Wing dropping stall recovery.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see an argument for keeping the aircraft in balance for the stall, then it won't drop a wing,
Furthermore, due to inaccuracies when building, previously encountered damage, wings that may have been taken off for transport or maintenance, different amounts of dirt on the wing and various other "rigging" issues, the actual angle of incidence, washout, twist or other aerodynamic factors, may be slightly different between the left and right wing. This may also cause one wing to stall slightly earlier than the other, leading to a wing drop.
Of course how severe these issues are will depend on the actual airframe. Both the design of the airframe (high-wing vs. low wing for instance) and the actual rigging.
But I would not assume that an aircraft that's flown in balance will not drop a wing in a stall.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually just checked out the price of an Angle Of Attack meter and guess what - it's $565. That's nothing. A very useful instrument. Think I might get one and install it at some point.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a perennial subject, which always brings up the same arguments, and drives me nuts.
Wot Mad Jock says.
Pick the Goddam wing up with the rudder and move the stick forward simultaneously then use aileron to level wings when unstalled.
If you don't like the phrase "picking up the wing with rudder" then call it "stopping further yaw with rudder" "preventing further drop with rudder" "keeping the aircraft in balance with rudder." Whatever; Dress it up any which way you like, but use rudder and elevator first 'cos IT WORKS!
Wot Mad Jock says.
Pick the Goddam wing up with the rudder and move the stick forward simultaneously then use aileron to level wings when unstalled.
If you don't like the phrase "picking up the wing with rudder" then call it "stopping further yaw with rudder" "preventing further drop with rudder" "keeping the aircraft in balance with rudder." Whatever; Dress it up any which way you like, but use rudder and elevator first 'cos IT WORKS!
Last edited by flybymike; 14th May 2011 at 01:26.
SSR: Control column centrally forward; simultaneously apply full power; maintain balance (prevent further yaw) with rudder.
If you apply rudder at the point of stall: HOW MUCH? What are you looking for?
Moving the CC forward you are looking for the signs of the stall to cease
Then you can roll the wings level with aileron.
If you apply rudder at the point of stall: HOW MUCH? What are you looking for?
Moving the CC forward you are looking for the signs of the stall to cease
Then you can roll the wings level with aileron.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that most of us can do two or three things at once 
. The priority in any stall must be to 'unstall' the wings and that is only done by reducing AOA - centrally forward on the controls. Now, if we have the capacity to do the other couple of things, a bit if opposite rudder (to arrest wing drop) and application of power will minimise the altitude loss. Of course, we all know what the secondary/adverse affects of such actions are and how to counter these. 
Personally, I find this a non-discussion for most simple aircraft types. The process should be automatic and we shouldn't be thinking about the order of control inputs during the stall.
. The priority in any stall must be to 'unstall' the wings and that is only done by reducing AOA - centrally forward on the controls. Now, if we have the capacity to do the other couple of things, a bit if opposite rudder (to arrest wing drop) and application of power will minimise the altitude loss. Of course, we all know what the secondary/adverse affects of such actions are and how to counter these. Personally, I find this a non-discussion for most simple aircraft types. The process should be automatic and we shouldn't be thinking about the order of control inputs during the stall.
Whilst 'full power and control column centrally forward, keeping the aircraft in balance with rudder' is totally correct, many instructors fail to teach how far forward the CC should be moved. The answer is no further forward than the attitude at which the stall ident ceases, then maintain that pitch attitude to accelerate, roll wings level with aileron and recover from the descent.
On Skill Tests I'd often get applicants applying full power and stuffing the nose earthwards excessively at the first squeak of the stall warner.
One pet hate I have is the use of 'signs' and 'symptoms' of the stall - which came from teaching medical students who told me that the RAF's use of the terms was incorrect. So I use 'stall warning' and 'stall ident' - the same terms as you will see on many large aircraft stall protection systems.
On Skill Tests I'd often get applicants applying full power and stuffing the nose earthwards excessively at the first squeak of the stall warner.
One pet hate I have is the use of 'signs' and 'symptoms' of the stall - which came from teaching medical students who told me that the RAF's use of the terms was incorrect. So I use 'stall warning' and 'stall ident' - the same terms as you will see on many large aircraft stall protection systems.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Essex UK
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One pet hate I have is the use of 'signs' and 'symptoms' of the stall - which came from teaching medical students who told me that the RAF's use of the terms was incorrect. So I use 'stall warning' and 'stall ident' - the same terms as you will see on many large aircraft stall protection systems.
I would have considered 'symptoms' and 'signs' to relate to things such as mushy controls and buffet and would have thought the words descriptive enough? i.e. things that occur in many light aircraft before a fully developed stall, not built in warning systems, simply observable effects?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, As I suggested, I was using the "picking it up" term colloquially, and other descriptions may be more literally accurate. I agree that no more than necessary to prevent further drop is correct. I usually find that a rapid, preferably instant response with a "stab" on the opposite pedal is all that is required
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
we shouldn't be thinking about the order of control inputs during the stall
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Essex UK
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
we shouldn't be thinking about the order of control inputs during the stall
It's not completely unknown to do everything at once in an unusual attitude recovery and be told by the instructor or examiner that we've confused them by not demonstrating that we know the correct order in which to do them one at a time.
we shouldn't be thinking about the order of control inputs during the stall
It's not completely unknown to do everything at once in an unusual attitude recovery and be told by the instructor or examiner that we've confused them by not demonstrating that we know the correct order in which to do them one at a time.
I then got moaned at for not recovering into a climb. Total height loss, 50ft
I felt like a should have just pointed the nose down, lost 300ft and made everyone happy. Flying is a weird world at times.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 67
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jock
Letting go of everything could be a very bad idea in a wing drop stall -which could lead to an incipient spin IMHO. I believe NASA tests showed the Mueller/Begs technique is less reliable than PARE... although M/B still needs you to know what rudder to press and hold (the hard one). Of course the POH is key knowledge here.
From Wikipedia: "The mnemonic "PARE" simply reinforces the tried-and-true NASA standard spin recovery actions—the very same actions first prescribed by NACA in 1936, verified by NASA during an intensive, decade-long spin test program overlapping the 1970s and '80's, and repeatedly recommended by the FAA and implemented by the majority of test pilots during certification spin-testing of light airplanes."
Cheers
Letting go of everything could be a very bad idea in a wing drop stall -which could lead to an incipient spin IMHO. I believe NASA tests showed the Mueller/Begs technique is less reliable than PARE... although M/B still needs you to know what rudder to press and hold (the hard one). Of course the POH is key knowledge here.
From Wikipedia: "The mnemonic "PARE" simply reinforces the tried-and-true NASA standard spin recovery actions—the very same actions first prescribed by NACA in 1936, verified by NASA during an intensive, decade-long spin test program overlapping the 1970s and '80's, and repeatedly recommended by the FAA and implemented by the majority of test pilots during certification spin-testing of light airplanes."
Cheers
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really moreflaps. In a spin the yaw comes from one wing being further back up the drag curve (more deeply stalled) than the other. If everything is flying, that doesn't happen.
It really is that simple: In order for bad stuff to happen, you must be stalled. Remove the back stick (e.g. let go), you're not stalled anymore - Quickly and promptly remove the AOA, then sort it all out. You might guess I don't particularly hold with the idea of powering out of a stall either
A wing drop does not require a spin recovery. Personally I'd be looking for something like 180+ of heading change before even thinking about spin recoveries. Being cautious of spins is good, but I do wonder if most folks consider anything beyond 30deg bank to be an incipient spin (a term I hate.. you're spinning or you're not!)
It really is that simple: In order for bad stuff to happen, you must be stalled. Remove the back stick (e.g. let go), you're not stalled anymore - Quickly and promptly remove the AOA, then sort it all out. You might guess I don't particularly hold with the idea of powering out of a stall either
A wing drop does not require a spin recovery. Personally I'd be looking for something like 180+ of heading change before even thinking about spin recoveries. Being cautious of spins is good, but I do wonder if most folks consider anything beyond 30deg bank to be an incipient spin (a term I hate.. you're spinning or you're not!)
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warning had a few beers
I stated PPL's not some aero savy pilot.
The best way to stop Joe blogs stalling is by teaching correctly exercise 1-13 with full reference to attitude flying. ie they know what attitudes to select and the ones not select. And also to recover from the incepent stall not a fully developed stall.
We are talking PA28's C150's, C172's and your general run of the mill spam can's most of which will recover from a spin by letting go of everything. If you let go even in a PA38 it won't spin even with a 80deg wing drop.
As much as these discussions like us to believe the pilot has to seriously screw up major time ignoring multiple indications either stall warners or extreme attitudes before they are anywhere near a stalling condition.
yes I can complete agree with you if you are inverted with 60 deg nose up letting go of everything might not be the best plan.
If you are Joe Bloggs Numbnuts going for a 300 quid burger and you are trying to get a photo of your mates house at 3000ft and you haul back to much while looking out the side window, letting go will solve your problem.
More attention to the basics of flying and attitudes as a discussion would do more for flight safety than endless discussions about how to dick around in a stalled condition.
prevention is better than cure
The best way to stop Joe blogs stalling is by teaching correctly exercise 1-13 with full reference to attitude flying. ie they know what attitudes to select and the ones not select. And also to recover from the incepent stall not a fully developed stall.
We are talking PA28's C150's, C172's and your general run of the mill spam can's most of which will recover from a spin by letting go of everything. If you let go even in a PA38 it won't spin even with a 80deg wing drop.
As much as these discussions like us to believe the pilot has to seriously screw up major time ignoring multiple indications either stall warners or extreme attitudes before they are anywhere near a stalling condition.
yes I can complete agree with you if you are inverted with 60 deg nose up letting go of everything might not be the best plan.
If you are Joe Bloggs Numbnuts going for a 300 quid burger and you are trying to get a photo of your mates house at 3000ft and you haul back to much while looking out the side window, letting go will solve your problem.
More attention to the basics of flying and attitudes as a discussion would do more for flight safety than endless discussions about how to dick around in a stalled condition.
prevention is better than cure
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 67
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Mark, re: "Not really moreflaps. In a spin the yaw comes from one wing being further back up the drag curve (more deeply stalled) than the other. If everything is flying, that doesn't happen.
It really is that simple: In order for bad stuff to happen, you must be stalled. Remove the back stick (e.g. let go), you're not stalled anymore - Quickly and promptly remove the AOA, then sort it all out. You might guess I don't particularly hold with the idea of powering out of a stall either "
I partially agree with you but would add that the spin results from the roll-yaw couple that is always present. If you have aft COG letting go of the controls may not reduce the AOA enough due to presence of gyroscopic precession (due to both yaw and prop). Reducing yaw with rudder reduces the gyroscopic effect and that may allow the nose to drop when the stick is moved toward the ground. As for powering out of a stall, one would hope that right rudder is used to stop the yaw that appears as the engine powers up... I agree that power is not necessary in stall recovery (except to reduce height loss).
Cheers
It really is that simple: In order for bad stuff to happen, you must be stalled. Remove the back stick (e.g. let go), you're not stalled anymore - Quickly and promptly remove the AOA, then sort it all out. You might guess I don't particularly hold with the idea of powering out of a stall either "
I partially agree with you but would add that the spin results from the roll-yaw couple that is always present. If you have aft COG letting go of the controls may not reduce the AOA enough due to presence of gyroscopic precession (due to both yaw and prop). Reducing yaw with rudder reduces the gyroscopic effect and that may allow the nose to drop when the stick is moved toward the ground. As for powering out of a stall, one would hope that right rudder is used to stop the yaw that appears as the engine powers up... I agree that power is not necessary in stall recovery (except to reduce height loss).
Cheers
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one would hope that right rudder is used to stop the yaw that appears as the engine powers up... I agree that power is not necessary in stall recovery (except to reduce height loss).
Moderator
Reducing yaw with rudder reduces the gyroscopic effect and that may allow the nose to drop
It also bears out well my recent experience spin testing the modified Grand Caravan. It was a very different recovery aft C of G than forward, I expect for exactly this reason.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aft CG in a spin can be very dangerous. There's the story of the spin where finally the pilot got out of it by leaning forward as much as he could just in time to save it. It's also a case for securing your loads and be vigilant about your weight and balances.