Originally Posted by glendalegoon
then we have never practiced stall recovery in any us simulator session in any plane I have flown.
Neither did I... up to my last type rating. Courtesy of AF447, training programme on 738 sim now includes fully developed high altitude stall. Drill was to decelerate with idle thrust towards shaker but stop trimming short of it and to pull when it fires until getting the stall break with nose drop. Despite expecting what was to happen and immediately applying corrective action, usual altitude loss was about 10 000 ft. If anything, it served as useful reminder to watch my speed and never ignore shaker.
Originally Posted by Mad (Flt) Scientist
And in that case (since you are both agreeing) what is unfortunate is that a whole generation has been, in effect, misled into thinking that their "approach to stall" recovery was the technique whenever the word "stall" was involved.
Alas! One needs look no further than this thread to see how true it is. It might be that low quality of high school science education leaves today's pilot unprepared to appreciate difference in aerodynamics and performance brought upon flying in thin air. Anyway, this just cannot be made into a case of one-size-fits-all. Low altitude stall warning recovery and high altitude full stall require somewhat different techniques. Using the wrong one has good chance of terminating one's lifespan prematurely.
Originally Posted by Tee Emm
Huh?? What is your point?
That while I'm aware of instances of structural failures, powerplant failures and loss of control followed by diving into ground after entering thunderstorms, the only case of stalling in CB I can recall is Pulkovo 612 and entering the CB was only an accessory.