Picking up a stalled wing with full rudder no aileron.
Thread Starter
Picking up a stalled wing with full rudder no aileron.
Chatting to a bunch of PPL's at an aero club bar the other day when the subject came around to stall recovery technique taught by their various instructors.
Each one said their instructor had told them to never use ailerons to level the wings if one wing happened to drop at the point of stall but instead to apply full rudder to cause the dropped wing to skid in the direction of rudder and so pick up lift which automatically levelled the wings without using aileron.
Where does this strange theory come from? An old war story perhaps? I would have thought that full rudder to "pick up" a dropped wing at the stall would have the potential to lead into an incipient spin in the direction of full rudder?
Each one said their instructor had told them to never use ailerons to level the wings if one wing happened to drop at the point of stall but instead to apply full rudder to cause the dropped wing to skid in the direction of rudder and so pick up lift which automatically levelled the wings without using aileron.
Where does this strange theory come from? An old war story perhaps? I would have thought that full rudder to "pick up" a dropped wing at the stall would have the potential to lead into an incipient spin in the direction of full rudder?
This dates back to the 60s/70 where some FIC instructors may have learned on the Harvard. At a FIE Seminar some years ago, it was stated that top rudder was used to minimize height loss in the recovery on that aircraft. The CAA has been trying to stamp this out for years but old habits die hard.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Teaching in the UK, my "local" examiner has said he would fail people, if during their approach into, and recovery from a clean stall, they use any aileron without first reducing AoA... I'm slightly at loggerheads, as I am more than happy with people using co-ordinated aileron/rudder to keep the wings level (or at any other bank angle they require them), then when they want to recover from the stalled condition, reducing AoA. Surely that's why we have washout on our wings, so the root stalls first due to it's higher incidence, and ailerons continue to work happily - I've also never been able to stall the wing I'm trying to lift first (WHILE STAYING CO-ORDINATED), yet the books tell me this should/could happen as I'm increasing it's AoA further, and it will bite me and flick the wrong way. This in a variety of types through PA18, 2T-1A-2, T67M, PA28 and Cessna 150/152... Perhaps I'm missing something?!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The examination requirement is that aileron should not be used to lift/arrest a dropped wing during a stall. It is acceptable to use rudder to arrest a dropping wing but not to lift it. The whole rationale is that the prime action should be reduction of AOA; remember we're trying to teach an automatic response to an unplanned manoeuvre in a wide variety of aircraft types. Indeed, in theory the same technique could be used on anything from a Cessna to a Boeing.
The automatic response for ab initio stall recovery instruction has to be stick forward. Reducing AOA is the immediate priority, as the student is doing that rudder can be used to stop any developing yaw, full power is then applied and with the airspeed increasing co-ordinated aileron and rudder used to level the aircraft and then the aircraft is pitched up.
The big thing that has changed is emphasis on minimum loss of altitude has been dropped. This IMO is sensible move as getting the airplane flying again has to be the first priority and trying to hold the nose up and power your way out of a stall is a recipe for disaster. Even simple airplanes will bite if abused this way
I once had a flight where the student (not mine) who was proud of how little altitude he could lose in the 150 after the stall. He made an aggressive pitch up to a power on stall and then when it stalled held the nose up and applied full power. The aircraft did a very nice half snap and flipped inverted at which point he screamed "you have control"
The big thing that has changed is emphasis on minimum loss of altitude has been dropped. This IMO is sensible move as getting the airplane flying again has to be the first priority and trying to hold the nose up and power your way out of a stall is a recipe for disaster. Even simple airplanes will bite if abused this way
I once had a flight where the student (not mine) who was proud of how little altitude he could lose in the 150 after the stall. He made an aggressive pitch up to a power on stall and then when it stalled held the nose up and applied full power. The aircraft did a very nice half snap and flipped inverted at which point he screamed "you have control"
Rudder should only used to maintain balance during stall recovery....
This 'picking up a wing with rudder' nonsense should have been binned at least 40 years ago....
This 'picking up a wing with rudder' nonsense should have been binned at least 40 years ago....
Hear hear Beagle. Neither roll nor yaw are inherently dangerous - sideslip is dangerous at high AoA, that's all.
Picking up a wing at-all is nonsense INITIALLY. Once an aeroplane is unstalled and under control, it's then the time to worry about any bank angle - not before.
G
Picking up a wing at-all is nonsense INITIALLY. Once an aeroplane is unstalled and under control, it's then the time to worry about any bank angle - not before.
G
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Teaching in the UK, my "local" examiner has said he would fail people, if during their approach into, and recovery from a clean stall, they use any aileron without first reducing AoA
It seems unstoppable despite the correct method being published in the CASA Flight Instructor Training Manual.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Agion Oros
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This term 'using rudder to pick up a wing' has been going on for years it really iritating just as to 'kicking the rudder'. It really down to poor instructional use of language and a lack of understanding of the misuse of rudder and the consequences.
I have alway used 'smothly apply rudder to prevent further wingdrop' as part of the stall recovery sequence in relation to the AoA, it's alway better to follow the POH as to the sequence, likewise follow POH on the spin revovery sequence technique to the book.
I have alway used 'smothly apply rudder to prevent further wingdrop' as part of the stall recovery sequence in relation to the AoA, it's alway better to follow the POH as to the sequence, likewise follow POH on the spin revovery sequence technique to the book.
Applying rudder to keep the aircraft balanced is not quite the same as applying rudder to reduce further wing drop.
The latter, I would argue, is another made-up variation on picking up the wing, and also wrong.
G
The latter, I would argue, is another made-up variation on picking up the wing, and also wrong.
G
Rudders primary effect is yaw control. The secondary effect of yaw is roll. Trying to use this effect to "pick up the wing" is IMHO just silly, not the least because you would have to remained stalled for this effect to kick in and I can think of no situation where you would not want to recover immediately in the event of an unintentional stall.
Bottom line wheel forward to reduce AOA ( NOTE: we are taking Ab inito training here, not upsets in swept wing fighters )
When you are doing this use the rudder as appropriate to stop any yaw and when the aircraft is flying again use co-ordinated ailerons and rudder to level the wings.
BTW I do the falling leaf exercise with every PPL student. Do a power off stall and when the aircraft stalls keep full back stick on. The aircraft will try to yaw and roll into the spin entry but prompt use of the rudder to counter the yaw will stop the aircraft from departing controlled flight. It is IMO an excellent demonstration of the ability for you to use all the available controls to make the aircraft do what you want.
Bottom line wheel forward to reduce AOA ( NOTE: we are taking Ab inito training here, not upsets in swept wing fighters
) When you are doing this use the rudder as appropriate to stop any yaw and when the aircraft is flying again use co-ordinated ailerons and rudder to level the wings.
BTW I do the falling leaf exercise with every PPL student. Do a power off stall and when the aircraft stalls keep full back stick on. The aircraft will try to yaw and roll into the spin entry but prompt use of the rudder to counter the yaw will stop the aircraft from departing controlled flight. It is IMO an excellent demonstration of the ability for you to use all the available controls to make the aircraft do what you want.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any chance you could let us know what the CASA method is please?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Weston Super Mare/UAE
Age: 60
Posts: 406
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The use of rudder was never intended to 'pick up a wing' at the stall....rather, it was meant to prevent further yaw. A stall condition plus yaw was a potential recipe for a spin entry. Thus stall recovery, as taught in the Royal Air Force, was stick forward to unstall the wings whilst simultaneously increasing power and rudder used, if neccessary, to prevent further yaw. That is all. No mention whatsoever, of picking a wing up.
Use of aileron to pick the wing up runs the risk of further stalling that portion of the wing around the aileron and was verboten!!
Use of aileron to pick the wing up runs the risk of further stalling that portion of the wing around the aileron and was verboten!!
At the stall we have a high AoA - this creates a risk of secondary loss of control, and also high drag - which bleeds energy off and causes a high rate of descent.
We wish to do two things initially - ensure that there is no secondary loss of control (most important) and reduce height loss (a bit less important).
So we move the stick forward and simultaneously (UK, EASAland, Australia) or just after (FAAland) apply full power. The stick reduces AoA, the power reduces height loss by putting more energy into the aeroplane.
Whilst the aeroplane is at high AoA, we want to avoid two things - (1) sideslip, (2) any further pitch up.
(2) Is ensured by not applying power before the pitch input, as in most aeroplanes there is a nose-up pitching moment with increased thrust. Yes, I know we hadn't mentioned that before, I'm just including it for completeness and before anybody starts talking about the equally henous practice of powering out of the stall.
(1) - sideslip, is avoided by using the rudder to keep the aeroplane in balance. Depending upon what you've got in the particular aeroplane - a yaw string (gliders mostly), beta gauge (a few hi-tech aeroplanes), slip ball (most aeroplanes) or sense through the seat of pants (anything) will all tell you whether the aeroplane is in balance. In very simple, but correct terms, an in-balance aeroplane has no sideslip.
However rapid the stall entry is, however much wing drop you have, whatever other motion is going on - if there's no sideslip, there should be no secondary loss of control (most likely an incipient spin).
The reason for not using aileron is exactly the same - any use of aileron will cause some sideslip. The design of the aeroplane will change the maginitude and sign of that, but is near certain not to eliminate it. So we keep the ailerons neutral.
If you do anything whatsoever with the rudder apart from keeping the aeroplane in balance, then there will probably be non-zero sideslip. If you do anything with the ailerons apart from keep them neutral, there'll be sideslip. With non-zero sideslip, there is a risk of 2LOC, and thus risk of a spin.
It doesn't matter whether you try to pick up a wing, prevent further wing drop, prevent further yaw - call it what you like; ANY use of rudder apart from to keep the aircraft in balance, is likely to result in non-zero sideslip, and thus a non-zero risk of a spin.
(Which is pretty much what BEagle said, just I used more words).
G
We wish to do two things initially - ensure that there is no secondary loss of control (most important) and reduce height loss (a bit less important).
So we move the stick forward and simultaneously (UK, EASAland, Australia) or just after (FAAland) apply full power. The stick reduces AoA, the power reduces height loss by putting more energy into the aeroplane.
Whilst the aeroplane is at high AoA, we want to avoid two things - (1) sideslip, (2) any further pitch up.
(2) Is ensured by not applying power before the pitch input, as in most aeroplanes there is a nose-up pitching moment with increased thrust. Yes, I know we hadn't mentioned that before, I'm just including it for completeness and before anybody starts talking about the equally henous practice of powering out of the stall.
(1) - sideslip, is avoided by using the rudder to keep the aeroplane in balance. Depending upon what you've got in the particular aeroplane - a yaw string (gliders mostly), beta gauge (a few hi-tech aeroplanes), slip ball (most aeroplanes) or sense through the seat of pants (anything) will all tell you whether the aeroplane is in balance. In very simple, but correct terms, an in-balance aeroplane has no sideslip.
However rapid the stall entry is, however much wing drop you have, whatever other motion is going on - if there's no sideslip, there should be no secondary loss of control (most likely an incipient spin).
The reason for not using aileron is exactly the same - any use of aileron will cause some sideslip. The design of the aeroplane will change the maginitude and sign of that, but is near certain not to eliminate it. So we keep the ailerons neutral.
If you do anything whatsoever with the rudder apart from keeping the aeroplane in balance, then there will probably be non-zero sideslip. If you do anything with the ailerons apart from keep them neutral, there'll be sideslip. With non-zero sideslip, there is a risk of 2LOC, and thus risk of a spin.
It doesn't matter whether you try to pick up a wing, prevent further wing drop, prevent further yaw - call it what you like; ANY use of rudder apart from to keep the aircraft in balance, is likely to result in non-zero sideslip, and thus a non-zero risk of a spin.
(Which is pretty much what BEagle said, just I used more words).
G
Very well explained Ghengis. That should be framed and displayed in every flying school briefing room.
I first met up with wing drops at the stall when learning to fly the RAAF Wirraway trainer. A whole bunch of trainee pilots straight from Tiger Moths were bussed in to Uranquinty NSW to commence basic flying training. As the base had just been re-opened after the war, aircraft and instructors were still arriving and setting up. Our bus stopped at the aerodrome perimeter to allow us trainees to watch our future steeds arriving en masse.
One Wirraway passed directly over the top of us and lo and behold the pilot (who was a Warrant Officer instructor) held off too high and floated over the grass field. It looked like a beaut three-pointer was about to be made when one wing dropped sharply and the wing tip bashed the ground.
We had seen our first dreaded wing drop of a Wirraway which was notorious for such a thing. Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words. Apart from the universal exclamation of '****" from we 30 trainees in the bus, there was a moments silence and we could see all the rumours of Wirraway wing drop tendency was true.
Yet the stall recovery technique as explained by Ghengis in his post was taught to us then and remains true to this day. Never did we hear the term "pick up the dropped wing with rudder." However our instructors did demonstrate that instinctive application of instant aileron to pick up a dropped wing at the point of stall, usually resulted in that wing dropping more sharply and into an incipient spin in the Wirraway.
A generalisation I know, but it was said by our instructors in those days that if you could fly a Wirraway safely you could fly anything.
There was a grain of truth in that claim since many of us went directly to Mustangs and even huge Lincoln bombers straight from Wirraways without bending anything. It was considered no big deal at the time.
I first met up with wing drops at the stall when learning to fly the RAAF Wirraway trainer. A whole bunch of trainee pilots straight from Tiger Moths were bussed in to Uranquinty NSW to commence basic flying training. As the base had just been re-opened after the war, aircraft and instructors were still arriving and setting up. Our bus stopped at the aerodrome perimeter to allow us trainees to watch our future steeds arriving en masse.
One Wirraway passed directly over the top of us and lo and behold the pilot (who was a Warrant Officer instructor) held off too high and floated over the grass field. It looked like a beaut three-pointer was about to be made when one wing dropped sharply and the wing tip bashed the ground.
We had seen our first dreaded wing drop of a Wirraway which was notorious for such a thing. Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words. Apart from the universal exclamation of '****" from we 30 trainees in the bus, there was a moments silence and we could see all the rumours of Wirraway wing drop tendency was true.
Yet the stall recovery technique as explained by Ghengis in his post was taught to us then and remains true to this day. Never did we hear the term "pick up the dropped wing with rudder." However our instructors did demonstrate that instinctive application of instant aileron to pick up a dropped wing at the point of stall, usually resulted in that wing dropping more sharply and into an incipient spin in the Wirraway.
A generalisation I know, but it was said by our instructors in those days that if you could fly a Wirraway safely you could fly anything.
There was a grain of truth in that claim since many of us went directly to Mustangs and even huge Lincoln bombers straight from Wirraways without bending anything. It was considered no big deal at the time.