Who does flight plans?

Matt Whiting wrote:

True, it is just the wing that is stalling.

No, it's not. You can't get the angle of attack required to stall the wing
without hitting the tail.

You somehow seem to think that you can let the airplane down more
gradually using elevator while at a higher speed than what occurs when
the wing stalls. This simply isn't the case in most airplanes.

Bull**** -- that's *exactly* what you are doing.

It is obvious that you weren't taught full-stall landings

No, I was taught by instructors who were educated enough to know what they were
actually doing.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

[...] you can get the yoke all the way back and the stall horn on just a
second before touchdown.


If the stall horn is on only a second before touchdown, you have not stalled
the airplane. The stall horn sounds well before you reach the stalling
angle of attack.

True, but only a few knots above in the Cessna's I've flown 150 - 182.
If you keep smoothly pulling back the yoke, the airspeed will bleed into
stall territory very shortly after you get a full stall horn.


Matt

George Patterson wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:


True, it is just the wing that is stalling.


No, it's not. You can't get the angle of attack required to stall the
wing without hitting the tail.

I get enough angle of attack that the wing will no longer support the
weight of the aircraft even with full up elevator. I'm not sure your
definition of stall, but this one works for me.


You somehow seem to think that you can let the airplane down more
gradually using elevator while at a higher speed than what occurs when
the wing stalls. This simply isn't the case in most airplanes.


Bull**** -- that's *exactly* what you are doing.

Yes, I'm using the elevator to bleed off airspeed until the wing will no
longer support the airplane. That isn't quite the same as using power
and pitch when "flying onto" the runway. The wing will still support
the weight of the airplane in that approach so you are flying it onto
the ground.


It is obvious that you weren't taught full-stall landings


No, I was taught by instructors who were educated enough to know what
they were actually doing.

How many of your instructors have been appeared in AOPA Pilot's Pilot
feature?


Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
True, but only a few knots above in the Cessna's I've flown 150 - 182.

Per certification rules, the stall warning must occur AT LEAST 5 knots prior
to stall. In my experience, it commonly occurs with an even greater margin.

If you keep smoothly pulling back the yoke, the airspeed will bleed into
stall territory very shortly after you get a full stall horn.

No, it won't. The airplane will settle onto the runway before you stall.
You have to move the yoke pretty sharply to keep lift equal to weight at
that airspeed.

Pete

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
I get enough angle of attack that the wing will no longer support the
weight of the aircraft even with full up elevator.

Any angle of attack may be insufficient to support the weight of the
airplane. All you need is a low enough airspeed.

I'm not sure your definition of stall, but this one works for me.

The definition of stall is quite different, and has already been discussed
in detail in this thread. Bottom line: you don't define stall based on the
lift the wing is generating. You *may* relate stall to (but not definite it
based on) the coefficient of lift, but to figure out actual lift you need to
account for airspeed, and stall has nothing to do with airspeed, not from a
definition point of view.

Yes, I'm using the elevator to bleed off airspeed until the wing will no
longer support the airplane.

That does not mean you are stalling the airplane. It just means your angle
of attack is insufficient to generate lift equal to the weight of the
airplane at your current airspeed.

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

True, but only a few knots above in the Cessna's I've flown 150 - 182.


Per certification rules, the stall warning must occur AT LEAST 5 knots prior
to stall. In my experience, it commonly occurs with an even greater margin.

I think 5 is considered "a few" by most, even hair-splitters such as
yourself.


If you keep smoothly pulling back the yoke, the airspeed will bleed into
stall territory very shortly after you get a full stall horn.


No, it won't. The airplane will settle onto the runway before you stall.
You have to move the yoke pretty sharply to keep lift equal to weight at
that airspeed.

Yes, it does require that you accelerate the rearward movement of the
yoke as the plane begins to settle in order to hit the stop at or slight
before the tires touch.

Again, I guess it depends on how you define stall. To me, a stall has
occurred when I can't maintain altitude with the elevator full-up. That
is the condition in which I attempt to land in normal conditions (light
crosswind and lack of significant wind gusts). I've never flown a
Cessna with an AOA indicator so I can't say if I've achieved the
critical angle of attack prior to touchdown, but these have been called
"full stall landings" since before I was born so that is good enough for me.


Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
I think 5 is considered "a few" by most, even hair-splitters such as
yourself.

Each person has their own definition. If you want to split hairs, you need
to use a more precise term. To me, "a few" is generally three, while I'd
use "several" for five or more.

In any case, the real question is how much before you stall will the horn go
off. It goes off much longer than a second before you stall the wing.

[...] but these have been called "full stall landings" since before I was
born so that is good enough for me.

As long as you understand that you are not actually stalling the airplane,
that's fine. Use whatever inaccurate terminology you like.

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

I think 5 is considered "a few" by most, even hair-splitters such as
yourself.


Each person has their own definition. If you want to split hairs, you need
to use a more precise term. To me, "a few" is generally three, while I'd
use "several" for five or more.

If you check Websters it says a small number of units. Five is a small
number.


In any case, the real question is how much before you stall will the horn go
off. It goes off much longer than a second before you stall the wing.


[...] but these have been called "full stall landings" since before I was
born so that is good enough for me.


As long as you understand that you are not actually stalling the airplane,
that's fine. Use whatever inaccurate terminology you like.

I understand that I'm stalling the wing, not the airplane.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
If you check Websters it says a small number of units. Five is a small
number.

My point is that "a few" is undefined with respect to a real number. If you
want someone to interpret your statement of "a few" with other than THEIR
definition, you need to be more specific. It is useless to come back later
and redefine it for them.

As long as you understand that you are not actually stalling the
airplane, that's fine. Use whatever inaccurate terminology you like.

I understand that I'm stalling the wing, not the airplane.

Now you're just being an ass; "stalling the airplane" is the same as
"stalling the wing". In any case, you are not stalling the wing either.

Pete