Stalls and Thoughts

What the hell.....why do we work at teaching stalls and recoveries? It
has gone to stall recognition and avoidance which is good. Does it
teach the proper things? How much of a new students time is spent
flying in slow flight at the low end of the performance envelope?
Isn't that where all the nasty things can happen?
I fly with students that become paranoid when they hear the least
little blip from the stall waring horn, and want to push the nose over
to get airspeed back. They fail to realize the whole point of the
training.
OK Here we go....... I teach slow flight with and without flaps at the
lowest edge of the flight envelope and req

On Mar 14, 11:11*am, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:
What the hell.....why do we work at teaching stalls and recoveries? It
has gone to stall recognition and avoidance which is good. Does it
teach the proper things? How much of a new students time is spent
flying in slow flight at the low end of the performance envelope?
Isn't that where all the nasty things can happen?
I fly with students that become paranoid when they hear the least
little blip from the stall waring horn, and want to push the nose over
to get airspeed back. They fail to realize the whole point of the
training.
OK Here we go....... I teach slow flight with and without flaps at the
lowest edge of the flight envelope and req

what the hell happened?...... and to follow on to the above.....
flight envelope and require my students to make a lot of turns to
headings while holding altitude and airspeed. I'll have them pitch
slightly to nibble on a stall while in the turn and even to go into a
stall and recover back to the nibble area instead of pushing the nose
over and watching the VSI go to 1000fpm and lose 100'+ while the
airspeed goes back up to Vx.
We are learning to avoid a stall when altitude is at a premium either
on approach or on a departure or go-around. How much altitude can be
sacrificed?
What the hell...lets have a donnybrook on the issue and keep things
interesting.
Ol S&B

I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

On Mar 14, 3:40 pm, Deadstick wrote:
I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

I think nothing breeds confidence like experience at all edges of the
envelope. Slow flight proficiency is required when you're trying to
squeeze it in somewhere on the backside of the curve.

So I agree that this instruction is valuable and necessary.

Dan Mc

On Mar 14, 3:40 pm, Deadstick wrote:
I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

To add to the above comment, it is not the lack of ability to
recognize stalls that got many pilots into trouble, but the ability to
overcome their natural instincts and do the right thing (pitch down,
level wings, ball centered). When there is a tree looming on the
windshield it is awfully tempting to simply pull up or bank away. The
same is true with VFR into IMC. It is not about flying the gauges, but
overcoming their natural senses to do what they already know how to
do. This is a human factors training more than a skill training.

On Mar 14, 2:40 pm, Deadstick wrote:
I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

I am curious as to the meaning of the phrase "..dragging it in". As
in "...he turned on final, dragging it in".

I knew a pilot at A&M who died in a C182 while "dragging it in". I
assumed at the time that this was slow flight and without further
details could only assume that he inadvertently stalled the plane at
some point.

I also inferred that this phrase could also say "was behind the power
curve".

Any thoughts would be appreciated. (IIRC, he did not spin in).

Richard

wrote in news:7bcc745a-a5d6-4731-84a6-
:

On Mar 14, 2:40 pm, Deadstick wrote:
I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

I am curious as to the meaning of the phrase "..dragging it in". As
in "...he turned on final, dragging it in".

I knew a pilot at A&M who died in a C182 while "dragging it in". I
assumed at the time that this was slow flight and without further
details could only assume that he inadvertently stalled the plane at
some point.

I also inferred that this phrase could also say "was behind the power
curve".

Any thoughts would be appreciated. (IIRC, he did not spin in).


That's generally how I understand that expression ot mean. Even for short
field stuff it's unnecessary to do that, IMO.


Bertie

wrote:
On Mar 14, 2:40 pm, Deadstick wrote:
I haven't done any instructing recently, but when I did, I taught slow
flight, stall recognition and avoidance AND stall entry & recovery. I
don't think they have be be exclusive of one another.

Plus I think learning to recognize and avoid stalls is probably a
better risk-management strategy given that it can be easily learned
and mastered by pilots of all skill levels. In principle I agree that
ALL pilots should be fully competent at slow airspeeds and at
recovering from stalls, but I would also tend to say that there's a
lot more that we can teach pilots before we set them free to fly on
their own.

I am curious as to the meaning of the phrase "..dragging it in". As
in "...he turned on final, dragging it in".

I knew a pilot at A&M who died in a C182 while "dragging it in". I
assumed at the time that this was slow flight and without further
details could only assume that he inadvertently stalled the plane at
some point.

I also inferred that this phrase could also say "was behind the power
curve".

Any thoughts would be appreciated. (IIRC, he did not spin in).

Richard
The analogy "dragging it in" refers to having the airplane configured
behind the power curve or if you wish, in the area of reverse command,
on final approach....a very dangerous situation.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 15, 4:33 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:


The analogy "dragging it in" refers to having the airplane configured
behind the power curve or if you wish, in the area of reverse command,
on final approach....a very dangerous situation.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dangerous, but certainly useful at times!

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:16:28 -0700 (PDT), "Ol Shy & Bashful"
wrote:

On Mar 14, 11:11*am, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:
What the hell.....why do we work at teaching stalls and recoveries? It
has gone to stall recognition and avoidance which is good. Does it
teach the proper things? How much of a new students time is spent
flying in slow flight at the low end of the performance envelope?
Isn't that where all the nasty things can happen?
I fly with students that become paranoid when they hear the least
little blip from the stall waring horn, and want to push the nose over
to get airspeed back. They fail to realize the whole point of the
training.
OK Here we go....... I teach slow flight with and without flaps at the
lowest edge of the flight envelope and req

what the hell happened?...... and to follow on to the above.....
flight envelope and require my students to make a lot of turns to
headings while holding altitude and airspeed. I'll have them pitch
slightly to nibble on a stall while in the turn and even to go into a
stall and recover back to the nibble area instead of pushing the nose
over and watching the VSI go to 1000fpm and lose 100'+ while the
airspeed goes back up to Vx.
We are learning to avoid a stall when altitude is at a premium either
on approach or on a departure or go-around. How much altitude can be
sacrificed?
What the hell...lets have a donnybrook on the issue and keep things
interesting.
Ol S&B

I think all of the above are important and particularly so if the
pilot moves up to high performance or even plans on doing so.
Even in my last flight review we flew around at minimum controllable
airspeed for a while.

To back up, I think only teaching stall avoidance is out right bad and
dangerous. I say that as there are times if I pilot flys enough they
are likely to encounter an inadvertent stall even when playing by the
rules. An unexpected vertical gust in one instance. A very strong
gust from the rear is another . In the latter the wing may not be
stalled or it may be, but the lift has been drastically reduced.
But...flying around for a while in a Bo at Vmc all the while nibbling
at a stall while making shallow turns and holding altitude is quite an
exercise. For one, if it's hanging on the edge of a stall and you use
an aileron to raise a wing you just may stall that wing. which
results in a very fast roll to inverted if the pilot doesn't catch it
with the rudder. The Deb and F33 WANT to drop a wing and spin. Their
stall characteristics are very different than the 150, 172, and
Cherokees used in training. In doing stalls like this they are an
absolutely rudder only airplane. When doing stalls the instructors
from the Air Safety foundation even _block_ the yoke to prevent the
pilot from using the ailerons.

Departure stalls even at full power aren't all that bad and although
abrupt can be done without losing any altitude. Accelerated stalls in
a coordinated turn are pretty much a non event. When the stall breaks
you just let the nose go in the direction it wants by easing off on
the back pressure. Uncoordinated can get interesting, or downright
exciting depending on the pilot. Again, if proficient instinct has
you pointing the nose in the direction it wants to go whether the top
wing is going over or the bottom one is going under. As soon as the
nose it pointed where it wants to go the roll stops and you can
recover but there is absolutely no time to stop and think about
recovery techniques. Approach stalls with gear and flaps down and
the plane becomes a different animal where the pilot has to know what
it's going to do. If you don't it'll show a nasty disposition by
turning around and biting the pilot in the back side leaving teeth
marks. It's going to want to drop a wing and spin. It becomes a
rudder only airplane. Touch an aileron and it will ABRUPTLY roll over
into a spin. These are best practiced at 5,000 or above.

With practice the pilot should be able to hold the plane in a stall
but it's like walking on a tight rope using the rudder for balance.
OTOH if back pressure is released (Don't shove the nose down) at the
first break it'll just fly on out of the stall with little or no loss
of altitude.

From what I've seen in trainers one of the biggest errors is "shoving
the nose down". It depends on the plane and conditions, but normally
the only thing needed to recover is release the back pressure on the
yoke.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com