Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
djpacro

Stalls

Recommended Posts

Agreed, I've laboured the point more than enough.  Apologies to all for my lack of consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.avweb.com/flight-safety/accidents-ntsb/accident-probe-twin-training/

 

Quote

Why the precautions? In part because piston twins aren’t certified for spins. In part because they have a greater tendency to enter unrecoverable spins after a stall break than a piston single. And in part because that record is especially unfortunate since a lot of the fatal unrecoverable spins in piston twins have involved training.

No I don't know how many "a lot" is. Nobody pretend that they do, please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Manwell said:

Agreed, I've laboured the point more than enough.  Apologies to all for my lack of consideration

Well I'll be ! You have TROLLED this forum , insulted everyone that has made a post, know everything and all in under a month of joining this forum.

Maybe you should consider going back to PRUNE's forum and play with the big GA boys instead of annoying us Rec flyers.

I know this won't insult you as "it is only words and it is how you interoperate them that matters" !  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1
  • Winner 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  A twin with assymetric thrust is certainly a more complex beast than a single but most accidents are where the plane gets below Vmc (a) and the aircraft rolls to the dead engine as the rudder cannot conteract the Yaw even though the plane is well above stall  speed.   You can remove THAT problem if you have enough height  (don't need to climb) by closing the throttle on the good  engine . Naturally this has to be done before the plane goes to a roll attiitude which is unrecoverable.. Retaining control is essential.  The same thing does happen with high powered prop planes 'P" factor where at high angle of attack the prop has much more force/thrust on one side than the other due to the angle of the respective blades orientation to the relative airflow. Nev

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Butch said:

Well I'll be ! You have TROLLED this forum , insulted everyone that has made a post, know everything and all in under a month of joining this forum.

Maybe you should consider going back to PRUNE's forum and play with the big GA boys instead of annoying us Rec flyers.

I know this won't insult you as "it is only words and it is how you interoperate them that matters" !  

Will you be, though Butch, that is the question?  Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take up arms against a sea of troubles, and so doing, end them?

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some very familiar fingerprints are starting to emerge here..............................................................................................

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, the best way to teach stall recovery is by NOT teaching stall recovery.  Learning how to fly confidently at speeds below Vs is far more practical, and practising slow flight just above a runway is the only insurance you'll ever need against unintentional stalls.  Once that's done properly, stall recovery training is superfluous, and if you can control an aircraft at stall, you also control whether it can spin.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Since there's been over the years, quite a lot of stalling on base turn  even with quite experienced pilots, I'm wary of going deep into this subject on line in case someone takes any comment too literally or out of context. . I do notice how a lot of pilots I got to fly with but did not train initially were $#1t scared of getting anywhere near the stall.  While this might be a good policy  Avoid and stay safe, it does indicate they haven't been trained ABOUT it very well.. . The "usual" way I believe is totally inadequate as you would never accidently stall a plane if all stalls were done  (happened) that way. People DO accidently (or call it inadvertently) stall planes and some show offs will flick roll them accidently too. That's a stall situation or really a horizontal spin. They often don't get to repeat that one, if they are not aware of what they are doing..Nev

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that stall speed dictated by the Bureaucrats was a few klicks more (for 95 aircraft) perhaps doing a speedy landing (with contrary wind),  that even a really good DRAKO pilot  can get caught out , when flying so slow.

spacesailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Anyhow, stalling is an angle of attack issue and your Plane will stall at many different airspeeds depending on how much lifting you ask the wing to do .. Nev

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, facthunter said:

 Since there's been over the years, quite a lot of stalling on base turn  even with quite experienced pilots, I'm wary of going deep into this subject on line in case someone takes any comment too literally or out of context. . I do notice how a lot of pilots I got to fly with but did not train initially were $#1t scared of getting anywhere near the stall.  While this might be a good policy  Avoid and stay safe, it does indicate they haven't been trained ABOUT it very well.. . The "usual" way I believe is totally inadequate as you would never accidently stall a plane if all stalls were done  (happened) that way. People DO accidently (or call it inadvertently) stall planes and some show offs will flick roll them accidently too. That's a stall situation or really a horizontal spin. They often don't get to repeat that one, if they are not aware of what they are doing..Nev

I know exactly what you mean Nev.  It scared the $h1t out of me to even dare to think that I could know better than the authorities, but there is no chance of progress unless we're willing to accept that what we've been doing is wrong.  Admittedly, this isn't something that any damned fool can pull off successfully, but treating all pilots like damned fools is a self-fulfilling prophesy.   Since it's different and inherently risky, pilots and instructors are more likely to be cautious than reckless, and if it's done right, the risks are intelligently mitigated to the point that there is literally less risk than if it wasn't done.   

 

The case of stalls off base turn is a great example to consider if we - and I mean instructors and senior pilots - are fair dinkum about the value of training.  What that example shows is that people don't "know" when they're about to stall, and don't "know" how to fly in balance.  Both deficiencies are rectified by teaching pilots how to fly at or below stall speed.  At very slow speed the cues don't come from the instruments, and only exposure to slow flight develops the spatial and situational awareness that is required to enable a pilot to "know" when they're near stall.  At very slow speed, ailerons are less effective than rudder to control roll, and it's easy to see when you're unbalanced if you're situationally aware.  In simple terms, if the wings are level and the aircraft isn't turning, you're in balance, which you can also feel through the seat of your pants - but only if you don't have any other option!  Once the pilot has experience at controlling an aircraft at altitude in slow flight, then the next step is to do the same thing over a runway at very low level, trying to fly just off the ground for the length of the runway.  If this training was done routinely, stall/spin accidents would be dramatically reduced.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, spacesailor said:

If that stall speed dictated by the Bureaucrats was a few klicks more (for 95 aircraft) perhaps doing a speedy landing (with contrary wind),  that even a really good DRAKO pilot  can get caught out , when flying so slow.

spacesailor

Are you suggesting to increase the listed approach speed which is a function of Vs, which is predicated on being at MTOW, straight and level, with flaps up or down, and in unaccellerated flight, space?  What is a DRAKO too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Internet connections is not reliable. Just found out. There's something wrong between here and the  exchange. about 5 kms away. Noty he first time. 2-3weks the last time  two months ago. This is a 3rd world country.  Go digital?  Sure if it works.  I've had enough of things that don't work. No NBN here EVER.  for me. Just not going to be available.   Nev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 95-10 aircraft Were Not designed to be 40k, stall, & Flimsy for weight, Then add in that wing-load rule. We possibly could design & build better, & safer aircraft, that Don't fall out of the sky when Abiding by Bureaucracy.

spacesailor

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With 40 years and 4000 hours of glider flying, I only entered an inadvertent spin once, and that was when framing a photo through the clear-vision panel. I was using the rudder pedals to help frame the photo and .... wow, the Ventus entered a spin.

As it was at 16,000 ft, there was no danger, but I have wondered what the ASI would have said. Gosh this would have been a bad thing to do on the finals turn.  

A lot of the time in a glider, you are thermalling at 45 degrees of bank and very close to the stall. But you don't do stall-spins at all, and I have wondered why not. (45 knots and 45 degrees is what I tell guys to aim for, if not carrying ballast )

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ercoupe was designed to be installable by limiting up elevator travel. Why hasn’t that been tried by others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pmccarthy said:

The Ercoupe was designed to be installable by limiting up elevator travel. Why hasn’t that been tried by others?

It would be due to landing considerations, I would not like to have any less up elevator in the Musketeer.

One reason that pilots may get into trouble is to much up trim, they don't feel that they are pulling back but the trim tab is very powerful. It is more difficult to gauge the position of a control yoke compared to a joy stick that changes angle as it is moved. Maybe the inner part of the yoke shaft could be painted red, when the red appears a stall is imminent, it would work regardless of airspeed and trim.  

Certified aircraft that have a stall warning vane (angle of attack) and loud horn should be fool proof, the Pipers with only the little red idiot light don't seem to fare any worse in stall accidents.

A few times I have heard the stall horn chirp and released some back pressure, would I have seen the light, unlikely. 

Edited by Thruster88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest video from Flightchops has an interesting look at this subject:

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan Gryder will explain his innovative idea of a minimum maneuvering speed marked right on the airspeed indicator. 

 

I think this is a very good idea, simple cheap and effective but most likely not casa approved.  

Edited by Thruster88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Prior to glass, airline ASI's had moveable coloured "Bugs" around the edge of the instrument, so there's not reason to not have them if the need arises. Each landing will have a different flap retract schedule( IF you go around. ALWAYS a possibility ina normal situation), approach and target  threshold speeds due flap used and landing weight variations. Your planes stall speed varies with weight and your safe approach speed may include gust factors.. .  You already have various coloured arcs around the edge of the ASI.  There's nothing new in this. When you get lighter in the seat your stall speed has already markedly reduced, as your  effective weight is less than it would be at one "G". Nev

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is already a minimum manouvering speed - Va, but it's not marked on the ASI, and the idea of expecting pilots to look inside to determine if they're close to stalling is unwittingly making it more likely they will stall.  As Nev says, when you're lighter in your seat, stall speed has reduced markedly - in fact you can't stall at zero G since there is no load required of the wing at all.   The key is to "know" when you're about to stall, not to be reliant on something to tell you what you should already "know".  The irony is that it's not that difficult either, or more risky, it just utilises all our senses in unison, rather than only eyesight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Va is a maximum maneuvering speed not minimum.

 

You didn't watch the video - the difference between maneuvering speed as used by GA (Va) and maneuvering speed used by airlines is the first thing they discuss.

 

The point of the video is that in GA we can calculate a minimum maneuvering speed, and make sure we do not go below that speed except in very specific circumstances e.g. final approach. Then whether or not you "know" when you are about to stall becomes irrelevant because you do not fly close to the stall.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later for your post to be seen If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...