over a tad more in his masterpiece!
