teaching stalls

[skyhigher]

can anyone advise or enlighten me as to the best technique when teaching students to recover from incipient stalls?
ie. stall warner sounds, then....

lower nose until stall warner stops while at same time applying full power to recover to climb (Vx)

what about stalls in turn, what does anyone teach for entry and recovery.. procedure etc..

cheers..

[FlyingForFun]

All very generic, and will need to be modified for your particular type. Also, specifically relating to clean power-off stalls - will need to be modified for anything else.

First of all, teach the entry to the stall: HASELL checks, followed by idle power, using elevators to keep height, and possibly trimming until speed decays past Vy.

Once the student reaches this point, take control. Demonstrate the symptoms of the approaching stall - nose high, controls sloppy, slow airspeed, and, if you hold it a little longer, stall warner and light buffer. Demonstrate that, if you lower the nose just a tiny bit, all of these symptoms go away. Raise the nose again, and the symptoms return. Repeat a couple of times, then recover and let the student have a go.

When the student repeats the exercise, tell him to lower the nose enough that the symptoms go away, raise the nose so that they come back, etc, exactly as you've just demonstrated.

Then, take the controls, and demonstrate the recovery: lower the nose exactly the same amount as before, whilst simulatenously adding full power and controlling any yaw with rudder. Gradually raise the nose to the Vy attitude and climb away. After the demonstration, get the student to repeat the exercise.

Once the student has mastered the recover from the incipient stall, it's time to look at the full stall. Get the student to enter the stall, up to the incipient point, the same as before. Once the stall warner sounds, take the controls and demonstrate that, if you continue to try to maintain height without recovering, you enter the full stall. Point out the features of the full stall - heavy buffet, lowering of the nose, rate of descent, possible wing-drop.

Demonstrate that lowering the nose will stop all the symptoms of the full stall, just the same as it did for the incipient stall, but that you need to lower the nose a little more this time. Then demonstrate the full stall recovery, which is exactly the same as the incipient stall recovery but with more lowering of the nose necessary to stop the symptoms.

Finally, get the student to repeat the exercise.

All of this will, of course, be properly briefed prior to the flight.

You specifically ask about stalls with bank. Whether the stall was entered with bank, or whether the bank has occured due to wing-drop, the recovery is exactly the same as without bank, but once the symptoms of the stall have been removed (and not before) you can use aileron to level the wings.

Hope that helps,

FFF
----------------

[hugh flung_dung]

FFF: I agree with much of what you've written but it's incorrect to talk about the nose being high; the aircraft can stall in any attitude and the nose may or may not be high. For erect stalls "stick sufficiently far forward to unstall the wing" is more appropriate than "lower the nose".

Also, waiting for Vy before pitching-up is unnecessary and leads to excessive height loss.

HFD

[adverse-bump]

i teach them to do the SSR recovery, but only to lease the back preasure.

[FlyingForFun]

HFD,

Agree with most of your points. "Stick sufficiently far forward to unstall the wing" is indeed better than my suggestion.

As for the nose being "high", though, I disagree. It is indeed true that the aircraft can stall in any attitude, and this is a vital piece of theory to be understood at some point - but for the purposes of Ex10bi, the nose will be high. And in the kinds of stalls which kill people (in the circuit), one of the first cues that something is not right is very often that the nose is higher than expected (a cue which many pilots ignore or don't notice, but I'm sure you agree that, as an instructor, you've noticed the nose being too high when your students are flying circuits and have attempted to rectify?)

I don't believe I said that you should wait for Vy before pitching up? What I said was that, once the symptoms of the stall have gone away, you should pitch to the Vy attitude - the pitching begins once the symptoms have gone away. If that's not clear from my post, then I hope this clarifies. :ok:

FFF
---------------

[homeguard]

It must be added that the aim of Ex 10/11 is NOT to teach stalling or spinning but rather to teach the student to recognise the symptoms of the onset/fully developed stall and also to seperate from the symptoms the particular characteristics of the aircraft used.
It should be a gentle exercise without macho wing drops and wham bam recoveries. The real danger of the stall is the failure to recognise it. Once all is fully understood and only then move onto recovery without loss of height from the incipient stage, with minimum further loss of height from the developed stall.
A great stress should be made on the fact that the only real danger from stalling is the failure to recognise the symptoms and to act accordingly. Also stress that the forces acting on a properly loaded aircraft will not allow it to stall on its own, it needs the aid of a pilot. The pilot should stop stalling the aircraft FIRST and then recover using the appropiate technique. Better still - do both at the same time.

[Whopity]

Skyhigher

I see that you are an Instructor in Europe. What were you taught on your FI Course?

[skyhigher]

i was taught not to level the wings until the stall warner had stopped in my FI training. But at the school i'm teaching at now (not uk) i have been told to teach students to add power and at same time level wings and into climb. this is for incipient stalls and not full developed.

my understanding was always to lower nose until stall warner stopped no matter what. i appreciate that height might be an issue and lower nose may increase height loss if too much.

i am also in need of direction as to what to teach for stall in turns. ie.. get student to descend in base configuration, level off, start turn while raising nose.... recover.

cheers

[Whopity]

At the incipient stage the aircraft has not stalled. SSR is to move the CC centrally forward whilst simultaneously applying full power and maintaining balance. If you do this, the nose will usually rise not lower, the effect of the power being greater than the effect of moving the CC slightly forward.

It is no different in the turn, SSR followed by rolling the wings level and clean up if you are in the base turn.

Setting up the base turn can cause some students a problem, set up the aircraft and delay the turn until the required speed is reached; many students will descend and accelerate in the turn so they need to increase the back pressure to maintain level flight until the symptoms appear.

[BEagle]

As Whopity says - SSR at the first stall warning. Whatever it is which construes the first warning!!

Full Power and Control Column centrally forwards whilst maintaining balance until the 'recovery' attitude is attained.

The 'recovery' attitude to maintain is that achieved when whatever gave the stall warning no longer does so. No need to select huge nose down pitch attitudes - as Whopity infers, the pitch attitude may only be a tadge* less than the attitude at which the warning first occurred!

Then - and only then - level wings and recover from any descent.

*tadge = a bit more than a smidge

[FlyingForFun]

To add to Whopity's and BEagle's reply:

For the incipient stall, the wings are not actually stalled. I can only guess that whoever told you "to teach students to add power and at same time level wings and into climb" is mistakenly saying that, because the wings are not stalled, it's ok to level the wings?

The fact is that you are pretty close to a stall - close enough to experience one or more of the symptoms of approaching the stall. Using aileron increases the angle of attack on the upgoing wing -and if this wing is close to the stall before using aileron, it will be even closer once you start using aileron. That's why we are all saying that the symptoms must have have stopped before leveling the wings.
i am also in need of direction as to what to teach for stall in turns. ie.. get student to descend in base configuration, level off, start turn while raising nose.... recover
There are two specific, different things to teach.

The first is the theory and practice of stalls in the turn. The theory is that stall speed will increase, there is an increased chance of wing-drop, and also the recovery which we've been discussing. This can all be covered in ground-school, but should be followed by a demonstration of a full stall in the turn. There is no need for the student to repeat this demonstration.

The second is the exercise of simulating mishandling by raising the nose on the base-final turn. This is done exactly as you say (the level off in base configuration isn't necessary, but won't harm, so teach whatever you're happiest with). The student should be taught to initiate the recovery himself at the first sign of the stall (which will be the stall warner or the light buffet, whichever happens first).

FFF
----------------

[VFE]

"Stick sufficiently far forward to unstall the wing" is indeed better than my suggestion.


I always teach "control column centrally forward"... deals with the aileron aspect and cuts out the circumlocution.

VFE.

[Croqueteer]

:uhoh: It's worth teaching people to be aware of the position of the stick/column. If it is getting near the fully aft position, the wing is about to stall irespective of speed and/or attitude.

[VFE]

Also, I would never teach: "pull the nose up" or "push the nose down".

From 4.1 onwards it's: "pitch up" and "pitch down".

VFE.

[homeguard]

I'm wondering how the wit of the pilot who has got themselves into a stall, or nearly so, would be so quick of mind and exacting as to stare inside and position the stick or column to a remembered position, 'central' or otherwise! Indeed the forces on the controls will not be symetrical and will mislead.
The very good reason to deal with the angle of bank secondary to unstalling and conserving height is that the stall is the problem not turn, indeed from shallow angles of bank many aircraft at the onset of stall will quickly flick or at least roll very rapidly the other way. If the unpracticed pilot is not already completely out of their depth they will now, very quickly, become so.
During the turn the ab-initio student in particular and many infrequent flyers will look sideways across the nose and in doing so believe the nose has lowered in pitch and pull back (pitch up). It makes good sense to first recover the aircraft and then consider the angle of bank.

[Dan Winterland]

The 'stick position' recovery is not a recognised technique and not reliable. "Control column centrally forward until the buffet stops" (or similar wording - this one is from the Central Flying School)) is the the only sure way to recover any stal.

This is the third time this topic has come up on this forum to my knowledge. It always gets a variety of answers and techniques, a lot of which contravene the PPL syllabus and in some cases are unsafe.

Be careful of advice offered here.

[Croqueteer]

:= Dan, I did not refer to a "stick position recovery". I merely said that it helps to avoid a stall if people get used to being aware of the stick position, which does not require you to look in! Typically, on a tailwind base leg the tendancy is to go through the centre-line, and pull a bit harder to correct. If you stall in that situation, the inside wing will probably stall first, (at a higher angle of attack) and at 500ft this would be a mind numbing experience for most pilots. You can almost paint a line on the cockpit side-wall, and if the stick is forward of that, the wing will not be stalled. Try it. Again, I am not talking about stall recovery here, just avoidance, using a simple method that is easily picked up even if the pilot is under considerable stress. It is all part of the armoury to safe flying.

[jamestkirk]

I am just glad that we all are talking about stalling the aircraft.

This is slightly off the subject but related to the above statement.

I have taken PPL holders on check out rides and asked then to fully stall the aircraft. On more than one occasion they kept recovering on the stall warner.

On closer questioning they said that they have never fully stalled the aircraft and/or experienced a wing drop, which is pretty likely with 30 degrees of flap and 1500 rpm, therefore never recovered from one.

Sorry, I should have said most of this is in a C152. Someone was bound to retort with, 'you charlatan, if you do that in a xxxx, you could end up in the ground like a tent peg'.

Just wondering if anyone else has had the same experience.

[S-Works]

I am also finding this. I have done 3 licence revalidation flights this week and not one of the students was confident about fully stalling the aircraft claiming that during training they always recovered at the stall warner.
I think this is symptamatic of the low hours Instructors doing FI courses to hour build. We teach from experiance and a couple of hundred hours in a lot of cases is not enough experiance to pass on. I have flown with a few of these FI's who won't push the envelope through fear of not being able to recover.

[VFE]

I have flown with a few of these FI's who won't push the envelope through fear of not being able to recover.
Which is why it's best to get your FIC done with a quality instructor and not scrimp and save by going abroad. My FIC course cost over £6000 and the instructor made me cover stalling and spinning (especially) until I was literally ill.... no limitations with minimum course hours either. He put me forward for the skills test when he was happy. My £6000 covered the course duration regardless of the number of hours it took for him to be satisfied and I have to say that is a very responsible way to conduct these courses, which are quite often wrongly viewed as a win/win no-fail breeze-through by many in the industry....

As a result, I feel confident of recovering from a student instigated bodge up and do not fanny about with my fingers ready to ponce at the controls all day, everyday, which must get throroughly knackering if you ask me - I've seen how some other low houred FI's behave like worried mothers and it's obvious this spawns from inadequate FIC training. Funnily enough though, they seem to know the LASORS back to front and notice the students wonky tie.... in short, all non-vital bumflufferies which obviously got over egged to the detriment of the proper stuff at some point, again, most likely during their FIC training.

VFE.

[jamestkirk]

Totally agree. I did mine with a ex-RAF CFS instructor at GWC, who was excellent. We were stalling/spinning the Tomahawk all day long. To be fair though, i do have an aerobatic ticket, so someone inadvertantly throwing me into a spin is not a great shock.

You do have to be absolutely comfortable to let the student try and recover correctly or incorrectly and that only comes with your own flying and instructing experience.

We had an instructor here many years ago , who i was told, was (i quote)terrified of fully developed stalls.

He/she got an airline job so maybe thats the secret. Sorry, bit cynical there!

It's a bit dissapointing that there are instructors out there that won't teach the whole subject of spinning/stalling; at least its none of us on this thread.

Apologies if I have gone off at a tangent on this thread, thus getting away from the original post.

JTK

[foxmoth]

On the UH Advanced PPL course we spend quite a lot of time covering stalling in every configuration and attitude, I usually find most PPLs have not touched this exercise since their licence so not surprisingly many are rusty and a bit wary of stalling. I would recommend all Pilots get up to speed on stalls (with a competent instructor if you are in any way unsure of what to do) then keep current by practicing stalls when you are out with nothing much else to do (though not of course if you have a nervous pax.):ok:

[BEagle]

Dan - RTFQ!! The discussion here is about incipient stalling. Not many SEP aircraft will exhibit buffet as the first warning...

Incidentally, I used to refuse point blank to use the stupid CFS 'signs' and 'symptoms' of a stall, having had to instruct medical students. Instead I use:

Stall warning: "Keep doing what you're doing and I'm probably going to stall!"

Stall ident: "I just have b£oody stalled, idiot!"

Mind you, ba$tard UK Wx and the day job means I haven't been able to do any instructing for yonks!

[Mad Girl]

God....I love my instructor.

slow flight to stall...either incipient or full stall and then into spins (in a rated aircraft) and then...just to make sure I've got it...I have to look away or close my eyes with hands and feet off controls... he puts the airplane where he wants it and says "recover", open my eyes and I could be in any configuration to recover...including inverted - I'm left to work it out and sort it out on my own!!!!

Nothing like a good work out from a "strong" instructor to keep you on your toes - Hopefully I'll still be alive in years to come.

:D :D :D :D :D

(Have to admit to a bit of masochism - I actually requested the contents of the above session we had in an aeros aircraft!!!!!! :E :E :E and I think I'm going to be doing the same every 6 months or so - It's good for me!!)

[VFE]

You wanna watch the aircraft isn't the only thing he puts wherever he likes...

Sorry, I need the number of that innuendo rehab clinic again.... ASAP. :bored:

VFE.

[pilgrim flyer]

Most PPL's that I fly with are unaware that:

1 Stalling the wing is directly related to stick position

2 That releasing back pressure is generally more desireable, controlled and efficient than stuffing stick forward

3 That if pulling the stick back and unable to pitch 'up' then the wing is stalled. Whatever else would appear to be the case

4 That flying out of a stall recovery with full power and the warner going result in losing much less height

5 That stalling nose high, ball into the turn usually won't result in a spin

6 That stalling nose low, ball out of the turn alomost certainly will

7 It is a far better idea to train and practise for this than not.....

PF

[foxmoth]

1 Stalling the wing is directly related to stick position

Pull the nose up to 70 degrees, put the stick in the middle at 10kts above stall, then tell me stalling is directly related to stick position!

[pilgrim flyer]

Hi Fox

I do it quite ofen in gliders actually in demonstrating recovery from winch launch failure.

And in a Pitts I pitch up 90 do a 'stall turn' but never stall the wing (unless I cock it up when you can tell that you have stalled the wing by the ensuing auto rotation).

PF

[foxmoth]

(unless I cock it up when you can tell that you have stalled the wing by the ensuing auto rotation).
So where is the stick when you cock it up and autorotate? certainly if you are not quite vertical and do not put the rudder in you WILL stall with the stick cental.My first inverted spin was a Pitts from a manouver including a stall turn and the stick was only just forward of center. As far as winch launch recovery goes, a long time since I did this but I seem to remember the stick going well forward of center for this and speed a little higher, the point I make is that you certainly CAN get the aircraft to stall with the stick in different places.

[Croqueteer]

:hmm: The point is, Foxmoth, when you pitch up to 70o the nose will drop long before you reach 10kts, or if you do it rapidly, the wing will stall (Like a flick-roll entry) in either case, you will be going downhill rapidly, but if the stick is central, THE WING WILL NOT BE STALLED! Of course you cannot regain level flight until such time as the speed is enough to provide the lift required. TRY IT! Also note that if you pitch up rapidly, the stick is now aft of my line on the cockpit wall. Speak to someone who does areo comps at advanced level.

[foxmoth]

f you do it rapidly, the wing will stall (Like a flick-roll entry) in either case, you will be going downhill rapidly, but if the stick is central, THE WING WILL NOT BE STALLED!
Sorry, you can't have it both ways! in one bit you say "the wing will stall (like a flick roll entry)" then you say it will not be stalled. I agree that the nose will be going down and may recover from the stall but you CAN stall with the stick central - ask anyone who has cocked up a stall turn by not getting properly vertical and being late with the rudder - they will have stick central and the WING WILL STALL, yes it will end up going down and will not need much more to recover but it will still have stalled. Also if you do a high nose up stall and centralise the stick just before the stall you can still stall (I will admit 10kts before, the aircraft MAY recover nose down before stalling but if slow enough, the increase in alpha from the nose going down can actually CAUSE the wing to stall), though the entry will have had the stick back as you say.

[Croqueteer]

:bored: You are being a bit obtuse here, Fox. If you flick stall, at that moment the wing is stalled, but if you then centre the stick, the wing is NOT stalled. In a "stall turn" or in American a "Hammerhead", although the aircraft might be stationary, if the stick is neutral, the wing is not stalled! I have done my comp aeros and know a bit about cocked up stall turns! Anyway, my original point was simple recognition of being dangerously close to a stall in an everyday situation when the workload is high. You are knit-picking!

[FlyingForFun]

1 Stalling the wing is directly related to stick position

Aerobatics aside, there are other factors which affect the stick position in which the aircraft will stall: flap position and power selected being the first two which spring to mind.

FFF
---------------

[foxmoth]

One reason I do not like the Stalling = stick position is I think this will not hold true in icing conditions,yes I know you should not get into this but it CAN happen, your well taught student now sits there saying "I can't be stalled, the stick isnt far enough back". Fine, teach it as a possible indicator but it should not be what you use to tell if you are stalled or not.

[Croqueteer]

:8 Flap position and speed don't make much difference to the stalling position of the stick. Try it! I also said this is only one indicator in the armoury of keeping safe, it's certainly not the be-all and end-all!

[VFE]

Never heard anyone mention the stick position = stall theory before.

I have often said to a student:

"Look how far back the control column is...!"

or.....

"Come on, pull ya big jessy.....pull... get that stick back....!"

etc... during a stalling lesson but have never said:

"Oi Bloggs, that's where ya stick's gonna be when ya stall".

Seems odd to me that does, but if it keeps ya punters out of oak panelled rooms then fair enough!

VFE.

[energie]

I hope it's ok for me to ask a question here, I feel that it's relevant and hopefully could add to this thread

I had my 2nd lesson on stalls today, specifcally on power on stalls. I am having a lot of problem recovering from the stalls :(

What is happening is that I am having problem controlling the yaw with the rudder. I am entering the power on stalls from 2100RPM. Once the airspeed is stable and i'm not ascending and descending, I began applying aft pressure on the controls. I do this smoothly until the stall horn sounded, then I gave it a bit more aft pressure just to tip it over the edge. As soon as it stalls, i apply full power. Because I am anticipating yaw that comes from the full power application, I stepped on the right rudder. But either i'm stepping on it too hard, too early, too late, too soft, I just don't know. One of the wings would drop and i would be attempting the recovery sideways.

My instinct would kick in and i would try to turn it back by turning the aileron the opposite way. This often makes it worse! At the same time I would stop the rudder pressure because I am instinctively unsure if the rudder pressure is actually causing my bad recovery!

This is very frustrating. Does anyone have any suggestion on how I can effectively control the yaw in this case? :(

thanks!
E.

[Whopity]

Where are you looking? Do you know what YAW looks like? You can only control the YAW if you can see and identify it. Your instructor should demonstrate this too you, then teach you how to control it by following through, and finally let you have a go.

[FlyingForFun]

Energie,

First of all, congrats on finding an instructor who's teaching you these things... you should hopefully come out of your training understanding what the stall is all about!

The key here is to find a visual feature, and keep the aircraft pointing at it. Since the nose is going to quite high up in the air for a power-on stall, a cloud would be ideal. Although a little bit of anticipation will help, what you really want to do is to do whatever it takes with the rudder pedals to keep that cloud in the same place in the windscreen.

FFF
----------------

[TurboJ]

I have taken PPL holders on check out rides and asked then to fully stall the aircraft. On more than one occasion they kept recovering on the stall warner.

On closer questioning they said that they have never fully stalled the aircraft and/or experienced a wing drop, which is pretty likely with 30 degrees of flap and 1500 rpm, therefore never recovered from one.


James T

I would be interested on your views given your comments quoted above.

I used to demonstrate a fully developed stall with all the symptoms including 'nose nod.' I also admittedly, frequently, got my students to recover from a fully developed stall until I read the following:

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/G-FORS%203-06.pdf

In a nutshell it recommends that fully developed stalls which result in 'oscillatory stalls' or 'nose nod' are not necessary and inappropriate in flight training.

Since then and in the light of this report, my CFI has recommended we do not demonstrate fully developed stalls which result in oscillatory motion and students should be taught the symptoms of approaching the stall and how to recover.

Regardless of whether I agree with this or not, I value my job and therefore have to comply.

Having read about your experiences that you posted above it would indicate that my FTO is not alone in this but schools merely complying with aaib recommendations.

[foxmoth]

My understanding of the Slingsby accident is that it was not the "nose nod" itself that caused the problem but the fact they were picking up the wing with rudder and in fact the oscillatory bit they were taking about was the rudder rather than the "nodding", unfortunately for all the detailed analysis the AIB do not explain enough WIHIH in this. Personally I like a student to fully recognise the full stall themself before recovery which should happen before the first actual "nod" and they certainly should not be picking the wing up. Normally what happens is students call "stalled" and recover well before the actual stall itself.

[TurboJ]

foxmouth

I fully appreciate what you are saying but my point is that the AAIB say that so called 'oscillatory stalling' or holding an aircraft in a stall should not be demonstrated as part of ab-initio flight training.

What I am saying is that JamesT has students who have never held an aircraft in a stall which is what the AAIB is saying should not be practised ?? So is this the fault of the instructor?

Personally I don't agree and feel that students should experience a fully developed stall and be able to recover from it, however as my previous post indicates I have been discouraged from demonstrating a fully developed nose nodding stall due to this incident.

TJ

[jamestkirk]

Let just be clear.

I DID NOT say hold it in the stall. I said experience a fully developed stall. That just means as soon as the nose drops, with whatever characteristic, we recover.

The oscillatory stall is not a technique i use. (i.e holding the aircraft in, while preventing wing drop with the rudder).

The book does state how to recover from 1. A stall and 2. Stall at the incipient stage. In my mind you cannot show a student how to un-stall a wing when it has never been stalled. The CFS expression of nose drop, we, drop, wing drop. is probably the best way to describe it. The book uses slightly different wording but it's just semantics.

It's unusual for a flying school to restrict the teaching of a fully developed stall. But if you are talking about oscillatory stalling then i agree.

Also it depends on the aircraft. Some instructors don't like spinning ansd some refuse to spin a Tomahawk. Different argument but as someone says it depends on your own experience level. I also have students who have never done slow flight below 65 knots (C152).

For person to hold a PPL and never have experienced a stall is quite alarming.

Lots of people have incidents in IMC regardless if they have a IMC/IR. We still teach it though.

[Dan Winterland]

From BEagle - "Dan - RTFQ!! The discussion here is about incipient stalling. Not many SEP aircraft will exhibit buffet as the first warning..."

Thanks BEagle. You stopped being my CFI over a year ago and you're still b0llocking me! ;)

Yes, I agree. But whether the first warning you receive is the high nose attitude, the low and decreasing airspeed, the less effective controls, the artificial warnings or the light buffet - the recovery should still be the same. Apply full power, prevent yaw with rudder and move the control column centrally forward until the buffet stops. If there is no buffet, then there is no need to move the control column - if at all - and then the prioity is to control the attitude. This is what I was tought, what I tought for 6 years as an RAF QFI and then a few years more in your club.

[BEagle]

Hi Dan! How are things over there?

You're absolutely right, of course.

Unfortunately most students (apart from ones who have been trained properly ;) ) will merely stuff the control column forward when the idiot warner beeps, then timidly inch the throttle open. Hardly a recovery 'with minimum height loss'!

[homeguard]

DAN
An old chestnut that needs reminding is this;
do you say POWER - ATTITUDE etc. or ATTITUDE -POWER etc.
It should be ATTITUDE - POWER etc!!!!!!!
You should of course do these thing simultaneously and I may be reacting to semantics.
I don't have a major objection to your point that there is no need to lower the nose on hearing only the stall warner as you describe it. However it is wise to do so sufficiently to restore the correct angle of attack. The stall warning activating indicates that you have marginilised the safety parameters which should then be corrected. It may take some time for the path of flight to change and therefore the angle of attack to reduce following the action to increase power.