stall warning and when to panic
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Unna, Germany
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We were at 50 deg bank balanced flight with ower on in a c150 or 152.
The aircraft was pitched to the buffet then roll applied to level the wings.
The wing tip stalled throwing us over the top and straight into a high rot fully developed spin which was nothing like the normal spin. Rudder made not the slightest bit of difference and neither did progresively moving the stick forward.
The aircraft was pitched to the buffet then roll applied to level the wings.
The wing tip stalled throwing us over the top and straight into a high rot fully developed spin which was nothing like the normal spin. Rudder made not the slightest bit of difference and neither did progresively moving the stick forward.
It was one of my three this is it moments in aircraft
After all, if it happened to you, it could happen to any of us......
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve6443:
My similar situation in a C152 Aerobat required power to recover after five turns in a spin. 150/152's don't normally need power for flow over the rudder/elev to recover from a spin. It seemed like a good idea at the time, and I'm here to report that it was.
My similar situation in a C152 Aerobat required power to recover after five turns in a spin. 150/152's don't normally need power for flow over the rudder/elev to recover from a spin. It seemed like a good idea at the time, and I'm here to report that it was.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fii was was doing a demo at the time so he recovered it by applying power in fact red line power until it started recovering. I still to this day don`t know if I was meant to take control off him before he did it or what. We knocked it on the head that day after that and got the engineers to check the plane out when we got back. They checked the rigging and found nothing wrong. Ever since then I have stayed well away from stalling in a steep turn. I presume they test the stalling up to 30deg bank. Anything more than that and your on your tod. In C of A test flights we only have to do up to 30 degs for the stick push function test.
The othere one was getting caught in mountain wave to the north of the cairgorm did a 160 back towards the spey and got out of it.
The third was in the works machine with wind shear on approach in imc and just did the training for that event. Including turning off the engine protection systems and getting 105% out of them both. Thought i had just burned half a million worth of engines but it turned out because we hadn`t exceeded the exhaust gas temp limits all that was required was a program of SOAP sampling, both engines were fine.
The othere one was getting caught in mountain wave to the north of the cairgorm did a 160 back towards the spey and got out of it.
The third was in the works machine with wind shear on approach in imc and just did the training for that event. Including turning off the engine protection systems and getting 105% out of them both. Thought i had just burned half a million worth of engines but it turned out because we hadn`t exceeded the exhaust gas temp limits all that was required was a program of SOAP sampling, both engines were fine.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piperboy:
Science and government can create whatever to protect you against yourself, but there will always be someone who will explore and override the design safety mechanism(s). It's an unchangeable human trait.
The Cirrus' leading edge difference (washout) to reduce incidence at the outboard end of the wing has been in existence for sometime in many airplanes (as I'm sure you know). Bertorelli explains the Cirrus leading edge like it was a safety feature Cirrus created, which I'm sure was not his intention. My particular old-school, 1971 Cessna 185 has washout...and no airframe parachute. The biggest safety enhancement any aircraft can have is the judgment and ability of the guy/gal in the left seat, IMO.
Want to eliminate stall/spin? Drive a car and don't get in the vast majority of airplanes.
Science and government can create whatever to protect you against yourself, but there will always be someone who will explore and override the design safety mechanism(s). It's an unchangeable human trait.
The Cirrus' leading edge difference (washout) to reduce incidence at the outboard end of the wing has been in existence for sometime in many airplanes (as I'm sure you know). Bertorelli explains the Cirrus leading edge like it was a safety feature Cirrus created, which I'm sure was not his intention. My particular old-school, 1971 Cessna 185 has washout...and no airframe parachute. The biggest safety enhancement any aircraft can have is the judgment and ability of the guy/gal in the left seat, IMO.
Want to eliminate stall/spin? Drive a car and don't get in the vast majority of airplanes.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
desert I found it interesting you have been in a similar mode of spin in that type.
I have spoken to a few other pilots that have also been in that mode and required power to get it out. I have never found anything documented on this alternative mode or for that matter a published recovery procedure.
Its is definitely not the usual Cessna spin which almost recovers itself if you let go of everything.
From 5000ft we recovered at 500ft agl to S&L coming out of rotation at 1000ft agl
Genghis with your boffin hat on have you got any ideas what was going on?
BTW if there are any budding test pilots out there wanting to prove MJ is talking nonsense I would strongly advise you are up at 8k-10k ft just in case you do get it to happen. It could be we had a bent wing or a unlucky gust at just the wrong time but if she does go it makes a tommy spin look tame.
I have spoken to a few other pilots that have also been in that mode and required power to get it out. I have never found anything documented on this alternative mode or for that matter a published recovery procedure.
Its is definitely not the usual Cessna spin which almost recovers itself if you let go of everything.
From 5000ft we recovered at 500ft agl to S&L coming out of rotation at 1000ft agl
Genghis with your boffin hat on have you got any ideas what was going on?
BTW if there are any budding test pilots out there wanting to prove MJ is talking nonsense I would strongly advise you are up at 8k-10k ft just in case you do get it to happen. It could be we had a bent wing or a unlucky gust at just the wrong time but if she does go it makes a tommy spin look tame.
Well having been flipped over the top in a cessna 152 into a spin which wouldn`t recover using the POH method and required full power to be applied before the rudder got any authority by doing just that but with the flight instructor instructor demoing a botched steep turn you crack on.
BTW it spun faster than tommy we lost 4k feet before he recovered it with 500ft left.
Sounds very like that other special of hanging in the air fannying around with the rudder pedals while holding it in the stall.
It took nearly twenty years and a rudder falling off an airbus to stop that lifting wing with the rudder nonsense.
BTW it spun faster than tommy we lost 4k feet before he recovered it with 500ft left.
Sounds very like that other special of hanging in the air fannying around with the rudder pedals while holding it in the stall.
It took nearly twenty years and a rudder falling off an airbus to stop that lifting wing with the rudder nonsense.
I have spoken to a few other pilots that have also been in that mode and required power to get it out. I have never found anything documented on this alternative mode or for that matter a published recovery procedure.
Its is definitely not the usual Cessna spin which almost recovers itself if you let go of everything.
From 5000ft we recovered at 500ft agl to S&L coming out of rotation at 1000ft agl
Genghis with your boffin hat on have you got any ideas what was going on?
Its is definitely not the usual Cessna spin which almost recovers itself if you let go of everything.
From 5000ft we recovered at 500ft agl to S&L coming out of rotation at 1000ft agl
Genghis with your boffin hat on have you got any ideas what was going on?
I'm guessing you had reasonable power on when you entered the spin, which probably meant you saw a higher AoA than would be normal, it *may* have locked you into a different to normal spin mode. Possibly one with the wings locked stably into a higher AoA condition that would be normal. I'm assuming it was an erect spin (yaw and roll in the same direction) as opposed to an inverted spin (way and roll in opposite directions)?
Sounds to me not dissimilar to two spin modes that I have seen - one is the high rotational flattish spin mode achievable in the Bulldog through introduction of some in-spin aileron during an erect spin, the other is the power-on erect spin to the left in the Tucano, which is not particularly fast, but extremely stable.
So, you were in a fast and very stable spin, too stable for primary controls to get you out of and the only control available was apparently the throttle, so you gave it a go. Clearly a good guess as you survived the experience.
Introducing power, added torque at the propeller, this should have created oscillatory pitching and yawing moments, and my guess is that in addition to the effect you were getting inputs from the controls, this got you out of the spin. In the Tucano it would do that in one direction, although in the other would just stabilise the spin even more.
The Bulldog of course has suffered a number of "inexplicable" spinning losses over the years, generally when captained by very experienced service QFIs who can reasonably be assumed to have known what they were doing.
Somewhat disconcerting for you I'm sure, but re-inforces a couple of my prejudices:-
- Most aeroplanes have potential for an undiscovered spin mode somewhere that can bite, and was not found in the original flight test programme.
- Spinning and/or aerobatics without a personal parachute and route out of the aeroplane is silly, however well understood we *think* that the type is.
G
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C of G was within limits more forward with two blokes in the front just a fire extinguisher and first aid box strapped in the back. Two hours of fuel.
Yes there was a fair bit of power on and also I presume a bit of the wrong way rudder as well.
And it was and erect spin.
Whats the certification testing? do they test up to 60degs or only up to 30degs?
And we hadn't planned on doing any spinning its was a patter a steep turn practical and he was showing me the common student screw ups after I had done my bit. It was more by luck than judgement we were at 5k.
Yes there was a fair bit of power on and also I presume a bit of the wrong way rudder as well.
And it was and erect spin.
Whats the certification testing? do they test up to 60degs or only up to 30degs?
And we hadn't planned on doing any spinning its was a patter a steep turn practical and he was showing me the common student screw ups after I had done my bit. It was more by luck than judgement we were at 5k.
Article in Flight Magazine of 24 October 1978 about spins in Cessnas with info from a Cessna test pilot - you should be able to find it online. FAA issued a safety bulletin for instructors on the subject at about the same time based on the same material but more comprehensive.
"Even small amounts of aileron deflection into the spin may increase the rotation rate and prolong recovery."
Info in Rich Stowell's excellent book too.
"Even small amounts of aileron deflection into the spin may increase the rotation rate and prolong recovery."
Info in Rich Stowell's excellent book too.
whats the certification testing? do they test up to 60degs or only up to 30degs?
The reality is that the wording in the certification standards over spinning is so vague and minimal that it really comes down to the professionalism of the flight test team, and what they consider an appropriate level of testing.
I would always ensure a significant amount of mishandling, and a variety of spin entries - but some manufacturers do the absolute minimum, and the authorities sometimes let them get away with it. What was going on between FAA and Cessna in the 60s of course, is anybody's guess - Cessna wouldn't tell, and anybody who worked on it will have retired long ago, and in all likelihood are using another form of aerial conveyance by now.
Which basically means, nobody has a clue.
G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer; 1st Jan 2014 at 23:53.
Back in 19** on my PPL course at Cranfield, we were taught dynamic stalling in steep turns. I well recall the buffeting and the stall warner screeching its head off as the aircraft stalled.
Some would roll further into the turn, others would depart in the opposite direction in an incipient spin. But they always recovered as soon as back pressure was released.
These were Reims-built Cessna 150s, but the big difference was that they were brand spanking new. We also used to spin them.
However, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that elderly C150 / C152, if deliberately mishandled, will bite the unwary. Rigging tolerances, mass distribution and other factors could be issues....
But closing the throttle and immediately centralising the controls should recover any incipient spin.....nevertheless, discovering that you have a rogue aircraft which won't recover quite so readily wouldn't be much fun....
In the Bulldog and Chipmunk, max rate turns on the 'buffet nibble' were an essential part of military flying training. As was recognition and recovery from any 'undemanded roll rate'.
Some would roll further into the turn, others would depart in the opposite direction in an incipient spin. But they always recovered as soon as back pressure was released.
These were Reims-built Cessna 150s, but the big difference was that they were brand spanking new. We also used to spin them.
However, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that elderly C150 / C152, if deliberately mishandled, will bite the unwary. Rigging tolerances, mass distribution and other factors could be issues....
But closing the throttle and immediately centralising the controls should recover any incipient spin.....nevertheless, discovering that you have a rogue aircraft which won't recover quite so readily wouldn't be much fun....
In the Bulldog and Chipmunk, max rate turns on the 'buffet nibble' were an essential part of military flying training. As was recognition and recovery from any 'undemanded roll rate'.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back to earlier in the thread, way back when I was a boy we were taught (gliding) MINIMUM 30 degrees of bank for final turn.
Even through commercial training they wanted exactly 30 degrees of bank, not 20, not 31. 30!
PS. Despite much deliberate 'abuse' resulting in plenty of departures and spins, I never managed to provoke the 'difficult' spin which the Firefly is known tp possess.
Even through commercial training they wanted exactly 30 degrees of bank, not 20, not 31. 30!
PS. Despite much deliberate 'abuse' resulting in plenty of departures and spins, I never managed to provoke the 'difficult' spin which the Firefly is known tp possess.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miserlou,
It also depends how much you pull on the yoke ( = AoA) during your turn. You could make a 30° final turn where you let the aircraft finds it's own balance or you could pull hard to intercept the centerline. Hard to describe but you will understand.
It also depends how much you pull on the yoke ( = AoA) during your turn. You could make a 30° final turn where you let the aircraft finds it's own balance or you could pull hard to intercept the centerline. Hard to describe but you will understand.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I did my PPL decades ago, spins were mandatory. We used C150s back then, and it was very difficult to get them to spin properly. I suspect that most C150 / 152 'spins' entered from the classic 'one knot per second' deceleration method are really semi-stalled spiral dives, hence the ease of recovery.
One very experienced instructor (ex-WW2 ex-Spitfire and ex-V bomber pilot) I flew with would use a deliberate flick entry into the spin, with the aeroplane rolling 'over the top' inverted and dropping into a spin as pro-spin controls were held. I recall these entries led to 'proper' spins in that they required the 'full opposite rudder, stick forward' spin recovery. But they did recover OK, not at all as MJ experienced.
Several decades of Chippying never led to any nasty spin experiences despite that aeroplane, at least in the early days, having a bit of a reputation in that department.
The Yak52 loved to spin and would do so at any opportunity. Flat spins off a botched stall turn being one of its party pieces. Recovery from flat spins (which I practiced with none other that Genna) required instant opposite rudder, full forward stick, and in-spin aileron. But recovery was fairly quick and reliable if you did it correctly (rotation in the spin was nose-high and fast).
I agree with Ghengis, however. Having done very many spins over the decades in many aeroplanes, only sometimes with a parachute, I was always aware that each was 'a bit different', and a nasty surprise might be around the corner. I also suspect that normally benign aircraft such as the C152 which are normally difficult to spin might be the very worst types to recover in very rare spin modes. I have no personal experience of that as MJ has..... It's just a feeling born of general spinning experience.
I think Ghengis is right about wearing a parachute for deliberate spinning (and of course ensuring there is the height to use it if recovery goes pear-shaped). We often didn't in the slightly more cavalier days of the 70s, 80s, and 90s (and in a biennial a few years ago we did a 5-turn Chipmunk spin without chutes) but nearly all of us got away with it. Some didn't.
One very experienced instructor (ex-WW2 ex-Spitfire and ex-V bomber pilot) I flew with would use a deliberate flick entry into the spin, with the aeroplane rolling 'over the top' inverted and dropping into a spin as pro-spin controls were held. I recall these entries led to 'proper' spins in that they required the 'full opposite rudder, stick forward' spin recovery. But they did recover OK, not at all as MJ experienced.
Several decades of Chippying never led to any nasty spin experiences despite that aeroplane, at least in the early days, having a bit of a reputation in that department.
The Yak52 loved to spin and would do so at any opportunity. Flat spins off a botched stall turn being one of its party pieces. Recovery from flat spins (which I practiced with none other that Genna) required instant opposite rudder, full forward stick, and in-spin aileron. But recovery was fairly quick and reliable if you did it correctly (rotation in the spin was nose-high and fast).
I agree with Ghengis, however. Having done very many spins over the decades in many aeroplanes, only sometimes with a parachute, I was always aware that each was 'a bit different', and a nasty surprise might be around the corner. I also suspect that normally benign aircraft such as the C152 which are normally difficult to spin might be the very worst types to recover in very rare spin modes. I have no personal experience of that as MJ has..... It's just a feeling born of general spinning experience.
I think Ghengis is right about wearing a parachute for deliberate spinning (and of course ensuring there is the height to use it if recovery goes pear-shaped). We often didn't in the slightly more cavalier days of the 70s, 80s, and 90s (and in a biennial a few years ago we did a 5-turn Chipmunk spin without chutes) but nearly all of us got away with it. Some didn't.