Or they may recognise fact that is available in most flight training manuals

In that case, perhaps you would like to provide some textbook references to support your view?


MJ:ok:

Stop teaching people to prevent wing drop with the rudder. Stop teaching people to pick up a wing with the rudder. This is what pilots may do when a wing drops for real and they spin in and die.

Whilst it's all very well to demonstrate it as a technical exercise it is bloody dangerous to have it in the memory bank as the correct reaction to a wing drop. It doesn't matter if the wing drops. Stick forward to recover from the stalled condition, roll the wings level when you have sufficient airspeed, and then recover as necessary.

I have had an FO stamp on the rudder in a Global Express on approach at about 200 feet because they thought the wing was stalled. Please stop teaching this crap now!

Is this what happened to AA587??

yes.

shows how much it matters what you learn first when you learn to fly.

Primacy is a powerful thing...

GlenQuagmire you re right.
At the current state of training the unstalling of aircraft by forward stick is what will save the day should a wing drop.

Though picking up a wing with the rudder in the event of a stalled condition is the right thing to do, the knowledge and skills pilots and instructors posess (Unless they have undergone professional training in this respect) will prevent such thing from happening.

What makes the situation dangerous and prone to accident, is that the non trained pilot/instructor already unconfortable with slow speed handling let alone stalling will, when confronted to such situation react by INSTINCTIVELY correct a wing drop with OPPOSITE aileron, which aggravates the situation by adding drag to the falling wing, this regardless of what has been though on the ground.
Regardless of whether he has been brainstormed to correct by picking up the falling wing with rudder or by unstalling, without training he will 99% of the time apply opposite aileron

An exercise proving this is the "Oscillation Stall" e.g. keeping the a/c stalled at a safe altitude and develop the proper coordination with rudder to prevent tipping over inverted with the rudder while mushing. This exercise is part of the forthcoming EASA UPRT/LOC in flight exercises.

This cannot be learned on the ground, it must be practiced in flight with a competent well trained instructor in suitable a/c. Firsts attempts will show sloppiness, overreaction, freezing at the controls due to unccordination and often fear, how many seconds before the a/c ends up inverted ?

Fine tuning and proper coordination, timely instinctive anticipation will come if one is willing to carry on, the result will be mushing at 1'500 / 2'000 FT descent rate while able to hold the a/c with light lateral oscillations under control. Does this mean something to you ?

I cannot stress enough how proper spin/ stall training will fine tune every pilot skills, and this will show how he/she will handle slow flight and stall after that.

LOC/UPRT near the ground ARE deadly, but it is criminal to dismiss proper training on grounds that it will be of no use because of that. There is a recognition that it is needed for IMC, though still resisted for other scenarios.

It is the mental blockage, fear, the freeezing at the controls, the lack of coordination, distraction, the overall pilot incapacitation PRECEDING uprt/loc near the ground which is responsible for most of these accidents.

Markkal,

I must strongly disagree that 'picking up the wing with rudder' is a correct response during a stall. The rudder should be used to *prevent* yaw. Yawing while stalled is a precursor to spinning. Raising the wing with rudder is opposite of this (preventing yaw) - it causes a yaw in order to induce a roll.

Good thing you experts are all in agreement. Makes it easier for the inexperienced pilot or indeed instructor to work out...........or not!

The length of debate about a flight maneuver is always inversely proportional to the complexity of maneuver. Thus, if the flight maneuver is simple enough, debate approaches infinity.

Robert Livingston, 'Flying The Aeronca.'

Is he related to Jonathan Livingston Seagull? Now that is someone (some bird) with credibility regarding aeronautics! :)

Tango - I love your reason for edit.. Left myself open to attack!!

Gents, this is a useful learning forum. I'm really happy to learn and I'm very happy to share what I've learned.

There's a big difference between learning to spin and recover as an aerobatic exercise, and learning the best response to the onset of stall or a wing drop when it is inadvertent. In my opinion (nota bene) if you learn that reducing the angle of attack makes the wing fly and gives you manoeuvring margin you are more likely to survive an inadvertent flirt with the stall. Keeping the wings level doesn't matter, minimising height loss doesn't matter, but making sure that both wings are flying is vital. Having that reflex built into your skills may well save your life. What you do with the rudder is entirely secondary in that scenario. That's my opinion built around 25 years of flying.

It's a reflex that will work in a light aircraft, a glider, or an airliner. In a sim session a couple of years ago we did stall recoveries from high altitude (49,000 feet). It took three or four seconds of significant forward stick to get enough authority to roll the wings level and 15 seconds before recovery was possible. Abusing the rudder caused the aircraft to flick inverted. First demo was motion off because it is so dramatic.

Whether you fly for fun or are intending to fly for a living, learn safe habits early.

This about sums this subject up.

It does if you are below 200':}

You were no doubt trained by an instructor who had either been trained on Harvards, or his instructor had. A technique which was designed to minimise height loss on a specific aircraft has perpetuated for many years despite the attempts to stamp it out.

The issue was discussed at a CAA Examiners meet some years ago and an elderley Ex RAF QFI stated categorically that this is where it originated.

Foxmoth - I understand why you make that comment but the point is this. If a pilot is distracted such that they allow a stall to develop, or are maxed out to the extent that the aircraft has been allowed to stall, the chances of them suddenly acquiring skills and capacity to recognise that the aircraft is stalled and carry out a recovery utilising secondary effect of the rudder along with elevator and power is nil. They simply will not go from inaccurate flying to precise recovery.
So the vital, critical response should be the reflex. The vital action is reducing the AOA. If you are concerned about loss of control at 200 feet, it's extremely unlikely that the approach was stable earlier than that. So instil critical appraisal of the approach (maybe gates) and the ability to decide to go around.

Time for a new subject?

I fully agree with GlenQuagmire.

Can you help me understand what you mean B737?

I genuinely believe I can't.

But if I thought I could, I might start by saying that a distracted pilot doesn't 'allow' anything to happen...

...okay, so start by saying that and carry on. I'm not sure what your viewpoint is but I'm interested to find out what is Neanderthal about my posts. I'm very happy to learn .