PJ2
Excellent post and reference , PJ2.
Itīs basically what i learned in the aerodynamics-course in UPT 35 years ago, also in view of flying fighter jets. I didnīt learn anything in my ATPL course concerning this matter, but maybe i was not attentive enough.
I had some argument via PM with some posters here about how much the nose would have to be lowered to break the stall at an AOA of 60° and posted some concern to the effectiveness of the THS. This reference states that it is not enough to lower the nose somewhat, and that it would lead to high sink rates and a difficult pullout if altitude would be sufficient. Posters calculated altitude loss to some 5.000 feet. Please, go back and read this reference from PJ2 and reconsider your calculation.
I get the impression that this new generation of engineers and pilots are forgetting, that computers dont change aerodynamic fundamentals, they only can help in manage the equipment being used in a different way. But its still used in the same old environment from years ago, when your nice reference was written down, and even before, when the fathers of flying conquered the skies.
Aerodynamics is unchanged, any aircraft can stall, can be stalled, and any aircraft can end in an unrecoverable mode of stall or spin. Know before, when it could happen and under what conditions it can happen, and dont get near such an situation. If you fail and find yourself approaching a stall, try to get out of it as fast and efficient as possible. There might be only this one chance.