Originally Posted by
Judd
What is important is to regain safe maneuver speed as quickly as possible - especially if the aircraft is still in severe turbulence. Application of climb or maximum continuous thrust at the same time as the nose is lowered to un-stall the wings, helps to achieve a more rapid acceleration towards severe turbulence penetration speed.
At high altitude recovering to maneuvering speed is done by trading altitude for airspeed. If you had encountered for example a sudden temperature rise from the developing convective activity, mountain wave, jet stream increasing thrust will probably give you no thrust at all, it will already be developing maximum thrust. FADEC is not going to deliver any more thrust even at TOGA. Engines at altitude do not accelerate quickly, it can take 45 seconds to obtain maximum continuous. Recovery from the situation you describe would be be done by descending down 2000 ft to the next level in order to gain better low speed, high speed, and thrust margins. Modern aircraft at high altitudes take forever to accelerate when flow level below the best L/D ratio.
Originally Posted by
BrogulT
We really need to specify aircraft types when making these statements as the results do vary. I'm pretty sure that in something like a DHC-7 you could demonstrate unstalling with power alone. Not that I fly one, just guessing....
I did explicitly state that the AFM should be consulted for the recovery techniques for the specific type. I doubt the DCH7 stall recovery technique would at first instance rely on thrust, the techniques for stall recovery are designed to be applied in any situation, including engine(s) out. I doubt any published stall recovery technique has thrust being used in the recovery below Vmca, just cannot see how that would meet certification standards.