If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
A 7AC Champ doesn't have any stall warning device. Its Type Certificate pre-dates the period when stall warning devices were required. Incorrect! The phrase from CAR 3 under which it was certified is almost identical to today's passage in Part 23: 3.120(f) A clear and distinctive stall warning shall precede the stalling of the airplane, with the flaps and landing gear in any position, both in straight and turning flight. 23.207(a) There must be a clear and distinctive stall warning, with the flaps and landing gear in any normal position, in straight and turning flight. The only difference is 23.207 goes on to say that it can either be accomplished via aerodynamic qualities or a by a device. A visual indicator by itself, by the way, doesn't qualify. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:36:51 -0400, Ron Natalie
wrote in : A visual indicator by itself, by the way, doesn't qualify. Where does it say that? The PA28-235 is equipped with only a red panel light. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
Larry Dighera wrote
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:36:51 -0400, Ron Natalie wrote in : A visual indicator by itself, by the way, doesn't qualify. Where does it say that? The PA28-235 is equipped with only a red panel light. (b) The stall warning may be furnished either through the inherent aerodynamic qualities of the airplane or by a device that will give clearly distinguishable indications under expected conditions of flight. However, a visual stall warning device that requires the attention of the crew within the cockpit is not acceptable by itself. Bob Moore |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
On 22 Aug 2007 12:56:36 GMT, Bob Moore
wrote in 28: Larry Dighera wrote On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:36:51 -0400, Ron Natalie wrote in : A visual indicator by itself, by the way, doesn't qualify. Where does it say that? The PA28-235 is equipped with only a red panel light. (b) The stall warning may be furnished either through the inherent aerodynamic qualities of the airplane or by a device that will give clearly distinguishable indications under expected conditions of flight. However, a visual stall warning device that requires the attention of the crew within the cockpit is not acceptable by itself. Bob Moore There seems to be a bit of ambiguity in that quote: "a visual stall warning device that requires the attention of the crew within the cockpit is not acceptable by itself." The stall warning light mounted in the center of the left hand panel in the PA28-235 doesn't require the crew's attention; it gets it. So I guess it's approved. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:27:52 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote: There seems to be a bit of ambiguity in that quote: "a visual stall warning device that requires the attention of the crew within the cockpit is not acceptable by itself." The stall warning light mounted in the center of the left hand panel in the PA28-235 doesn't require the crew's attention; it gets it. So I guess it's approved. Probably the light in association with airframe buffet is what gets it approved. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
Larry Dighera wrote
The stall warning light mounted in the center of the left hand panel in the PA28-235 doesn't require the crew's attention; it gets it. So I guess it's approved. There's a good chance that in the case of the PA28-235 that the light is not required at all due to natural stall warning and Piper just put the light there just for good measure. Bob Moore |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
On 22 Aug 2007 18:10:28 GMT, Bob Moore
wrote in 28: Larry Dighera wrote The stall warning light mounted in the center of the left hand panel in the PA28-235 doesn't require the crew's attention; it gets it. So I guess it's approved. There's a good chance that in the case of the PA28-235 that the light is not required at all due to natural stall warning and Piper just put the light there just for good measure. Bob Moore My experience is that the PA28 doesn't provide much aerodynamic warning of a stall. It'll just smoothly mush along for a long time before the nose finally drops. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
("Larry Dighera" wrote)
My experience is that the PA28 doesn't provide much aerodynamic warning of a stall. It'll just smoothly mush along for a long time before the nose finally drops. I counted two. Paul-Mont |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:33:10 -0500, "Montblack"
wrote in : ("Larry Dighera" wrote) My experience is that the PA28 doesn't provide much aerodynamic warning of a stall. It'll just smoothly mush along for a long time before the nose finally drops. I counted two. Two what? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
NTSB Accidents & Incidents
("Larry Dighera" wrote)
My experience is that the PA28 doesn't provide much aerodynamic warning of a stall. It'll just smoothly mush along for a long time before the nose finally drops. I counted two. Two what? Two aerodynamic warnings of a stall, in your post. Paul-Mont |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Physiology and accidents | Bill Daniels | Soaring | 7 | May 30th 07 02:14 PM |
Aviation incidents | [email protected] | Piloting | 2 | June 22nd 06 06:45 AM |
Accidents | Big John | Piloting | 3 | December 14th 05 01:19 PM |
Accidents happen... | Manuel | Piloting | 26 | November 28th 04 11:32 AM |
U.S. won't have to reveal other friendly fire events: Schmidt's lawyers hoped to use other incidents to help their case | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 18th 03 08:44 PM |