Jump to content

CASA Safety Notice warns against stalling Bristell aircraft - 19 Feb 2020


Recommended Posts

Not good to be too dependent on instruments. When the controls start to feel sloppy it's a good indication you're almost out of flying speed.

I built mine so that it stalls after the horizon disappears under the cowl.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I recall doing ASI less circuits in PPL training in about 1979 in PA38s. Can’t quite remember the numbers but something like 1700RPM, 70knts, and 500fpm descent all went together. So just a matter of setting power, trimming for the descent rate and so we must have the speed. Think of an equilateral triangle, we only have to get two sides and angles in place and the third sorts itself.

 

Like someone previously said, a little understanding of what’s going on is more than a little helpful in having a happy long life as a pilot..

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know the factors at play you can anticipate. Like add power entering a turn to overcome extra drag and keep you margin of speed. Not wait till the need becomes more obvious. When lowering flaps , allow for the extra drag effect. Later you can lower flaps and enter a turn at the same time, safely and fully controlled. Nev

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly some are tested more than others, and unfortunately we'll never know to what extent they have been tested. Interestingly I believe some models of the p92 tecnam family are approved up to a one turn spin, but you would need letters on the side to explore that....

Link to post
Share on other sites
...we'll never know to what extent they have been tested...

We know that Jabiru have a very exhaustive test regime. One ex-RAAF test pilot told us about doing 80 spins on one Jab model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there was quite an extensive programme. for them. I can't recall it being an issue with Jab. Airframes. There's a fair amount about this related to design in CAR 23. For our category(ies) of aircraft it's not really acceptable to make spin "touchy" aircraft when it's fairly well known how to design planes that are not, especially when a low stall speed limit is used as a requirement of it's certification. Nev

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who has built and flown their own plane has been a test pilot. Experimentals could be really dangerous to spin, but they could still be legal.

A good pilot knows what is happening and if something unusual happens he should be able to work it out.

Much better that way than to be like the average car driver, who is usually just sitting there unknowing what is happening.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who has built and flown their own plane has been a test pilot. Experimentals could be really dangerous to spin, but they could still be legal.

A good pilot knows what is happening and if something unusual happens he should be able to work it out.

Much better that way than to be like the average car driver, who is usually just sitting there unknowing what is happening.

I have done major repairs and modification to a well known design and as such have been the "test pilot" on many occasions, but two things I wont do are:

1. Deliberately spin it, despite being illegal and although the airframe design looks acceptable, I can't find any data on spin testing.

2. Load it outside CoG limits, and mine would be very easy to overload to the aft. Care is always taken there.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I built & test flew my plane. I managed to get it into an incipient spin by keeping about 2200 rpm in the stall & kicking the rudder. The wing dropped quite violently but stick forward, centre aileron & power & recovery was instant. Way back in about 2012 I asked Garry Morgan to demo it when we were doing some standard power off stalls & remembered how quickly it went over with power & full rudder. I've only done it once myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I built & test flew my plane. I managed to get it into an incipient spin by keeping about 2200 rpm in the stall & kicking the rudder. The wing dropped quite violently but stick forward, centre aileron & power & recovery was instant. Way back in about 2012 I asked Garry Morgan to demo it when we were doing some standard power off stalls & remembered how quickly it went over with power & full rudder. I've only done it once myself.

That's good I'm sure Garry would have known the spin recovery performace of his aircraft.

Edited by Blueadventures
Link to post
Share on other sites

The bit I'm keen to hear about is the ability of all aircraft in thier recovery from developed spins. I guess this is what CASA are after. Results from 3 to 5 fully developed spins and the recovery performance. All gliders have this detail including the loss of height in recovery. No matter what aircraft brand, model or type that impacts terrain from a very flat path needs that matter's factors covered and explained in detail.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We did circuits in gliders with ASI covered and also in training for our pilot's certificate.

 

I copped this from my glider instructor.....

75358608-55D5-4EC0-8B0C-59445D187524.jpeg.43f840b675b24ae43cbfcd83f3eb1041.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some aircraft take about 3 turns to get into a fully developed spin and need anti spin aileron to get there more quickly.. You can use power to advantage in a stall recovery but usually power OFF is used with spin recovery. Power on entry usually gets you into a more dramatic wing drop, which gets most people's attention. Beyond that I'm not sure it means much if you have height to sort it out .A "flick" roll is virtually a horizontal stall/spin event. It stresses the plane and makes fuel slosh dangerously.. The normal spin doesn't stress the plane. A well executed recovery should not exceed 2-3 G's. A SPIRAL DIVE will eventually break the plane if you stay in the spiral long. You are not stalled and the speed keeps on increasing.

Planes vary greatly in the way they spin. (entry and recovery). and the effect of the Cof G position. Some designs are dead dangerous and should never fly.. IF the weight distribution is such that the plane tends to spin FLAT. for instance...Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think so. Get out of a spiral as quickly as possible Yawing, Speed INCREASING and "G" load..? Level wings with aileron power off, and gently recover from dive. Challenging on limited panel, Non VMC. Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use power to advantage in a stall recovery but usually power OFF is used with spin recovery.

Agreed. I mentioned power in post 135 for some reason but it is not until recovery has been completed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We can generally say recovery from a spin with power OFF is pretty universal. ALL planes should be treated as potentially different and the recovery technique as applies to them, used and should be known by the pilot. Fine for planes that are certified for spinning although some of them are not as predictable as one would like, so extra height is your friend. You could learn and practice on an approved plane and that's some help if you've done it well, but no predictor of any plane that's not been spin tested and passed, being able to be recovered safely from any spin, by you or anyone else.. There's a pretty obvious situation here that exiting any spin even if it's an approved plane and you do everything exactly right and know it's coming, takes at least one thousand feet and mostly a lot more. Strict AVOIDANCE IS the only solution at anything like circuit height.. Unfortunately some flying techniques and natural responses predispose some into getting in strife at low levels.. (unbalanced turns with sudden back stick). Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

As Nev said above 'unbalanced turns with sudden back stick', add in low airspeed and it's all over red rover! Crazy thing is its optional to spin in and kill yourself!?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...

There's no record of any coronial finding involving Fentanyl, in any aircraft crash in Australia, that I can find.

 

There have only been four recorded Bristell crashes where the ATSB has become involved, one in Ireland and three in Australia, and only two of these crashes are recorded as being suspected as a result of a flat spin.

...........

 

Australia - Stawell, VIC - Investigation: AO-2018-066 - Collision with terrain involving BRM Aero s.r.o. Bristell S-LSA, VH-YVX, near Stawell, Victoria, on 5 October 2018

 

 

The ATSB has published details of the Stawell crash, and they don't seem to have a lot to do with aircraft design.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5778172/ao-2018-066_final.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what you can say, as regards that crash - except "cowboy" springs to mind. The bloke must have thought he was driving a Pitts Special. Page 10 and Page 16 says it all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately TRUE.. Wherever Hugo, its Ego.. I constantly had to ignore requests to do a spectacular departure in MY cute little Citabria, even. It's hardly any honky aerobatic machine apart from spelling it's name backwards and being licenced for medium aeros of the non blackout kind. I want about 9 "G" capability in anything I throw around coarsely... Who enjoys bursting blood vessels in their eyes anyhow? You could probably put on as good a show in a Grumman Ag Cat as in most things anyway. Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...