Stall & Engine failure scenario and recovery
 

Just completed skill-test with an instructor for the renewal of my licence and of course we did perform stalls and engine failure recovery procedures.

I'm however wondering if it is allowed to perform these scenarios without an instructor sitting in the right seat.

Even though I've committed the stall and engine failure recovery procedures into memory, I'm of the opinion that it must be practiced without an instructor in the right seat to make the recovery more secure and effective.

Currently, I'm not really trying the procedures when flying alone but I'm looking into practicing them the next time I go flying.

So, the question is, are there any regulations out there that restrict that?:confused:

WP

There is nothing apart from all the other rules of the air.

Saying that though in Germany it might not be the done thing even if it is legal.

The best thing to do is to speak with your instructor and ask if you can practice some stall recoveries on your own!
It happened in my training days some time back but will vary from person to person!
Some will be happy and relish the thought others will tremble in their shoes at the thought!
Your instructor knows you and your flying and will advise!
Unless things have changed the answer is yes you can practice some stall recoveries!

Pace

They are PPL license holder its got nothing to do with any instructor

I have just finished my PPL (paperwork just to do now) and both my instructor and examiner have strongly advised me to practice, inter alia, stall recovery, PFLs, EFATO drills and glide approaches which I certainly will be doing once the CAA give me a licence.

Why wouldn't one practice such things?

Sorry MJ I rush read it on a train and posted with my I phone!
If you are a PPL of course you can do what the heck you wanna do !
As a student with your instructors approval Yes
Sadly even PPLs are scared to practice stall recoveries on their own
Pace

It would be very remiss of you indeed NOT to practice these things! How the heck are you going to respond appropriately if it happens for real if it's months or maybe years since you practiced it?

Whatever happened to 'airmanship'?

During my PPL course I was sent off to do an hour's solo stalling practice.

By engine failure recovery procedures, do you mean actually switching it off and restarting it at altitude? I wouldn't want to switch off a perfectly serviceable engine, however I do occasionally recite my immediate action points and reach for the switches to simulate carrying out those actions.

If you mean practising landing without using the engine power, I regularly approach airfields at 2000 feet and ask for permission to do what the germans call a "ziellandeuebung" (practice forced landing) and if they don't have much traffic in the circuit, they allow it so with respect legality, it's allowed, indeed at our club, it's highly recommended to practice it whenever we can.

Having said that, although in my case I just close the throttle and leave the engine on idle simulating an engine failure, I have seen an ultralight come in with it's engine completely off, then restart on the runway so yes, it's something practiced, although I'll not kill my engine, I'm not that foolish because if someone just rolled out onto the runway as I come onto a short final, I'd like to know I can go around even when practicing a PFL.

Concerning stall recovery techniques, I'll do them now and then but only if I'm alone or the other people in the plane are warned about what to expect - hearing the stall warning horn go off and the plane dropping can be unnerving for the uninitiated. In my mind, not practicing might lead to you taking the wrong action at the wrong time so practice makes perfect.....

Sheesh, of course you should practice! As for landing engine stopped, we do it in gliders and motor gliders all the time, but a light aircraft is not so well equipped for that (airbrakes better than flaps)
I used to get sent off for solo stalls, spins and pfls long before I finished my ppl.

Repeating other people's opinions really.

If you learned to do it, were tested on it, you're allowed to do it.

I tend to think that if I've not practiced at least one practice emergency (engine failure most usually) and at-least one stall and recovery monthly, I'm not current.

G

G

That is how it should be :ok: But many do not its on with the autopilot and away they go with many not practising stalls at all or as I said before some are not comfortable on their own because they worry about getting it wrong and getting into a situation they cannot handle i.e. a spin.

PFLs are again another important item that are rarely practised but should be.

Pace

Stall & Engine failure scenario and recovery
 

I often practice stall recovery especially when my cocky (hard as nails) friends are sitting next to me ;)
Not so hard after all

It is encouraging to hear that most of you are practicing these emergency procedures to ensure a positive outcome in case of emergency circumstances. I certainly recognize the value of performing emergency procedures to minimize my risk profile and I've resolved to be more active in engaging these procedures in my next flights.:ok:

WP

Can (should?) a PPL practice entering and recovering from spins? or is the territory of areos training?

Except in a few special circumstances before the airplane stalls it has to pass through slow flight first. Personally I think there is more value in practicing maneuvering the aircraft in slow flight then there is to just going out and doing stalls.

For new PPL's I suggest that they start with a power on stall and recovery and then work at a concentrated 10 minutes worth of slow flight. And I mean true slow flight, that is flying with the stall warn horn first sounding intermittently and then even slower with the horn sounding continuously. This should involve turns and descents in slow flight. (Note 1: the initial stall practice is to make sure you have reviewed the stall recovery so that if you c*ck up the slow flight and actually stall you will make an uneventful recovery and Note 2: make sure you monitor the engine temps to avoid overheating)

I see many students get scared when they see 60 kts IAS in a C 172 or Pa 28. This speed is still way above stall speed and there is lots of margin left. The best way to not get into an inadvertent stall is to recognize the fact the airplane is getting slow just by how it feels and how it is performing. Being comfortable flying it slowly also makes operating into and out of short fields safer.

As for engine failures, well as I have pontificated on before 80 % of all engine failures are the direct result of the actions or inactions of the pilot. Even if the engine fails power can often be restored if a "cause check" is promptly performed.

As a fairly young instructor the "AH HA" moment for me involved a forced landing of a C 172 by a new PPL in very inhospitable terrain. The pilot did a great job of getting on the ground without killing anybody after the engine suddenly stopped, but when the wreckage was retrieved there was 10 gals of fuel in the left tank zero gals in the right tank and the fuel selector was selected to the right tank.

If his instructor had put the same effort into teaching this pilot the importance of a quick and effective cause check as he did into flying the forced approach, he would have been able to restore power and fly home......

I would support what BPF says!
One observation adding to what BPF says is practising flying accurately at speeds both level and climbing and descending.
Many pilots I have flown with seem unable to be accurate on speed, dropping flap above the flap speeds or above the gear speeds and accelerating in descent or loosing speed in the climb.
If pilots are precise on flying speeds then the stall situation will not happen but so many are not!

Pace

Spins aren't in the PPL syllabus, and shouldn't be flown without a parachute and a means of abandonment - such as jettisonable doors.

But if a PPL is flying aeros, and thus should be wearing a parachute routinely in a suitably configured areoplane, and also likely to end up in a spin from time to time - yes, they should.

G

Interesting... at the end of my second lesson on stall recovery my instructor demonstrated two spins. Is this reckless without the precautions mentioned above? It seemed almost routine at the time.

Surely this is the very thing we are teaching students to avoid! Flying aircraft slowly is potentially dangerous because it can lead to the stall and the spin and is taught as one of the symptoms of the approaching stall; thre point at which the pilot should initiate recovery action. Teaching people to fly around at these speeds means they are less likely to recover from a worsening situation because they "know it is OK" they have done it regularly! It is much better to be comfortable with stalling at a safe height; be familiar with the recovery action, then stay away from the conditions that might put you there in a lesss desirebale position i.e. a height where recovery may be compromised.
Provided you know what you are doing, have an appropriately certified aircraft and have had it demonstrated and practiced before, then there is nothing to prohibit it. The choice of a prachute is always debateable but remains optional.

Here we go again to spin or not to spin. In the right aircraft with the right instructor a spin is no more reckless than a spiral dive with far less loading on the airframe. The 152 is a doddle:ok:

but yes I think it is important to spiral dive spin and all manner of stalls but i would add it to the PPL syllabus in the form of aerobatic training with an aerobatic approved instructor and machine.
There are far less important things they can trim out of the PPL syllabus to make up the couple of hours.

I would put it in the syllabus just before the qualifying X countries

It will make you a far more competent and confident pilot than those trained in avoidance who do not know what lies beyond.

Pace

Agreed. It will also teach you to fly by 'feel' and not by numbers so you are far less likely to inadvertantly go into 'departure', even with your eyes outside, where they should be when flying VFR.

The lack of aerobatic training aircraft and the almost total lack of instructors who can do it, however, is a problem.

If we are looking at spins most trainers will spin well there are just a few bad boys.
The problem appeared in the past to be the lack of suitably trained instructors
I really do want to take the emphasis away from spinning as if it is unique and bundle it up with all what you could call out of the box behaviours!
The problem I have with avoidance which is obviously the best thing to do is that it leaves a big dollop of unknown " what if I mess up what will happen? What do I do ? Am I in a spiral dive or spin? Will I react instinctively and identify instinctively what is happening ? "
The biggest fear is fear of the unknown take away the unknown and it has to make for a more confident and capable pilot should anything ever happen.

I am not trying to take away from the avoid method of training as avoid always has to be better and in a perfect world is but ??? Maybe I just had a different generation of instructor /examiners :E

Pace

In my opinion, yes.

Whilst demonstrating them to PPL students is reasonable, I don't personally think that spins need to be in the PPL syllabus (I do think they should be in the CPL syllabus, although they aren't), but the fact remains that aeroplanes can bite in the spin. There is suffient accident data to show that types which have spun 10,000+ times satisfactorily can then find an odd mode and spin into the ground. The odds of this happening are tiny, but they are not close enough to zero to justify ignoring such fundamental safety precautions.

I'll admit I've done this, which I'm arguing against, several times - always however when I had to finish a bit of training and the school in question didn't have the facility. I have not, and will not, ever do(ne) this as captain. I'll also avoid doing it with somebody else as captain wherever I reasonably can.

Two people I know, both instructors, have found themselves in an unrecoverable spin. One was in a Bulldog and wearing a parachute - he's still fine thanks. The other was in a T67 and not wearing a parachute; he should have been.

G

As a low hour ppl I have been following this thread with interest. It is something I have thought about since getting my licence. It's all very well saying go ahead and practice by yourself but the thought is in the back of one's mind what happens if I get it wrong and end in a spin. Spin recovery is talked about, but not practiced, due to the number of instructors and students not living to tell the tale in the past.

Having said that I have accidently spun a C152 with an instructor (silly me tried to correct a wing dropping at low speed with aileron!) so I have experienced the recovery technique. Also I did some spins many years ago on a 2 week gliding course.

So, went up today in the C152 and decided to practice stalling clean. Discovered a problem, it's one thing stalling with a 13 stone instructor beside you, with just me I was doing 40 knots, stall warning sounding (faintly!), yoke right back and no sign of nose dropping!

Having followed other threads it's one thing practising without an instructor beside you in a 152, it's another in the likes of a Warrior which if not properly configured sounds like a nightmare even for someone who is well experienced in the type (thinking now of the fatal crash near Wrexham last year).

One point nobody seems to have emphasised is if you do practice low speed handling or stalling, make sure you have plenty of altitude before you start.

"One point nobody seems to have emphasised is if you do practice low speed handling or stalling, make sure you have plenty of altitude before you start."

That should be covered as the first letter of your HASELL checks!

Any Pa28 Warrior I've flown, I've stalled it at a safe height early on during the rental, and I've never found, or heard of, a problem.

My apologies, should read Tomahawk not Warrior. :\

There is nothing unusual about stalling a tommy. You reduce the angle of attack and it unstalls.

If you have pants skills and use the airleons during the stall you will get a wing drop which is what should happen. Which is solved by applying rudder to stop any more yaw and reducing AoA.

Its one of the reasons why tommy trained pilots are better than cessna trained.

The point I was trying to make was that if during training you are warned that stalling could lead you into a spin and if you have not experienced a spin then practicing stall recovery by yourself might not seem appealing? As regards inadvertently entering a spin in a Tomahawk my comment is as a result of reading another thread on this forum regarding the fatal crash near Chester/Wrexham last year.

As other posters have already commented spinning should be part of the ppl syllabus.

It was when I did the PPL (1978) and we happily spun the C150, often with a 'flick' entry to ensure it span rather than spiralled. Don't think I'd do that now except perhaps if it was an aerobat and we had 'chutes on. As Ghengis says, every once in a while a normally docile spinner will lock into a hard-to-recover spin.

I've done a few decades of aeros and probably hundreds of spins, and you soon realise that despite a similar entry technique, not all spins are predictably similar. I have been lucky in that all mine were recoverable without too much bother (flat spins in the Yak not excepted!) but it doesn't take much imagination to understand why some very experienced pilots spin-in.

I'd happily aerobat the Chipmunk (gentle basic 'Sunday afternoon' aeros) without a 'chute, but these days I'd think twice about deliberately spinning it without one.

Both UK and USA saw a reduction in spin fatalities when it was dropped from the syllabus.

I'd argue strongly that it should be in the CPL syllabus - and done properly rather than the "quick see and let's not even bother with a parachute" done in most instructors courses. But I'd leave it out of the PPL syllabus beyond the current "understand and avoid" that's there.

G