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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:27:25 UTC, Don Johnstone
wrote: The answer is again simple and goes to recognition. A stall with wing drop is just that and provided action is taken to solve that problem, unstall the wing, the a spin will be prevented. A spin is the result of failure at the first step for whatever reason. Everyone properly trained will know the difference. OK, so how would you described the difference. How far does the wing have to drop before /you/ use spin recovery rather than stall recovery? I'm genuinely interested: it's not supposed to be a trick question in any way. Ian |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Ian Johnston" wrote in message news:dzZo7CxomoOm-pn2-QjvLCM11RPHz@localhost... On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:27:25 UTC, Don Johnstone wrote: The answer is again simple and goes to recognition. A stall with wing drop is just that and provided action is taken to solve that problem, unstall the wing, the a spin will be prevented. A spin is the result of failure at the first step for whatever reason. Everyone properly trained will know the difference. OK, so how would you described the difference. How far does the wing have to drop before /you/ use spin recovery rather than stall recovery? I'm genuinely interested: it's not supposed to be a trick question in any way. Ian What do we think about picking up the wing with rudder when in a stall with wing drop? It's not the BGA method and I'm troubled by someone who recommends it. Stephen |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Stephen ] writes
What do we think about picking up the wing with rudder when in a stall with wing drop? It's not the BGA method and I'm troubled by someone who recommends it. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Say, right wing drops in a stall so this "method" would advocate kicking in left rudder as you move the stick forwards to alleviate the stall? Personally, the last thing I'd do when the aircraft was in a stalled state, whether or not a wing drop was involved, would be to intentionally use the rudder in an uncoordinated fashion. That is, unless I actually wanted to spin. -- Bill Gribble http://www.scapegoatsanon.demon.co.uk - Learn from the mistakes of others. - You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:27:25 UTC, Don Johnstone
wrote: Now here's a question. Given the answer above why when the wing drops at the start of a take off run (winch or aero-tow) does everyone almost without exception try and lift the downgoing wing with aileron? Define "drops". How do you keep your wings level on the takeoff run? Ian -- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I'll bite Ian
I suspect that keeping the wing off the ground with aileron in the initial part of the ground run works because with the tailwheel/ skid on the deck the effects of adverse yaw & secondary effect roll are negated. There is no way on Gods earth that the rudder of the Nimbus is going to accelerate a dropping wing at the beginning of the ground run. Personally I thing the rudder of the Nimbus is there because us pilot types wouldnt but an hairyplane without one Ian |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On 23 Jun 2005 21:27:25 GMT, Don Johnstone
wrote: Now here's a question. Given the answer above why when the wing drops at the start of a take off run (winch or aero-tow) does everyone almost without exception try and lift the downgoing wing with aileron? .... because it works in 99 percent of the cases? Bye Andreas |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Don Johnstone writes
The answer is again simple and goes to recognition. I think that was the point of the BGA's question A stall with wing drop is just that and provided action is taken to solve that problem, unstall the wing, the a spin will be prevented. A spin is the result of failure at the first step for whatever reason. Everyone properly trained will know the difference. I know the theoretical and practical difference between a spin and a stall with or without a wing drop, and understand the difference in recovery for each. However, The BGA Instructor's Course question asked: "The offical recovery from a stall with wing drop is different from the official recovery from a spin. At what point do you, personally, transition from one to the other?" At what point do you NOT put the stick forward to reduce AoA and alleviate the stall and instead centre the controls then kick a boot full of opposite rudder in to stop the spin? Assuming no flaps, that is... Or is the question, and the suggestion that you transit from one recovery procedure through to the other at some definite point in time, intrinsically wrong? Should it be, "What is the difference between a stall with wing drop and a fully developed spin?" I have thought about this and decided that if I ever get to the point where I do get to a fully developed spin at final turn height I am going to spin in, rather that than tent peg half way through the recovery. Presumably working on the grounds that impacting at the lower, stable velocity of a spin is going to hurt less than doing so at the higher, increasing velocity of the initial part of the recovering dive? I can appreciate the sense in that argument, though personally I doubt I could accept the inevitability of the impact without putting up a struggle and trying to recover despite the futility of the situation. My philosophy teaches recognition of the approach of the problem so it can be prevented and this is still not given sufficient emphasis in training. It was in mine. Repeatedly hammered into me through graphic description and demonstration by a number of different instructors throughout the period of my training. Yes train people to recover from fully developed spins but if you do the job right and train so that they recognise the approach and take the correct preventative action they will never need to recover from a spin. Though that overlooks the other essential advantage of spin training. It teaches familiarity and confidence with the aircraft in unusual and discomforting attitudes, which, IMHO, makes you far less likely to panic and make a potentially bad situation terminally worse if you ever find yourself there, whether through fault of your own or otherwise. Besides which, as one of my favourite instructors was once quoted as saying when asked why he had spun on a certain occasion; "Well, it's just about one of the most exiting things you can do in a glider". That is, of course, unless the glider concerned is a Fox -- Bill Gribble http://www.scapegoatsanon.demon.co.uk - Learn from the mistakes of others. - You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
OK. For the wing drop I take the recovery action for
that. Spinning is more than stalling with the wing down or indeed with wing drop. A spin involves the aircraft autorotating with yaw, roll and pitch movement. I suppose you could say that if there significant yaw present then that needs to be stopped. I think the important point is that the angle of attack needs to be reduced. If that can be achieved by use of the elevator then that is all that is required. I am not sure that I can explain satisfactorily in words, but I could definitely demonstrate the difference. At 22:24 23 June 2005, Ian Johnston wrote: On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:27:25 UTC, Don Johnstone wrote: The answer is again simple and goes to recognition. A stall with wing drop is just that and provided action is taken to solve that problem, unstall the wing, the a spin will be prevented. A spin is the result of failure at the first step for whatever reason. Everyone properly trained will know the difference. OK, so how would you described the difference. How far does the wing have to drop before /you/ use spin recovery rather than stall recovery? I'm genuinely interested: it's not supposed to be a trick question in any way. Ian |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
At 02:06 24 June 2005, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 16:34:41 -0500, Bob Johnson wrote: Frankly spoken, pulling the stick back hard enough to break off the wings shows that the pilot was lacking the most basic skills to fly that bird. well, possibly, but having got to the position where you could either go through Vd or pull back what would YOU do? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Johnson: pulling the stick back hard enough to break the wings shows pilot .. lacking .. skills to fly that bird. Robert William wrote: having got to the position where you could either go through Vd or pull back what would YOU do? Is, 'Not getting into that position', an allowed response? Jon. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
AmeriFlight Crash | C J Campbell | Piloting | 5 | December 1st 03 02:13 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |