So when does it all click?

[Kennyc]

Hello there,

I've been told from many people that it all just 'clicks' one day and I wonder when that's going to be!

I've done 28 hours, flown solo, passed all exams and am currently working on cross country. When I read the books I feel good and confident, I really understand it...then when I'm in the aeroplane I still have to think so hard what to do next, when to do it, what's my height, what's my airspeed, attitude etc etc. You may think this is normal but surely I should be more fluent by now? I am still terrified of spinning the aeroplane as I genuinely thought of giving up after ex11...I didn't enjoy that one!

Any thoughts appreciated :)

[mad_jock]

If its a consolation flying VFR didn't really click completely with me until after 100 hours as a flight instructor so about 320 hours. Before that I thought I knew what I was doing passed all the exams etc but really was going through the motions with what I had been taught. After it clicked I knew what I was doing and the actual control inputs were automatic. I just needed to think I want to be over there in xxx config at yy speed and it would happen while I was spouting the theory and demonstrating while knowing what all the other traffic on frequency was doing. I suppose a bit like when you realise you haven't thought about changing gear or what you did with the clutch in a car on a hill start.

IFR it was after the first winter so was about 500 hours. Before that I didn't have a clue what was going on around me looking back. I only knew what was going to happen in 5 mins time.

These days it automatic for me to think flights in advance and 6 day blocks. The individual flights are just revolutions of the same procedures and its more maint, flight duty times, operation planning issues etc etc The flying is the fun part when nobody can phone me up. But that's the life of a commercial Captain.

Its completely normal so don't worry about it.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

As MJ says, the real 'click' is well beyond PPL. The point at which you 'think' the aeroplane around much as you do with your car without being conscious of any control inputs; the point where maintaining 1000 feet in the circuit just happens automatically without you having to think about power, attitude, trim; the point where you want to lose 800 feet in an overhead join and just roll wings vertical without pulling and without even thinking about it, is a couple of hundred hours minimum, I'd say. Maybe quite a bit more for the latter.

Sounds like you're doing OK so far - keep up the good work and the rewards will come!

[glendalegoon]

lindbergh said it best, you don't know how to fly until you have taught someone else how to fly.

so there you go, when you feel you could teach someone else how to fly, you may very well hear the clicking sound.

but if it is from your teeth, see a dentist.

you should be consciously thinking about everything, though I would say altitude and not height...maybe it is a british thing.

a friend told me you are not a real instrument pilot until you can fly an approach to minimums while eating a hamburger.

so, 28 hours...be patient little bird.

[piperboy84]

As MJ and Ssd says it takes a while, with me it's been a looooong while , I've got about 800 hours now and recently done my Instrument rating and will be sitting my commercial check ride in a few weeks and am only now thinking this flying thing is clicking and feeling comfortable (hopefully not complacent)with the whole thing.

Being a farm boy I would describe it as the feeling I got in my teens when backing a grain trailer into a shed, or burling the tractor down the right tattie drill or other tractor driving tasks without having to think about it or demolishing stuff , it becomes second nature.

[Kennyc]

Thank you all,

I will only be flying for fun and my licence journey ends at PPL. No IMC or ATPL needed here, just a quick night rating and I'm away :)

[9 lives]

It'll take a while. Indeed, you will only know it has clicked when you look back, and think to yourself, hmmm, that clicked a while back, and I did not notice.

When I was learning to fly, there was this old pilot, who was just around the club all the time. While I was busy dreaming of progressing from a 150 (before the days of 152's) to a 172, I'd see him fly three or four types in a day - never needing a checkout or anything! I always wanted to be a pilot like him.

A few years back, I was flying home from work in my 150. I thought back on what I had flown solo that, and the previous days: I'd flown my 150, a Cessna Caravan, a DA42, a Lake Amphibian, and a Tiger Moth. Click. I was that old pilot, 35 years later. But the click had happened some time ago, as I was capable of flying these planes, and trusted to do so, long before I had.

I don't know when the click happened, and it does not matter really. If you think you have heard it, it was a mirage. Instead, you'll look back one day, and think to yourself, hmm, I clicked a while back, and didn't hear it. You'll just relax and smile to yourself. Ii the mean time, just enjoy....

[Kennyc]

I love the wisdom and the stories...

[mad_jock]

though I would say altitude and not height...maybe it is a british thing.

Its because in our world we still use QFE and QNH so we use both terms depending what we are doing.

As soon as we see height we presume circuits or in a MATZ.

Altitude they must be cross country.

Oh and I have flown with commercial pilots that it still hasn't clicked after thousands of hours. And to be honest if there car driving is anything to go by they never will. Just no gut feel or touch with any machinery.

[150 Driver]

A retired airline pilot gave me this advice:-

- At 100 hours you think you'll never get it
- At 1000 hours you think you've got it
- At 10000 hours you know you'll never get it

[Whopity]

At 1000 hours you think you've got itAnd considered to be one of the most dangerous times!

[9 lives]

Yes, 1000 hours seems to be a dark click. At 1004 hours flying time I was a bit too casual flying a Tomahawk, and had my first dark click. It was the first time I realized that my growing casualness or complacency had lead me to darn near wreck a plane, and I had the experience to recognize that that had nearly happened to me!

Now, with a lot more experience than that, I'm looking over my shoulder a lot more, and seeing how many things could have just gone wrong, but happily didn't. For me, the bliss of ignorance is way behind me!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Sure, but it ain't quite that bad, folks.

Most of us make the transition, before PPL, between

- five minutes is nowhere near long enough to do all the things you have to do to get round the circuit

and

- gosh this circuit is taking forever, wonder if there's anything interesting to look at out of the window.

[mad_jock]

not a chance in hell I clicked in CPL never mind PPL and I have never seen any PPL click during training. There have been some good uns one of mine is now flying Typhoons. But the instinctive use of the controls to obtain a flight profile nope never happened. And even the ones that were the dogs dangles aka the one that went off to the RAF he didn't have the big pic through his ears of what was going on around him with a mental update of his model with time with the data with no more information.

ie knowing if traffic is going to be infront of you or behind you by its last position and intentions. And which bit of the window to look at to find traffic and when its worth while looking for it. This does presume a back ground in types performance as well. Ie PA38 does 85-90 knts and other types slightly slower or faster.

When it clicks you don't do any calcs you just know its the right time when to look and where to look. The controls might as well be on auto pilot for all the conscience effort it takes to think what to do with them.

[Flyingmac]

The first time you take off with the pitot cover on, and don't notice until after you land.;)

[mary meagher]

I began to really learn to fly when I started instructing!

And now I am so old that I have to fly with an instructor, it still comes natural to talk through what I am doing and why.

[9 lives]

The first time you take off with the pitot cover on, and don't notice until after you land.;)

I Love it!

[foxmoth]

I am interested in this part of the post:-
I am still terrified of spinning the aeroplane as I genuinely thought of giving up after ex11...I didn't enjoy that one!

I would like to know what aircraft you did your spinning in and how you did it - many people who have this reaction I find have done spinning in aircraft that are not really suitable such as C152 or Pa28 or an instructor who uses the technique that results from learning on these aircraft, by this I mean that they pull hard into the entry then have a rushed patter before the aircraft recovers by itself - do spinning on a proper spinning aircraft with a good instructor and it is a far more relaxed affair and few people come away terrified.

[On Track]

Why do spins at all unless you are doing an aerobatics rating?

[mad_jock]

It depends how its taught those exercises.

Some still teach people by getting them to stall and then do a dance on the rudder pedals lifting wings and such nonsense.

Its no wonder some don't like them, and if the instructor is clueless and pass on all the old wifes tales to do with stalling etc it makes it worse.

Hell some instructors are adding on 20knts to book approach speeds because they are clueless and **** scared themselves of stalling.

[foxmoth]

Why do spins at all unless you are doing an aerobatics rating?

Increased knowledge and handling ability?

[mad_jock]

Agreed it does but its the when its done and by whom which I think is up for debate.

It was years after I finished instructing I realised how ill equipped I had been teaching spinning in the aircraft I was using.

[wsmempson]

300hrs is a number that seems to come up quite often.

After passing my PPL, thinking that I knew how to fly now, I bought an aged PA28 140 and flew 300hrs in 18 months. At 300hrs it all really came together, and also made me realise how accurate the description of the ppl was, as a "licence to learn".

[foxmoth]

Agreed it does but its the when its done and by whom which I think is up for debate.

And in what aircraft - but I think this has been covered enough in previous threads.

[9 lives]

many people who have this reaction I find have done spinning in aircraft that are not really suitable such as C152 or Pa28 or an instructor who uses the technique that results from learning on these aircraft, by this I mean that they pull hard into the entry then have a rushed patter before the aircraft recovers by itself - do spinning on a proper spinning aircraft with a good instructor

C152s and PA28s spin and recover in a way which allows the student to appreciate the concept of a spin, and the sensations to be experienced. These types also allow practice at recovery technique. They are suitable. That is not to say they are the best, but they're suitable - they're certified for it.

A good friend of mine used to tell me about spinning Meteors, Hunters, and the efforts made to not spin Phantoms. From what he tells me, spinning a Hunter made a pilot out of you - a Hunter pilot. Very cool, but personally, I don't see myself needing to develop the skills to spin and recover a Hunter.

If a pilot learns to skillfully spin and recover a C152, or a PA28, that pilot will have adequate skills to recover a recoverable spin in any certified single engine aircraft, and that's all that's intended from the training.

Sure, there are excellent things to be learned in aerobatics courses, and in other aerobatic types - go for it if that interests you.

But otherwise every student should learn the basics of spinning - three reasons: Awareness - you know what's going to happen if you get in, and that there will be a period of rotation where the aircraft will seem to not react to a control input, but be patient. The knowledge that you can recover a recoverable spin, so don't just give up. And, you understand the sensations as you approach the stall/spin, so you can allow yourself to get close (a confident 1.3Vs approach in a crosswind with a chop), and thus fly the aircraft as it was designed, rather that these 1.3Vs + 15 knot approaches resulting from lack of skill and understanding. An added bonus would be the instructor who has the student spin the same aircraft at the extremes of its spin approved C of G range, to see the difference in handling. This is where one learns why we don't load behind the aft C of G limit!

I'm one of those students of the '70's who was only trained spins in a 150. At that time, that was all that was available. But I practiced, practiced, and still practice. I do not accidentally spin airplanes, and when I deliberately spin them under planned safe testing conditions, it works out fine. Now, I count 12 types I have spun, and with changed configurations, it becomes 17, With the biggest being a Cessna Grand Caravan. It taught me that there is no room to not follow the Flight Manual procedure, so know your aircraft!

So students, go and spin the spin approved aircraft - even just the compromise C 152/PA28, in a planned flight for that purpose, with your instructor. You'll thank yourself later....

[foxmoth]

C152s and PA28s spin and recover in a way which allows the student to appreciate the concept of a spin, and the sensations to be experienced. These types also allow practice at recovery technique. They are suitable. That is not to say they are the best, but they're suitable - they're certified for it.

IMHO, just because an aircraft is certified for something does NOT mean it is suitable!
C152s and Pa28s are not easy to get into a spin so the entry tends to be overdramatic with a hard pull back before the stall is reached, then they do not stay in easily so the instructors patter tends to be rushed, then the spin will frequently degenerate into a spiral dive, so this does NOT show the "concept" of the spin (whatever that is?!) and often results in the incorrect recovery being used as it should then be a spiral dive recovery - and part of proper spin training is showing the difference between Spin and spiral.
Compare this to spinning in something like the Bulldog - entry can be done AT the stall and it will enter a spin without a dramatic nose up inverted entry, it will then stay in the spin, giving the instructor plenty of time to cover WIHIH, much more relaxed. Teaching on Cessna and Pipers is, I believe, one reason so many hate and fear spinning!

[glendalegoon]

FWIW the PA28 should not be spun if loaded into the "NORMAL" catagory.

You must load it into the UTILITY Catagory, so check you W&B and aircraft manual.

Now, if you want to have fun in a spin, try a tomahawk!

[Genghis the Engineer]

I've spun a C150 a few times, because it seemed to be the only way to pass a course at the time but wasn't at-all happy about it, the PA28 not at-all.

Every aeroplane I've been comfortable spinning had a "get out of gaol" card - whether that was a BRS, ejector seat, or personal parachute and jettisonable door.

Okay, there are a few hardened aerobatic pilots who spin at very low level and thus the parachute would do no good at-all. Those pilots are usually very current in spinning and know their aeroplanes very well - so far enough, they fly other manoeuvres where there's no recovery if it's messed up either. Their call, grown-ups and all that.


But I really cannot accept the perceived wisdom in deliberately spinning an aeroplane with no emergency "route out". Maybe I know too much having studied the spin at very great length during my PhD, but I know people - better pilots than me who have jumped or pulled the handle from an unrecoverable spin, and knew somebody who didn't.

(My distant recollecton of spinning the Hunter was that it was pretty straightforward and honest - just lost a stupid amount of altitude.)



As for when it clicks - for me it's really a matter of recency rather than total time. If I'm doing the sort of flying I've been doing, say, 6-12 hours per month over the last 3+ months, it's clicked and whilst complacency is still the enemy, I can get pretty smooth and consistent. If I go below half a dozen hours a month, or are doing the sort of flying I've not done for a while (say some complicated handling tests, which I tend to only do a few times a year, or an instrument approach if I've not flown one for 3+ months, then it's distinctly un-clicked and I need to get myself back in the groove.)

G

[foxmoth]

FWIW the PA28 should not be spun if loaded into the "NORMAL" catagory.

You must load it into the UTILITY Catagory, so check you W&B and aircraft manual.

That applies to almost all aircraft, even some highly aerobatic ones!

[9 lives]

then the spin will frequently degenerate into a spiral dive, so this does NOT show the "concept" of the spin (whatever that is?!) and often results in the incorrect recovery being used

Well, yes and no, and no. A properly entered spin in a utility category plane will not become a spiral dive, or that plane would not be certified. Any aircraft for which the spin changes to a spiral dive within one turn of the spin will not be certified without a lot of discussion with the approving authority. This is why the installation of a STOL kit wing cuff on a 150 or 172, will result in a "Spins prohibited" limitation. It simply won't stay in the spin past one turn, as required by the utility design requirements.

So yes, training spin recovery in an aircraft in which the spin changes into a spiral dive by itself is more difficult, though properly briefed, it is a valuable learning opportunity. But, if you're training spins in an aircraft which won't stay in a spin for one turn, something is wrong. Otherwise, if you are following the spin recovery technique specified by the aircraft manufacturer, the correct recovery is being used. In all cases it's going to include reduce the AoA, and stop the yaw. Minor variations in this may delay recovery, but they will not prevent it. For example, the Caravan POH says to avoid the use of the ailerons, as the up going spoiler linked to the aileron may delay recovery.

As for the Bulldog, I've read about how good they are for spin training, and I'd love to try one - but I'm not aware that there are any in Canada. Everyone who I know who has spun them says they are superior to other training types (in many ways), and how lucky for those who can train in them - but it does not make spin training in other utility types unworthwhile....

A "click" for me is that with proper preparation, I'll one turn spin any certified normal category single engined GA aircraft, for which a spin demonstration is required for certification.

[mad_jock]

I have only once spun a c152 and it remained in the spin of its own violation.


Unfortunately it wouldn't recover using the poh prescribed spin recovery.

[Pirke]

Mad_jock: wrong mass&balance?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Well, yes and no, and no. A properly entered spin in a utility category plane will not become a spiral dive, or that plane would not be certified. Any aircraft for which the spin changes to a spiral dive within one turn of the spin will not be certified without a lot of discussion with the approving authority.

I wouldn't regard that as much of a problem myself given that a spiral dive is easily recovered from in most aeroplanes - I've test flown and certified without difficulty aeroplanes which autorecovered into a spiral dive. I can't think of anything in part 23 which requires the aeroplane to stay in a spin.

It does need some careful POH wording, and there is the issue that most light aircraft instructors and students never read the POH, but that's basically Darwinian and the authorities don't have big issues about that.

G

[mad_jock]

Nope just a none certified tested entry put us in a mode which isn't documented.

During fi rating the fii was demoing steep turns and pulled to the buffet and then waggled the controls in roll.

Outside wing stalled competly we flicked over the top into a high rot spin. Faster than the pa38.

Normally poh recovery performed and basically sod all happended with full rudder and the stick full forward.

Controls were then neutralised rudder applied and throttle opened until the rotation started slowing then a small amount of forward pitch applied. We recovered to s&l at about 750ft agl from 6k and over 5 rotations.

I suggest you don't try and replicate it. The engine was burping and farting during the spin and if it hadden't picked up i would have been a greasy smear.

[rolling20]

As for the Bulldog, I've read about how good they are for spin training, and I'd love to try one - but I'm not aware that there are any in Canada. Everyone who I know who has spun them says they are superior to other training types (in many ways), and how lucky for those who can train in them - but it does not make spin training in other utility types unworthwhile....
The Bulldog could get into a High rotational spin with unusual characteristics from which there was no recovery. We were told in no uncertain terms to hit the silk! I only had limited knowlwdge of it.Thoroughly put me off spinning!

[Crash one]

Thank you M-J. It's a bit off putting to read such things about a supposedly benign training aircraft. What would have happened to a student solo?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Back when I did my PPL spins were part of the syllabus. It was quite difficult to get the C150 to spin as opposed to spiral dive, and one method we used was a flick entry. There have, however, been accidents over the years that show that the normally benign 150/152 can and does spin viciously. And I suspect, like many aeroplanes that don't readily spin, when they do spin for real, recovery may be prolonged.

I've spun quite a few aeroplanes (150 / 152, Chipmunk, Citabria, Yak52 come to mind) and thankfully never had any recovery issues. Only in the Yak did I have a parachute, but knowing what I do now about how spins are not necessarily repeatable (each can be a bit different to the last and occasionally you might get a very nasty one) I wouldn't do it now without a parachute and plenty of height.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Thank you M-J. It's a bit off putting to read such things about a supposedly benign training aircraft. What would have happened to a student solo?
Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover?

Spin accidents take many forms; the base-to-final turn is only one example. However, although a fully developed spin from circuit height is irrecoverable, a pilot trained in and familiar with the feel of the aeroplane as it departs probably won't allow the aeroplane to spin as it'll be ingrained second nature for hands and feet to reduce the AoA and remove any yaw before a spin develops.

A pilot without that grounding in spins and spin recovery will probably miss the subtle clues the aeroplane gives before departure, and may not even know something's wrong until the nose starts to drop. At that point, still not understanding what's happening, they may well instinctively pull back.

Incipient spin training simply doesn't cut it. To be sensitised to those subtle pre-departure clues and to have the automatic reactions to them to unload the wing and remove any yaw without having to think about it (there won't be time!), requires that the pilot be in regular full spin and recovery practice, and/or current in aeros where critical AoA is sometimes exceeded.

[9 lives]

A pilot without that grounding in spins and spin recovery will probably miss the subtle clues the aeroplane gives before departure, and may not even know something's wrong until the nose starts to drop. At that point, still not understanding what's happening, they may well instinctively pull back.

In thousands of posts, this is probably one of the most relevant written in a long time.... Pay heed....

[Crash one]

Quote:
Thank you M-J. It's a bit off putting to read such things about a supposedly benign training aircraft. What would have happened to a student solo?

Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover? Quote:

I seem to remember that a number of "accidents" occurred very shortly after qualifying by pilots spearing in to their parents/girlfriends house. I can recall circling over mine with my daughter on board, first pax, & pulling considerable unexpected G as I straightened up from the turn.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover?

Statistically, spinning off full power climb from an initial climb or go-around is more likely. However, this has exactly the same outcome as you describe - a stall or spin from too low to do anything about it.

The scenaro Crash 1 descrbes is not uncommon as well, and in both cases the moral is clear - know what the approach to the stall looks like, and stay well aware from it close to the ground unless you're trying to land.

G

[Camargue]

I was shown high rotational spinning in the bulldog by the cfi (ex hunter pilot) you let the stick drift forward once the spin has started (rather like competition aero's in a mono) you are falling out of the sky about 18,000ft per minute. recovery is noticeably longer and you need every bit of your 10,000 start height.

[mad_jock]

Never mind a solo student, I don't think in the heat of the moment i would have thought about putting the power up to give more flow over the rudder. Thats was with a cpl and ir pass under my belt.

But I wouldn't have gone anywhere near the attitude the instructor did and I wouldn't have waggled the controls the way he did either.

Chances of a solo student doing it in my opinion is nil. They won't have the balls to get the plane into the required attitude.

I haven't either since.

[9 lives]

falling out of the sky about 18,000ft per minute

About 205 MPH? Isn't that difficult to achieve in a stalled aircraft?

I did 9200 FPM down for a few seconds in the Caravan, and I thought that was really something!

[Camargue]

18,000 was a figure I remember being quoted for high rotational and 11,000 for standard.

to be honest I've never stopped to workout if this was true or not - 205mph in a stalled a/c with lots of drag does seem fast - but you are very nose low with little oscillation.

a standard 3 turn spin/recovery took around 2500ft, high rotational took about 4000 iirc (was about 25 years ago! and I could be talking total bs! - Beagle might know, he used to fly them)

[thing]

This is where flying gliders comes into it's own. Every year you have to do your spin checks and you can spin to your hearts content in between too, although scrubbing height for no good reason is anathema to most glider pilots. Glider pilots spend most of their time very near the stall at high angles of bank; usually pulling in and out of buffet. Consequently I've never feared spins in a powered aircraft. Not to say that I fly willy nilly, I've never been near a spin unintentionally. Probably because I know how easy it is to finish up in one.

Oops forgot the OP's question. I've no idea whether it's clicked or not. I just fly around. Haven't died yet.

[Crash one]

But I wouldn't have gone anywhere near the attitude the instructor did and I wouldn't have waggled the controls the way he did either. Quote:

First time I circled the house, 45deg bank, wife came out to wave & I waved back by waggling. How close was I ?

[9 lives]

I waved back by waggling. How close was I ?

It depends upon your airspeed, and how hard you were pulling in pitch when you did it. In my opinion, useful stall/spin awareness cannot exist for a pilot who has not actually flown a number of stalls and spins.

The design requirements for certification require that it not be possible for a single engined aircraft to be able to get into an unrecoverable spin, with any use of the controls - but it might take a while to get out, and you could stretch some airplane depending how abusive you are going in.

In some cases, "any use of the controls" included throttle as a control (which in this case I vigorously opposed), but I was overruled and still required to demonstrate 75% power spins in a 210HP Lake Amphibian. It worked, but I'm never doing that again! It did show me though, how a pilot could power themselves into a departure spin (and a climbing turn over/around the trees at the end of a short lake is just the occasion for it to happen). That plane was on its back so fast, it did make my head spin!

[Camargue]

crash one,

stall speed in a turn is the square root of the load factor plus s/l clean stalling speed

ie

45 aob is about 1.37g iirc? so multiply sq root of this - 1.17 by your s/l clean stalling speed to get the stall speed in a 45 turn (this assumes you are applying load)

if you waggle whilst applying load and reach 60 aob your stall speed will increase by a factor of 1.41, abt 80 aob its 2.4 (assuming you maintain load)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Errrm, there is NO SUCH THING AS STALL SPEED! Only stall angle (of attack). Fly aeros, and you'll soon see there's often little relationship with the stall and what the ASI is reading.

And that doesn't just apply in aeros - after all, the aeroplane has no idea it is doing aeros!

[darkroomsource]

Going back to the original post for a moment.
"When does it all click?"

You say that you're having to focus on thinking about everything all the time (my words, not yours). That's a good thing.

The best advice I ever heard, I got on the day I passed my PPL, from a retired airline captain. He said "Congratulations! Now you have a license to kill yourself."

It took me a minute to realise what he'd said, because everyone was congratulating me. But when I asked him what he meant, he said something to the effect of:

When you get your license or any additional ratings or certificates, you're at your peak of knowledge and ability, after that you slowly start to degrade in your knowledge and ability. Many pilots can't pass the PPL exam a year after passing it. You need to continue training, on a regular basis, and continue learning, in order to maintain a level of knowledge and ability that is close to where you are now. If you don't continue to train and learn, your skills will degrade until one day, when you think you're as good as you are now, but you're not, and you'll do something that you could do now, but can't do then, and you will die. I only hope you don't take someone else with you.

But, if you continue to train, learn, study, work hard on thinking while your in the plane, never get complacent, work on your skills, you can fly for a long long time and never have an incident.

--
Through the years I've seen young pilots who think they've "got it" who then get complacent, and their skills do deteriorate.

My advice to you, is this, the minute you think you've "got it" and know what you're doing, go and get some training and make sure you do "have it". I bet you'll find that there are some simple little things that you've forgotten, or have stopped doing.

Keep flying, enjoy it, but keep working hard in the cockpit, keep thinking ahead of the plane. Eventually you'll be thinking further ahead than you are now, but never accept your performance as "good enough". There's always room for improvement.

[9 lives]

A part of it all clicking is knowing that a wing stalls at an AoA, and that is influenced by airspeed and loading. At any given airpseed, the wing can be instantly unstalled (or prevented from stalling) by pitching down. This must be instinct - and is an important "click".

I used to entertain myself, flying my 150 under control (and wagging the wings) at indicated airspeeds of less than 20 MPH. But these events were brief, because they were flown at less than 1G.

[Camargue]

ok,ok,ok

stall angle of attack will equate to a speed which as about xxx higher than the stall angle..... you get my drift

[9 lives]

stall angle of attack will equate to a speed which as about xxx higher than the stall angle

Well, to be honest, that drift I don't quite get. Perhaps I'm just not taking the meaning you intend, but his is one of those few rather pivotal "click" topics for newer pilots so it should be very clear...

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

ok,ok,ok

stall angle of attack will equate to a speed....

Only for a given weight and loading (G). Stall angle never varies for a given configuration; stall speed can be anything you want it to be, so is meaningless.

[Camargue]

what I meant was that if a ppl is taught critical angle occurs at an air speed of about 55kts he can know that in a 60 aob turn at 2g stall speed will be about 80kts

He doesn't really need to know that the critical angle, there are no visual cues and stalls under g will be sharper so less warning from the airframe.
In this instance best to know not get to close to 80kt, unless he wants to do max rate/min radius turn and hold it on the buffet.

sure shaggy but in GA weight variation is generally so small it makes bugger all difference, so as far as I can see speed is a useful reference point as long as you accept its not definitive.

[Crash one]

I wondered how long it would take before the mere mention of the word stall & speed on the same day would trigger the time honoured response of screaming ANGLE OF ATTACK.
Even in spite of "straight & level" being added.
Why for Christs sake can't we agree that to discuss stalling first of all WE KNOW THERE iS NO SUCH THING AS STALL BLOODY SPEED, ONLY ANGLE OF ATTACK.
:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Aerials]

Yes, angle of attack is the definitive way to determine the point at which a wing's stalls. Fine, I have no dispute with that. So, with no AofA indicator in my li'l 3-axes (plural of axis for those about to get into a spelling and grammar drift) microlight, how do those pundits of the AofA tell me when I am getting close to the stall? I'll tell you - it's called an ASI and it works extremely well!

[Crash one]

Threads might run a bit longer on subject if they weren't diverted by having to explain every word as if we are all dumb assed & stupid. I would love a pound for every time we get boringly reminded of the bleeding obvious.
Just for the record by the way. When I "waggled" the wings at a bank angle of 45deg, I did, an instant before, push the nose down a bit just to make sure I had enough SPEED to avoid the stall. Whilst I was doing all this I was aware that my altitude was at least 800 ft above the ground, as I had previously noted that my house sits on ground at an elevation is 350 ft. I was also aware of my fuel state.
Just in case someone would like to enquire, anything else, please ask!

[Kennyc]

Wow, I cant believe this thread is still going, thanks to you all for your replies. I'm glad foxmouth elaborated on the spinning part of the post.
I am interested in this part of the post:-

Quote:
I am still terrified of spinning the aeroplane as I genuinely thought of giving up after ex11...I didn't enjoy that one!
I would like to know what aircraft you did your spinning in and how you did it - many people who have this reaction I find have done spinning in aircraft that are not really suitable such as C152 or Pa28 or an instructor who uses the technique that results from learning on these aircraft, by this I mean that they pull hard into the entry then have a rushed patter before the aircraft recovers by itself - do spinning on a proper spinning aircraft with a good instructor and it is a far more relaxed affair and few people come away terrified.This was done in a C152 and like you said it was a hard pull back then it quite dramatically fell to the left and all I could see was the ground going round in circles. I don't know if it was a spin or a spiral dive but my instructor applied right rudder, yoke forward then power when it levelled off. It felt like the worst rollercoaster you've ever been on.

When Gertrude mentioned the base to final bit -
Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover?I started searching around and couldn't believe how big a deal this is for, I assume, newish pilots and how easily it can be done. In fact any turn for that matter not just base to final.
I think if I'd have read all this before I flew solo I wouldn't have done it. My instructor obviously mentioned it along the way but probably not in a scare story sort of way so I must have put it to the back of my mind in the spur of the moment, but I think if I overshot the turn to final I would have done exactly the things you're not supposed to do; steeper bank, rudder and pitch up. I couldn't get to sleep last night for thinking about this because I could easily not be here now. I hope I'm just overthinking it and don't lose confidence but I had turns 'ticked off' but they are now very much unticked off!

I don't think I need to worry about it clicking any time soon, stalling in a turn is now my number one fear and it'll always be there in the back of my mind at every turn. I am glad it has been discussed here so thanks to everyone for opening my eyes to the danger. Guess who's dreading their next turn now? And every one after that!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Oh dear....

how do those pundits of the AofA tell me when I am getting close to the stall? I'll tell you - it's called an ASI and it works extremely well!

Good luck with that. I've stalled a Yak 52 at 160 kts IAS, and flown many aeroplanes at an IAS off the bottom of the clock, with no stall. So have millions of other pilots.

WE KNOW THERE iS NO SUCH THING AS STALL BLOODY SPEED, ONLY ANGLE OF ATTACK.

SO WHY PERSIST IN USING THE WRONG BLEEDIN NOMENCLATURE ?

but in GA weight variation is generally so small it makes bugger all difference

Two words; wing loading. Can make a hell of a difference.

Bottom line is it doesn't matter a hoot what you call it, but it matters a hell of a lot that you understand what's going on. It seems from some posts on here and historically on aviation forums when the shouting of "PEDANT!" and other derision such as "pundits of AoA" greets a statement of fact, that quite few do not really know what's going on, and worse, they think it just doesn't matter - the ASI will do it OK for them!

Well, I direct you back to pilots who will instinctively react correctly to an aeroplane in a base-to-final turn, perhaps over-ruddered, about to depart due excessive AoA, and those react not at all, or incorrectly, and who will die. Do the instinctive ones have a model in their heads of stall speed, or of AoA?

[9 lives]

there are no visual cues and stalls under g will be sharper so less warning from the airframe.

Exactly! There are ONLY tactile clues, what the airframe is telling you by the way it, and the controls feel. It is a failing, if a pilot is depending only on the indicated airspeed for stall awareness. Firstly because an error or failing of the airspeed indicator will result in the pilot being clueless. Worse, if the pilot is so single minded about a speed being the primary factor in a stall, they will wrongly think that increasing speed will prevent or recover a stall.

Increasing speed might prevent a stall, but it takes time, and is uncertain. Reducing AoA is an instant effect based upon pilot action (instinctive, I hope). I can stall and unstall an aircraft without changing the airspeed at all. I can fly most airplanes in steady flight slower than their published airspeed. Also recall that when the speed at which a stall can be expected is determined, it is expressed as CAS rather than the indicated IAS. Are pilots who are approaching the stall pulling out the position error correction table from section 5 of the Flight Manual to determine the correction for the stall "speed" as they approach a stall?

So, based upon the foregoing series of posts, I now think it important to define a precise and effective understanding of all things stall and AoA as a "click" point for a new pilot. You have not clicked, until you are very conversant with these factors, and your instinctive reaction to approach to unintended stall is to instantly reduce AoA and prevent yaw.

[thing]

You have not clicked, until you are very conversant with these factors, and your instinctive reaction to approach to unintended stall is to instantly reduce AoA and prevent yaw.

I always assumed that was what every qualified pilot did anyway? :confused:

[Armchairflyer]

I don't think I need to worry about it clicking any time soon, stalling in a turn is now my number one fear and it'll always be there in the back of my mind at every turn. I am glad it has been discussed here so thanks to everyone for opening my eyes to the danger. Guess who's dreading their next turn now? And every one after that!Being aware of the risk is great and potentially live-saving, being afraid is IMHO unnecessary. Unless you are rough and frantic on the controls (which is bad flying anyway), there is IMO virtually no risk that you will make a garden variety PPL plane suddenly drop into a deadly spin in a turn. Get your instructor to practice approaching this kind of situation at a safe altitude, you will probably see that flying the plane in such a way just feels wrong and awkward, well before there is a real risk of a stall with a wing drop, even if the stall warning were inoperative *wink wink nudge nudge*.

FWIW, I remember an occasion where I got a bit too slow on turning for base and finals (at our aerodrome, this is just one continuous turn, as there is no rectangular pattern). Even before the stall warning kicked in (it never did) the soft und mushy feeling of the controls was enough to tell me that something was amiss. Stick slightly forward, a trifle of power to check the rate of descent, and all was fine again. Just never yank the stick/yoke back in panic when you feel uneasy in a turn at low airspeed, and you should be OK.

Edit: I suppose someone already recommended you go and get (and read) a copy of "Stick and Rudder" by Wolfgang Langewiesche?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I always assumed that was what every qualified pilot did anyway?

If that were true this thread would have petered out long ago. And there'd be fewer pilots pushing up daisies, too.

[thing]

Can't argue with that. Sad though that so many pilots have crashed. Do you think the training is wrong?

[mad_jock]

No training is correct its just most don't practise regularly. And thier currency is low.

The reactions don't get instinctive until its been repeated at regular intervals for a while. Which is why instructors click quicker. You can be doing stalling 3-4's a week same with the other exercises. And when you teach it makes you think about your actions which the renforces them.

If ppls would go once a month for an hour doing the exercises for the first year with or without an instructor it makes a huge difference to there reactions under stress.

How about a show of hands when was the last time you did a stall or pfl or steep turn?

I was last month in the sim for stalling and steep turns. Did them single engine in a twin to boot which makes matters a bit more interesting.

[9 lives]

Stall awareness and "clicking"

I always assumed that was what every qualified pilot did anyway?

To quote Wikipedia:

The accident was investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transportation_Safety_Board) (NTSB), with a final report issued on February 2, 2010. The NTSB determined that the accident was caused by the pilots' inability to respond properly to the stall warnings.

Too many times, I have been right seat to a "qualified" pilot who did recognize that they were approaching a stall, either imminently, or the extension of the necessary flight path (too low and slow on final, for example).

Do you think the training is wrong?

I certainly think that some training is very inadequate in this regard.

stalling in a turn is now my number one fear and it'll always be there in the back of my mind at every turn

A new pilot has apparently learned to be scared of stalling in a turn, and thus, by extension, turns themselves. That is a training failure.

Instead the training should be teaching increasing alertness, progressing to alarm when AoA is increasing, and speed or inertia are decreasing at the same time. The ONLY way to meaningfully teach this is to demonstrate then mentor it during training, while preventing it from being perceived as a meaningless head spinning roller coaster. In that case, the student get no value in training, just a scare.

Instructors: Your training stalls and spins, and approach to these, should allow as much time as possible to elapse start to recovery, with meaningful patter appropriately throughout. The blindingly fast "Watch this..." and flish flash it's all done, leaves students unaware and afraid, rather than working toward getting. Let them see what happens, so they learn, and one day click....

[mad_jock]

Blanking the ASI helps as it gets the student focused on attitude instead of airspeed

[Crash one]

OK. Let us assume that numerous pilots rely on the ASI to keep them alive. Fine. But and it is a big but. The ASI is "in most GA light aircraft" the only tool in the box other than the pilots own knowledge/experience/feel. When we discuss stalling at fr instance in this case, different angles of bank at the same weight & balance configuration, it is pointless stating that at straight and level the aircraft will stall at 17.5 deg, however at 45 deg of bank it will stall at 17.5 deg, on the other hand if the bank angle is increased to 75 deg then it will stall at 17.5 deg.
To attempt to do the calculation as the aircraft is actually stalling, working out the effect of all the variables to arrive at what? A SPEED. Absolutely impossible, unless I have seriously misjudged the superhuman Spock like mathematical genius of the average competent pilot.
So I think to be sensible can we just agree, as I always have agreed, that the ASI is no more than a guide to be used with reference to all the other variables, visual cues, airframe feel etc?
I too flew gliders, I also stalled a K13 at 80 knots, my Emeraude stalls at (God help me) 40 knots straight & level clean, though I've managed to fly it at 35. I don't profess to be an expert, all I'm trying to do is use what we all have, an ASI.
Yes I agree it is all angle of attack, I have known this fact for a long long time, please, please, for the love of God please do not keep reminding me, I KNOW.

I also agree with the training thing as well. The instructor who has barely spun the thing himself wants to get it over with as quick as possible, the current system of only doing the "incipient" bit, recover from the stall at the first bleep of the warner. I went to do stalls once (ex 10a/b?). Arrived at the area, stall warner not working, exercise cancelled, full stop!
The K13 didn't have a stall warner, nor did the K6E, nor does the Emeraude. Unless you include the stick shaker, highly sophisticated piece of 1959 technology.
Sad thing to be afraid of the stall, far far better to understand it properly.
Go to a gliding club & learn to actually fly.

[thing]

Go to a gliding club & learn to actually fly.

I may have mentioned it once or twenty times before...that I think all powered pilots should solo on a glider first. Things like stalls, spins are all so obvious in a glider. You can turn until you start to nibble and just relax the back pressure, it's not even a movement as such to get the wing working again then squeeze to the nibble and release, you can do that all day long and you can hear the wing struggling. You can throw it into a spin one way then the other and feel everything that is going on without the racket and vibration of the engine up front.

I suppose folk will still fly like they drive their cars though.

[Crash one]

Agree with that.
Doing a "Mutual" once with a syndicate partner, she asked, do you normally fly at 2 knot above the stall? You do if you want to stay in the lift!
And yes it's a reflex action at the first little shake. It's also definitely transferable to power with all the noise and vibration of that instant lift device up front.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The ASI is "in most GA light aircraft" the only tool in the box other than the pilots own knowledge/experience/feel. When we discuss stalling at fr instance in this case, different angles of bank at the same weight & balance configuration, it is pointless stating that at straight and level the aircraft will stall at 17.5 deg, however at 45 deg of bank it will stall at 17.5 deg, on the other hand if the bank angle is increased to 75 deg then it will stall at 17.5 deg.
To attempt to do the calculation as the aircraft is actually stalling, working out the effect of all the variables to arrive at what? A SPEED.

Oh dear again....

This is precisely the sort of arse-backwards thinking about stalling that I'm banging on about.

YOU DO NOT DO A CALCULATION! You have an awareness of what the aeroplane is doing regarding the AoA of the wing, and you fly the wing using attitude, and if neccessary if you push it to the limit, subtle pre-departure clues, which trigger subconscious reactions to reduce AoA (and remove any yaw).

YOU DO NOT ARRIVE AT A SPEED!
The ASI is NOT a reliable anti-stall device as should be plain by now to anyone who has read the posts on here.

However, when an instuctor is teaching a student he will of neccesity use the term 'stall speed' and teach the student not to fly the approach below a certain speed as 'there be dragons'! He does this because there's no way an ab initio student will have the experience to avoid high AoA, and certainly won't have in his toolbox the recognition of pre-departure clues, and the auto-reactions to prevent such departure. So he is taught by rote; by numbers. This is (I think) unavoidable.

However, when we 'grow up' as pilots we should ditch that, as well as ditching stuff like flying circuits the way a PPL is taught ("at this point on base reduce power to x, extend X flap, trim for X speed etc") and just make the aeroplane do what we want it to. Without even thinking about it. It becomes an extension of the pilot's body.

That is, I think, what is meant in this thread by 'Click'. Once it has 'Clicked' with a pilot, he chucks out the baby stuff he was of necessity fed at PPL, and flies like an aviator!

Oh, and :

Go to a gliding club & learn to actually fly.

I started my flying as a glider pilot. I do remember one gristled old instructor, frustrated at trying to teach basic flying techniques in the limited time between cable launch and landing (in a Ka4) saying "these people should get a PPL so they'll know how to fly before they take up gliding!".

[darkroomsource]

I strongly believe that if you use the ASI to identify the stall, you will miss the stall warnings.

Yes, under a majority of conditions the ASI will indicate approximately when the stall will happen, but it's like relying on the Tachometer (fixed pitch) to tell you if you're climbing. The tach will "slow" slightly when climbing and increase slightly when descending under the majority of conditions.

To understand the stall, you have to fly at the stall "speed" (angle of attack, but for that for that aircraft, with that weight loading, temperature, altitude, tach speed, etc, it will equate to a certain speed) aircraft condition for a while until you get used to the feel of it (in that aircraft, with that weight loading, temperature, altitude, tach speed, etc). Do some turns, find out how it affects the stall. This was a big part of my training as far as I can recall (it was 20 years ago), and it's been a part of every aircraft checkout I've ever done. Even when training on a twin, it seems like most of the training was single engine close to the stall speed.

Gliding would be a great way to experience it (I never have, but would like to some day), but it would be limited to the specific aircraft you're in.

If you're using the ASI, or are not comfortable with stalls, or not comfortable with spins, tell an instructor who is comfortable with spins, and go do some "ultra-slow" flight, stalls and spins. (OK, in todays aircraft you might only get to do spin entry) You'll be amazed at how much more confident and comfortable you are flying the plane.

[piperboy84]

What is the LRI (http://www.liftreserve.com/STORY.htm)

Problem solved !!

[Aerials]

SSD. Your post 62. Please accept my apology for seeming to deride yours and others valuable contributions here and elsewhere on the subject of AofA. That was not my intention, very far from it in fact. From a dictionary, Pundit. Noun. A person who knows a lot about a particular subject and is therefore often asked to give an opinion about it. It follows therefore that I respect your opinion and those of others and had said that I agreed with it.

Crash One explains my predicament precisely! I can only go with what I have fitted (ASI), using it as "a guide to be used with reference to all the other variables, visual cues, airframe feel etc".

My manoeuvres are very limited by the class of aircraft and the various important speeds are tabulated in the POH. My max AoB is only 60 degrees and I know from basic training that I need to keep an eye on the ASI and mind on 1.4 Vs when turning steeply. Awareness of these (hopefully), will keep me safely in the envelope. For my sort of flying, it's all I can do!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Ariels, the last thing I want to do is pull anyone away from what keeps them safe in the air. Robust discussion about 'clicking' such as we enjoy in this thread simply presents the experiences of pilots here. And of course, I don't know your aircraft, in which it may not be practical to experience frequent excursions to the wrong side of the drag curve, and the wrong side of the critical angle of attack.

But hopefully you will have picked up that the ASI is not always a 'get out of jail free' card where stalling is concerned.

BTW the best way, in my experience, to appreciate the lack of a connection between the ASI and AoA, and to teach a pilot to fly by attitude and 'feel' (especially regarding flow breakaway in the stall), is to regularly participate in aeros. Not everyone's cup of milk I know, and of course you need to be in a certified aerobatic aeroplane (please don't ever try to aerobat a non-aerobatic type - one of my PPL instructors killed himself and another guy doing that just after I'd qualified back in the late 70s).

[Flyingmac]

Since the AOA is constant in the vertical in the first part of this clip, at what point can the wing be considered to be stalled? With reference to the ASI?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQpnzMJRtCU

[Crash one]

SSD.
It seems that you are obsessed with the idea that anyone mentioning the phrase "stall speed" obviously has no idea of the concept of the subject.
Oh dear indeed, I am becoming increasingly as frustrated as Aerials and others.
Please tell me what words you want written down & in what order to convince you that some of us here, myself included do actually understand.
To keep banging on about angle of attack as if we don't get it is not getting us anywhere. We do "get it".
The problem is convincing you that we get it.
You can't spin, stall, and generally chuck a glider about with the entire panel covered with a sheet of paper as we used to do years ago without knowing that the ASI is not required. That you "feel" the stall. How else can I put it?
Then when someone in all innocence asks, what speed does it stall at? All hell breaks loose, the ****e hits the fan, and instructors go blue in the face with utter joy, "We got another one here boys".
OK. No calculations, No Speed, Just Angle.

[9 lives]

To keep banging on about angle of attack as if we don't get it is not getting us anywhere. We do "get it".
The problem is convincing you that we get it.

I think some get it, I have doubts about others. However, each poster here is accountable to themselves, and maybe an instructor - not SSD, Crash, nor any other poster here.

As stated, AoA awareness will be one of those "click" moments, and the new pilot probably won't realize that click has happened until they look back upon their own improved skills, and understand that is has.

SSD mentions aerobatics as a great way to refine the understanding of AoA, G and speed as it relates to stalling. I do agree, but as he says, aircraft availability makes that impractical as a learning tool for the masses - we just don't have enough aerobatic planes nor instructors to go around.

So we're going to have to train and mentor the new pilots with the resources available. The challenge is though that this is one of those skills which has a large element of learning which can be done only hands on, and with lots of practice. I doubt that most of the PPL's out there want to spend their hours or two of rental a month practicing stalls and slow flight, when they could take their mates or significant others for a flight somewhere.

Stall awareness and airplane handling is a perishable skill. Once a pilot has done a few hundred stalls in different types, that skill will have a longer shelf life, but still not indefinite. A month ago I did ten hours training with a 300 pilot, which included 20 approach and landings where precise stall awareness was a primary element. The aircraft was fitted with an Alpha Systems AoA indicator, and we focused a lot on using it. It worked very well. But it too was only a part of a good approach, and even while flying with it, I still had to correct a few approaches.

This goes to show the importance of a "whole knowledge" of the subject, not just picking points and declaring "I get it". Anyone here being offended because someone else does not seem to get it is pointless, but each pilot reading need to know that their own life may depend upon their getting it!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Since the AOA is constant in the vertical in the first part of this clip, at what point can the wing be considered to be stalled? With reference to the ASI?

A stall turn is mis-named of course; there should be no stall. I'm pretty sure that other than to check entry speeds, the pilot in that clip would not be looking at the ASI; certainly not during stall turn itself, or during the lomcevak!

[9 lives]

A stall turn is mis-named of course; there should be no stall.

Well I think that the propeller blades stall.... ;)

[Big Pistons Forever]

Blanking the ASI helps as it gets the student focused on attitude instead of airspeed

Near the end of the PPL I get the student to fly a takeoff, circuit and landing with the ASI covered. It is never a big deal as I have emphasized setting the attitude by observing the natural horizon through the windshield, and the Attitude + Power = Performance relationships; from the very first lesson. I highly recommend that students ask there instructor to allow them to do the same exercise on one of the late PPL dual exercises.

Re stall/spin: IMO the most important "click" is recognizing the fact the airplane is about to enter slow flight by tactile and visual clues and automatically and without thinking, correct the situation.

To get into an inadvertent spin you have to be stupid times 3

Stupid times 1 = Allowing the aircraft to get into inadvertent slow flight and not recovering into the normal flight regime

Stupid times 2 = Allowing the airspeed to continue to decay enough to allow the aircraft to stall

Stupid times 3 = After the aircraft has stalled allowing the aircraft to yaw

The bottom line is simple, pay attention to what the airplane is doing and if it is not doing what you want then fix it. Fly the airplane don't let it fly you

Disclaimer

My comments are intended for pilots flying one of the common Cessna/Piper trainers like the OP and I suspect the vast majority of the people reading this thread. If you are flying a high performance and/or unusual handling aircraft then additional precautions are required.

[Camargue]

shaggy

you mention stalling at yak 52 at 160kts - what g??

I ask as I pull 8g in an extra at 130kts for a flick roll
a 52 aint stressed for 8g

just curious like.

[On Track]

Exactly what Big Pistons Forever says!

[Weeeee]

I have to say I never got comfortable with stall and spin and related departures until I'd done a few hours in a decent aerobatic aircraft.

And my first spin was in a traumahawk during PPL, albeit one with the LE wedges. Really seemed to flick in and rather put me off. After that, driving around in PA28 etc I always felt like I was balancing in a narrow region of control that could easily get away from me.

I think that's the problem, you're taught to fly by numbers, you don't get enough feel, and you certainly don't spend enough time in the marginal area to know what that feels like, just a few nervous, stressed stalls and hurried recovery.

And that's why everyone uses stall speed of course, because you are flying in a limited number of regimes and there is a reasonably accurate stall speed for them. But if you start to do anything dynamic rather than steady state, a particular speed isn't sufficient approximation any more. I honestly think all GA aircraft should have AoA indicators - one for each wing if you want to enthusiastically waggle them while pulling G :hmm:

I would encourage everyone to get a few hours aerobatics experience in a decent aircraft specifically to get to understand this, then you do start to automatically unload when things start to feel odd and only then have to think about what's going on.

Enlightening to be floating over the top of a loop at well below "stall speed", or feeling buffet when pulling too hard in the last quarter, to be able to push and pull in and out of buffet when slow in an extended vertical.

This is how I started to get a real feel for how the aircraft flys.

Caveat that of course one can get complacent about how the usual aircraft / loading feels and get badly bitten in a different type / loading.

[mary meagher]

kennyc, buy yourself some time in a basic aircraft complete with a relaxed and experienced instructor, and request at least one solid hour of just MESSING AROUND at altitude.
If the instruments are covered, even better. Get used to stalling in turns, lots of turns, nose high, steep turns, thermal turns. Play with the aircraft, just have fun for an hour, don't try to learn anything. Best way to get a feel for it.

[Crash one]

A few days ago whilst discussing the merits and otherwise of constant speed props, I've never flown one by the way. An accident was discussed whereby the prop was capable of being reversed. The aircraft was on final at a height in excess of 50 ft when the pilot selected reverse pitch. Now, I don't know if this is true, or whether there is some safety feature to prevent this or not. I don't think the pilot can tell us either. So perhaps the more experienced can comment on whether this is possible. I would think the consequences wouldn't need to be discussed much.

[Weeeee]

Never heard of it on small stuff but I believe you can on turbo props.

Even so, close the throttle in fine pitch and you've got quite an air brake.

[9 lives]

the prop was capable of being reversed

A bit of thread drift, but okay....

Have a look at my post #963 here: http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/111332-personal-flying-videos-49.html

I did all of the developmental testing on this aircraft, and the MT prop is magnificent!

This is the only piston powered Cessna ever with a reversing prop. It is incapable of entering reverse in flight. My 13 page report describes this in great detail.

I have flown Twin Otters just nudging into reverse in flight, accompanied by a DHC test pilot and gosh, do they go down fast doing this!

I flew testing in a Siai Marchetti 1019, which has a 400 HP turboprop engine and reversing propeller. There is a locking control to prevent unintended entry into reverse, But, I managed to once accidentally bypass it in the flare while moving an adjacent control, and the plane about stopped in the air, and dropped the last couple of feet. Not good at all! Nothing hurt, but it could have been much worse.

Lake Amphibians are commonly fitted with MT reversing propellers, which are wonderful for precise water maneuvering.

[mad_jock]

There is usually a gate to prevent you going into beta in the air. You lift a lever on the power levers and then you can move them further back on the ground

[Crash one]

I think it was a Sport Cruiser, but I would think it shouldn't be possible.
Excuse the thread drift, but it would be a novel way of stalling.

[mad_jock]

Our props if you manage to get them into beta in the air they won't come out.

Its because the return spring isn't strong enough.

I think their have been 2 incidents which are believed to be because of beta selection nobody survived.


There have been other incidents one they think went into beta at around 2m off the ground and resulted in a 5.6g landing.

[9 lives]

Our props if you manage to get them into beta in the air they won't come out

Hmm, interesting. What aircraft type please MJ?

Yes, all reversing systems I have flown have some kind of interlock to prevent, or at least reduce the likelihood of entering reverse blade angle in flight. Some are more effective than others.

I can say from co pilot experience that a DHC test pilot can get a Twin Otter from 6000 AGL to down and clear, in less than 2 minutes, with the help of reverse - that was a ride!

As a real drift, the DC-8-63 allowed approach with the inner two engines operating in reverse thrust. It came down quickly doing that!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

We'll be on to Trident Twos soon, with reverse on 1&3 and main gear only down doing the 'Westcott Snatch' from FL100 to touch down in a few miles. :ok:

[mad_jock]

http://www.mccauley.textron.com/von_klip_tip_cs_propeller.pdf

And Dowerty on TP331 engines.

[Kennyc]

kennyc, buy yourself some time in a basic aircraft complete with a relaxed and experienced instructor, and request at least one solid hour of just MESSING AROUND at altitude.
If the instruments are covered, even better. Get used to stalling in turns, lots of turns, nose high, steep turns, thermal turns. Play with the aircraft, just have fun for an hour, don't try to learn anything. Best way to get a feel for it.
Thank you Mary, that sounds like an excellent idea.