Flight Safety Australia article - duff gen
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think if we are totally honest with ourselves its not stall recovery techniques that are getting people. At the GA level people are stalling, or even worse stalling and spinning, at levels that are far too low to recover. I guarantee if you stall on final at 50ft you're hitting the ground before you recover. Even at best in training most people take about 100ft to recover, and thats when you know you're going to stall and have the recovery primed and ready. As for the base to final turn stall/spin, well the only way to be safe from that one is by not entering it. Once its happened your gone.
As for airlines, I think the concerning thing is these pilots aren't recognising that they have stalled, for example the Air France crash and the Colgan Air crash. Pilots are flying aircraft that were certainly recoverable into the ground because they didn't realise they were stalled.
As for airlines, I think the concerning thing is these pilots aren't recognising that they have stalled, for example the Air France crash and the Colgan Air crash. Pilots are flying aircraft that were certainly recoverable into the ground because they didn't realise they were stalled.
However, how do you know how much of the wing is stalled, so assume the worst and avoid the use of aileron until unstalled.
It is a matter of feel. On the military jets of the 70/80s, the F4 Phantom and the Lightning any max rate turn required flying in the buffet. Too much and the drag increased too much and you stopped turning. Too little and the turn radius increased. It starts with light buffet and gradually gets heavier. Not much to do with the original question I admit but in the Phantom light buffet had to be pulled on the finals turn as the wing did not work too well at low speeds!
It is a matter of feel. On the military jets of the 70/80s, the F4 Phantom and the Lightning any max rate turn required flying in the buffet. Too much and the drag increased too much and you stopped turning. Too little and the turn radius increased. It starts with light buffet and gradually gets heavier. Not much to do with the original question I admit but in the Phantom light buffet had to be pulled on the finals turn as the wing did not work too well at low speeds!
Agreed but didnt you have an AOA in the F4 where the watchword, IIRC was “ unload to control. And roll control in the buffet was rudder, use of aileron inviting a flat, unrecoverable spin.
of course my memory may be failing me !
SWH, please reread my posts , STALL requires reducing a of a below the critical value , a low speed recovery needs just THRUST.
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Somewhere South
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that is correct. I did not fly the F4 but several of my close friends did. I was on the Lightning. I think that on the finals turn, the F4 flew in the light buffet and turned using mainly rudder! I have used air to air cannons against a target towed by a Canberra many times!
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fairness the F4 isn’t your textbook training aircraft, it’s more an example of what happens when you have 35000 pounds of thrust with something that kind of functions a little bit like a wing attached to it...
The advent of UPRT training is seeing that trained out of people at airline level now.
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: California
Age: 59
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would characterise your technique as a low speed recovery, not a stall recovery. Immediately adding thrust has not been part of stall recovery training for some time, it does not unstall a wing. The use of thrust when stalled can interfere with the pitch control and prevent recovery.
The only way to recover from a stall is to reduce the angle of attack. Specific guidance for each type in stall recovery is listed in the AFM.
The only way to recover from a stall is to reduce the angle of attack. Specific guidance for each type in stall recovery is listed in the AFM.
This is another demonstration of why ‘one size fits all’ guidance can be dangerous.
What is important is to regain safe maneuver speed as quickly as possible - especially if the aircraft is still in severe turbulence. Application of climb or maximum continuous thrust at the same time as the nose is lowered to un-stall the wings, helps to achieve a more rapid acceleration towards severe turbulence penetration speed.
Thread Starter
Recovery from the situation you describe would be done by descending down 2000 ft to the next level in order to gain better low speed, high speed, and thrust margins
Certainly in the B737 Classics at 37,000 ft you can count on deliberately losing at least 3500 feet during the recovery phase to reach a minimum safe airspeed of Vref 40 plus 100 knots as the criteria for levelling out. Add another 2000 ft to reach Severe Turbulence Penetration speed if still encountering severe turbulence.
Where do you go after the recovery in Judd’s example ? Back to the original level where performance was marginal or one level down ?
Hi Centaurus, greetings from the northern hemisphere!
I learned to fly in 1967 in a Fleet-80 Canuck. Stalls and full spins, not just incipient spins, were part of the private licence course. I remember when the early Cessna products came out, (152, etc.) and those aircraft were prohibited from spinning, and that ended the kind of training which I thought at the time was exceedingly valuable.
The "mythology", if I may, behind "not using aileron" vice using aileron to do so, has grown into something that was perhaps not intended when orginally stated in print and taught, at least here in Canada.
In demonstrating/teaching the stall, there wan't much said about the ailerons at the time. The emphasis was on lowering the nose, adding power and using opposite rudder to stop the spin. When the airplane was unstalled, the ailerons were used to level the wings.
From a Canadian Flying Training Manual by the Department of Transport - Civil Aviation Branch in Chapter VIII, On Stalling;
:
Obviously aircraft which are not of the type considered in the above document will possibly have slightly different recovery techniques.
PJ2
I learned to fly in 1967 in a Fleet-80 Canuck. Stalls and full spins, not just incipient spins, were part of the private licence course. I remember when the early Cessna products came out, (152, etc.) and those aircraft were prohibited from spinning, and that ended the kind of training which I thought at the time was exceedingly valuable.
The "mythology", if I may, behind "not using aileron" vice using aileron to do so, has grown into something that was perhaps not intended when orginally stated in print and taught, at least here in Canada.
In demonstrating/teaching the stall, there wan't much said about the ailerons at the time. The emphasis was on lowering the nose, adding power and using opposite rudder to stop the spin. When the airplane was unstalled, the ailerons were used to level the wings.
From a Canadian Flying Training Manual by the Department of Transport - Civil Aviation Branch in Chapter VIII, On Stalling;
On some types of aeroplanes, especially those with sharply tapered wings, one wing may go down at the same time as the nose, and it is also common on some types for the aeroplane to attempt to flick or roll when stalled with the engine on. If this happens, keep straight with rudder and unstall the aeroplane by moving the control column forward. An attempt to level the wings with the ailerons at the point of stall may be quite ineffective or may even have the opposite effect to that desired; if for instance, an aileron is lowered in an attempt to raise the wing that has gone down the effect may be to stall the wing more completely and cause a loss of lift and increase the drag on that wing. Once, however, the angle of attack is reduced to below the stallng angle the ailerons become again the obvious and natural method for raise the wing.
...etc.
...etc.
Obviously aircraft which are not of the type considered in the above document will possibly have slightly different recovery techniques.
PJ2
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the fact is there are cowboy flying instructors who happily hack-flick-zoom and rack these poor aircraft into a steep climbing turn, go to full power and kick in full rudder.
All that does is skid the aircraft horribly as it gyrates on one wing while the instructor shouts "SEE - THERE'S a WINGDROP"...while the frighted ab- initio student thinks WTF and goes away having learned nothing.
All that does is skid the aircraft horribly as it gyrates on one wing while the instructor shouts "SEE - THERE'S a WINGDROP"...while the frighted ab- initio student thinks WTF and goes away having learned nothing.
Best lesson ever.
The Airbus technique mentioned above grew out of the AF447 accident. In simple terms, having only 'practiced' stalls in the simulator at relatively low level with sufficient power to accelerate out of the stall, the F/O applied TOGA thrust and expected the aircraft to accelerate. At high altitude, with little relative additional thrust (and with the added impact of raising not lowering the nose for other reasons) the aircraft remained deeply stalled. Thus the revised Airbus technique became "Nose Down Pitch Control…..Apply, Bank…….Wings level" until the stall indications cease, before you do anything else - including adding thrust.
Thread Starter
Had an instructor student try and teach me that just this week in their stall briefing so yep still happening.I believe in the old pub45 they mentioned it at one point and it became the standard phrase that still gets repeated today - "pick up the wing with rudder".
Quote:
"I managed to check out the reference to stall recovery and wing drop in my Flight Instructor Manual (Publication 45). My one is dated September 1975.
Exercise 9 (Stalling) has 2 references and I’ll quote them here:
Recovery when a wing drops
Use standard recovery i.e., simultaneous use of power and forward movement of the control column. In addition rudder must be used to prevent the nose of the aeroplane yawing into the direction of the lowered wing. The ailerons should be held neutral until control is regained, when the wings should be levelled. In aeroplanes where the ailerons remain effective beyond the critical angle, they may be used to regain or maintain lateral level in association with rudder.
Common Faults
When a wing drops at the stall the student instinctively tries to correct this with aileron. The use of ailerons at the point of the stall must be carefully explained to the student. Even if the use of ailerons at the stall is permitted in the type of aeroplane in use, the student must understand that in some types their use will aggravate the situation.
Clearly there is no mention of "picking up the wing with rudder" in DCA Publication 45 published in 1975. So where did this expression originate? Maybe around a local aero club bar in those far back days - picked up in turn from a beery wartime pilot and soon spread like the Corona Virus..
I don't wish to instigate thread creep - this discussion has stayed within the realm of powered aircraft, and for the most part what has been said in so many different ways obviously remains valid for that broad branch of aviation. However in the world of glider flying it appears to be different. The idea of "grabbing" a dropping wing at the stall with opposite rudder - not aileron - was drummed into me some 54 years ago as a student in that discipline, and I vividly remember what took place in the practical demonstrations which were part of the experience.
I'm well out of it now, and gliders have changed enormously since those days, but from what I read, it's still applicable in the general sense for gliding. Certainly, this quote from the current Gliding federation of Australia manual suggests that: "Most gliders still have some aileron authority at the stall but don’t use ailerons because that itself may cause the glider to enter a spin". (Australian Gliding Knowledge, page 67)
(apologies for the digression)
I'm well out of it now, and gliders have changed enormously since those days, but from what I read, it's still applicable in the general sense for gliding. Certainly, this quote from the current Gliding federation of Australia manual suggests that: "Most gliders still have some aileron authority at the stall but don’t use ailerons because that itself may cause the glider to enter a spin". (Australian Gliding Knowledge, page 67)
(apologies for the digression)
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not thread drift at all, totally relevant to powered aircraft as well. Precisely the same thing will happen in a powered aircraft too. And that includes some of our supposedly sedate training aircraft. Understanding the relation between angle of attack and coefficient of lift on a stalled aerofoil makes it pretty clear why this happens.
This is a great video of what happens if you use aileron after the stall
This is a great video of what happens if you use aileron after the stall
A colleague of mine kindly sent this message today:
Quote:
"I managed to check out the reference to stall recovery and wing drop in my Flight Instructor Manual (Publication 45). My one is dated September 1975.
Exercise 9 (Stalling) has 2 references and I’ll quote them here:
Recovery when a wing drops
Use standard recovery i.e., simultaneous use of power and forward movement of the control column. In addition rudder must be used to prevent the nose of the aeroplane yawing into the direction of the lowered wing. The ailerons should be held neutral until control is regained, when the wings should be levelled. In aeroplanes where the ailerons remain effective beyond the critical angle, they may be used to regain or maintain lateral level in association with rudder.
Common Faults
When a wing drops at the stall the student instinctively tries to correct this with aileron. The use of ailerons at the point of the stall must be carefully explained to the student. Even if the use of ailerons at the stall is permitted in the type of aeroplane in use, the student must understand that in some types their use will aggravate the situation.
Clearly there is no mention of "picking up the wing with rudder" in DCA Publication 45 published in 1975. So where did this expression originate? Maybe around a local aero club bar in those far back days - picked up in turn from a beery wartime pilot and soon spread like the Corona Virus..
Quote:
"I managed to check out the reference to stall recovery and wing drop in my Flight Instructor Manual (Publication 45). My one is dated September 1975.
Exercise 9 (Stalling) has 2 references and I’ll quote them here:
Recovery when a wing drops
Use standard recovery i.e., simultaneous use of power and forward movement of the control column. In addition rudder must be used to prevent the nose of the aeroplane yawing into the direction of the lowered wing. The ailerons should be held neutral until control is regained, when the wings should be levelled. In aeroplanes where the ailerons remain effective beyond the critical angle, they may be used to regain or maintain lateral level in association with rudder.
Common Faults
When a wing drops at the stall the student instinctively tries to correct this with aileron. The use of ailerons at the point of the stall must be carefully explained to the student. Even if the use of ailerons at the stall is permitted in the type of aeroplane in use, the student must understand that in some types their use will aggravate the situation.
Clearly there is no mention of "picking up the wing with rudder" in DCA Publication 45 published in 1975. So where did this expression originate? Maybe around a local aero club bar in those far back days - picked up in turn from a beery wartime pilot and soon spread like the Corona Virus..
As you say - somewhere this phrase got picked up and has become common.
I wonder if perhaps it started from a student mis-hearing their instructor?
What gets said and what gets heard in a cockpit (or briefing room) can sometimes be quite different - much the same as what I recalled reading once in pub45 years ago and what it actually says...
Clearly there is no mention of "picking up the wing with rudder" in DCA Publication 45 published in 1975. So where did this expression originate? Maybe around a local aero club bar in those far back days
Stalling - In all cases roll and yaw control could be controlled with unreversed use of controls up to the stall. On those occasions when a wing dropped it was not always possible to prevent the roll off with roll control alone, but intuitive use of rudder was always effective in checking the roll.
The differences between this aircraft and one designed to a post WWII airworthiness specification, it should be noted the lateral and directional characteristics of the aircraft, which are typical of most aircraft of this era, in particular of de Havilland designs, are not conventional by 'modern' standards. The pilot must understand that the primary turn control in those days was seen as the rudder, with ailerons being used only to maintain wings level or to 'fine tune' the bank angle required to achieve balanced flight. When such a control strategy is used it eliminates adverse yaw, because the rudder produces proverse yaw before the aileron is deflected significantly.However, a 'modern' pilot, one trained after WWII, expecting to enter and exit turns using the aileron to effect the roll angle change will experience significant adverse yaw unless attention is paid to balance and the rudder used generously. It should be recognised that the lateral/directional stability and control characteristics described are little different to and no worse than those of the DH82 Tiger Moth.
The differences between this aircraft and one designed to a post WWII airworthiness specification, it should be noted the lateral and directional characteristics of the aircraft, which are typical of most aircraft of this era, in particular of de Havilland designs, are not conventional by 'modern' standards. The pilot must understand that the primary turn control in those days was seen as the rudder, with ailerons being used only to maintain wings level or to 'fine tune' the bank angle required to achieve balanced flight. When such a control strategy is used it eliminates adverse yaw, because the rudder produces proverse yaw before the aileron is deflected significantly.However, a 'modern' pilot, one trained after WWII, expecting to enter and exit turns using the aileron to effect the roll angle change will experience significant adverse yaw unless attention is paid to balance and the rudder used generously. It should be recognised that the lateral/directional stability and control characteristics described are little different to and no worse than those of the DH82 Tiger Moth.
