RetiredF-4
Wie gehts? What do you make of the initial STALLSTALL?
At Mach.82, it takes very little NU to produce the (cricketStall)?
IF PF input of NU caused the alert, could it in some way be related to an unloading of the a/c such that the ensuing climb was negative "g"? Actual Stall?
That would make the climb negative g, and ballistic in character. If g = < 1 wouldn't the PF maintain pull? Likewise, would not the a/c follow his input with THS (Leading Edge) DOWN?
If negative, the pilot would feel a profound "falling" sensation, as would the airframe? Hence his pull throughout in concert with THS TRIM? He had no visual reference, and his instruments would not be helping, "No valid indications". He would not feel deceleration (It would also be felt as -g), and at "over the top" the negative would increase rapidly as the a/c started to "fall" having run out of energy? This could explain his reversal to ND at the top, the additional neg. g he may have taken for the Nose falling through at "Stall".
Was the game over at a/p loss and first "STALL". This is a heavy a/c with beaucoups energy to sustain a short climb of 3k feet?
For this, the a/c would not have fallen off the Nose, so was the THS stalled, and Center of Gravity aft enough to prevent the Nose from falling through?
When I trained, we practised "maintaining Stall". Instead of releasing the HS and Pushing, we held it back, sufficient to continue the Stall, the effect was a MUSH, a way to lose gobs of altitude in short order.
There was a trainer available that was rumored to have "Inadvertent IMC" recovery solved by initiating this >MUSH< descent through the TStorm, and break out beneath to recover. It was said this a/c could actually "land" in this configuration, and slowly enough to prevent serious injury.
Every pilot knows it is possible to "fall" UP.
Last edited by bearfoil; 12th Jun 2011 at 15:43.