Originally Posted by
Propjet88
I respect the stated view that the Stalled Stick Position (SSP) concept is valid for a typical ab-initio training aircraft. However, the stick position at the stall actually varies with weight and configuration (flap setting). It is also not applicable to aircraft that have a moveable stabiliser (such as larger air transport types) where the rate of pitch is controlled by either or both the elevator and or the trimmed position of the stab. The SSP technique may be of value to simplify initial attempts at stall recovery for a student in a light trainer, but under the concept of “primacy” I’d suggest that it is not a technique that should be embedded in early learning.
Fly Safe
PJ88
Good points. PJ88, but the idea of SSP is to teach Bloggs that fundamentally, stall avoidance / recovery is a function of AoA reduction - which is true in all aircraft. The fact that SSP will move about (for a range of reasons) does not diminish its applicability in training ... But you are correct - in a light aircraft it is basically fixed save for variation due flap extension per my earlier.
Given that the role of flight training is to prepare Bloggs for his first job in aviation, not necessarily the airline (I’m a traditionalist!), I’d offer that techniques applicable to light aircraft are more relevant in early training than those developed for transport category machines...
Certainly, the common nexus is that the instinct must be AoA reduction - SSP as “primacy” teaches that better than the thinking that stalling is more closely aligned with speed - which is what sausage factories and CASA (sadly) seem to espouse...