Quote:
Thank you M-J. It's a bit off putting to read such things about a supposedly benign training aircraft. What would have happened to a student solo?

Don't student spin accidents usually involve screwing up the turn from base to final? So it hardly matters what sort of spin it is, or which recovery method works, as there isn't the height to recover? Quote:

I seem to remember that a number of "accidents" occurred very shortly after qualifying by pilots spearing in to their parents/girlfriends house. I can recall circling over mine with my daughter on board, first pax, & pulling considerable unexpected G as I straightened up from the turn.

Statistically, spinning off full power climb from an initial climb or go-around is more likely. However, this has exactly the same outcome as you describe - a stall or spin from too low to do anything about it.

The scenaro Crash 1 descrbes is not uncommon as well, and in both cases the moral is clear - know what the approach to the stall looks like, and stay well aware from it close to the ground unless you're trying to land.

G

I was shown high rotational spinning in the bulldog by the cfi (ex hunter pilot) you let the stick drift forward once the spin has started (rather like competition aero's in a mono) you are falling out of the sky about 18,000ft per minute. recovery is noticeably longer and you need every bit of your 10,000 start height.

Never mind a solo student, I don't think in the heat of the moment i would have thought about putting the power up to give more flow over the rudder. Thats was with a cpl and ir pass under my belt.

But I wouldn't have gone anywhere near the attitude the instructor did and I wouldn't have waggled the controls the way he did either.

Chances of a solo student doing it in my opinion is nil. They won't have the balls to get the plane into the required attitude.

I haven't either since.

About 205 MPH? Isn't that difficult to achieve in a stalled aircraft?

I did 9200 FPM down for a few seconds in the Caravan, and I thought that was really something!

18,000 was a figure I remember being quoted for high rotational and 11,000 for standard.

to be honest I've never stopped to workout if this was true or not - 205mph in a stalled a/c with lots of drag does seem fast - but you are very nose low with little oscillation.

a standard 3 turn spin/recovery took around 2500ft, high rotational took about 4000 iirc (was about 25 years ago! and I could be talking total bs! - Beagle might know, he used to fly them)

This is where flying gliders comes into it's own. Every year you have to do your spin checks and you can spin to your hearts content in between too, although scrubbing height for no good reason is anathema to most glider pilots. Glider pilots spend most of their time very near the stall at high angles of bank; usually pulling in and out of buffet. Consequently I've never feared spins in a powered aircraft. Not to say that I fly willy nilly, I've never been near a spin unintentionally. Probably because I know how easy it is to finish up in one.

Oops forgot the OP's question. I've no idea whether it's clicked or not. I just fly around. Haven't died yet.

But I wouldn't have gone anywhere near the attitude the instructor did and I wouldn't have waggled the controls the way he did either. Quote:

First time I circled the house, 45deg bank, wife came out to wave & I waved back by waggling. How close was I ?

It depends upon your airspeed, and how hard you were pulling in pitch when you did it. In my opinion, useful stall/spin awareness cannot exist for a pilot who has not actually flown a number of stalls and spins.

The design requirements for certification require that it not be possible for a single engined aircraft to be able to get into an unrecoverable spin, with any use of the controls - but it might take a while to get out, and you could stretch some airplane depending how abusive you are going in.

In some cases, "any use of the controls" included throttle as a control (which in this case I vigorously opposed), but I was overruled and still required to demonstrate 75% power spins in a 210HP Lake Amphibian. It worked, but I'm never doing that again! It did show me though, how a pilot could power themselves into a departure spin (and a climbing turn over/around the trees at the end of a short lake is just the occasion for it to happen). That plane was on its back so fast, it did make my head spin!

crash one,

stall speed in a turn is the square root of the load factor plus s/l clean stalling speed

ie

45 aob is about 1.37g iirc? so multiply sq root of this - 1.17 by your s/l clean stalling speed to get the stall speed in a 45 turn (this assumes you are applying load)

if you waggle whilst applying load and reach 60 aob your stall speed will increase by a factor of 1.41, abt 80 aob its 2.4 (assuming you maintain load)

Errrm, there is NO SUCH THING AS STALL SPEED! Only stall angle (of attack). Fly aeros, and you'll soon see there's often little relationship with the stall and what the ASI is reading.

And that doesn't just apply in aeros - after all, the aeroplane has no idea it is doing aeros!

Going back to the original post for a moment.
"When does it all click?"

You say that you're having to focus on thinking about everything all the time (my words, not yours). That's a good thing.

The best advice I ever heard, I got on the day I passed my PPL, from a retired airline captain. He said "Congratulations! Now you have a license to kill yourself."

It took me a minute to realise what he'd said, because everyone was congratulating me. But when I asked him what he meant, he said something to the effect of:

When you get your license or any additional ratings or certificates, you're at your peak of knowledge and ability, after that you slowly start to degrade in your knowledge and ability. Many pilots can't pass the PPL exam a year after passing it. You need to continue training, on a regular basis, and continue learning, in order to maintain a level of knowledge and ability that is close to where you are now. If you don't continue to train and learn, your skills will degrade until one day, when you think you're as good as you are now, but you're not, and you'll do something that you could do now, but can't do then, and you will die. I only hope you don't take someone else with you.

But, if you continue to train, learn, study, work hard on thinking while your in the plane, never get complacent, work on your skills, you can fly for a long long time and never have an incident.

--
Through the years I've seen young pilots who think they've "got it" who then get complacent, and their skills do deteriorate.

My advice to you, is this, the minute you think you've "got it" and know what you're doing, go and get some training and make sure you do "have it". I bet you'll find that there are some simple little things that you've forgotten, or have stopped doing.

Keep flying, enjoy it, but keep working hard in the cockpit, keep thinking ahead of the plane. Eventually you'll be thinking further ahead than you are now, but never accept your performance as "good enough". There's always room for improvement.

A part of it all clicking is knowing that a wing stalls at an AoA, and that is influenced by airspeed and loading. At any given airpseed, the wing can be instantly unstalled (or prevented from stalling) by pitching down. This must be instinct - and is an important "click".

I used to entertain myself, flying my 150 under control (and wagging the wings) at indicated airspeeds of less than 20 MPH. But these events were brief, because they were flown at less than 1G.

ok,ok,ok

stall angle of attack will equate to a speed which as about xxx higher than the stall angle..... you get my drift

Well, to be honest, that drift I don't quite get. Perhaps I'm just not taking the meaning you intend, but his is one of those few rather pivotal "click" topics for newer pilots so it should be very clear...

Only for a given weight and loading (G). Stall angle never varies for a given configuration; stall speed can be anything you want it to be, so is meaningless.

what I meant was that if a ppl is taught critical angle occurs at an air speed of about 55kts he can know that in a 60 aob turn at 2g stall speed will be about 80kts

He doesn't really need to know that the critical angle, there are no visual cues and stalls under g will be sharper so less warning from the airframe.
In this instance best to know not get to close to 80kt, unless he wants to do max rate/min radius turn and hold it on the buffet.

sure shaggy but in GA weight variation is generally so small it makes bugger all difference, so as far as I can see speed is a useful reference point as long as you accept its not definitive.

I wondered how long it would take before the mere mention of the word stall & speed on the same day would trigger the time honoured response of screaming ANGLE OF ATTACK.
Even in spite of "straight & level" being added.
Why for Christs sake can't we agree that to discuss stalling first of all WE KNOW THERE iS NO SUCH THING AS STALL BLOODY SPEED, ONLY ANGLE OF ATTACK.
:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Yes, angle of attack is the definitive way to determine the point at which a wing's stalls. Fine, I have no dispute with that. So, with no AofA indicator in my li'l 3-axes (plural of axis for those about to get into a spelling and grammar drift) microlight, how do those pundits of the AofA tell me when I am getting close to the stall? I'll tell you - it's called an ASI and it works extremely well!

Threads might run a bit longer on subject if they weren't diverted by having to explain every word as if we are all dumb assed & stupid. I would love a pound for every time we get boringly reminded of the bleeding obvious.
Just for the record by the way. When I "waggled" the wings at a bank angle of 45deg, I did, an instant before, push the nose down a bit just to make sure I had enough SPEED to avoid the stall. Whilst I was doing all this I was aware that my altitude was at least 800 ft above the ground, as I had previously noted that my house sits on ground at an elevation is 350 ft. I was also aware of my fuel state.
Just in case someone would like to enquire, anything else, please ask!

Wow, I cant believe this thread is still going, thanks to you all for your replies. I'm glad foxmouth elaborated on the spinning part of the post.
This was done in a C152 and like you said it was a hard pull back then it quite dramatically fell to the left and all I could see was the ground going round in circles. I don't know if it was a spin or a spiral dive but my instructor applied right rudder, yoke forward then power when it levelled off. It felt like the worst rollercoaster you've ever been on.

When Gertrude mentioned the base to final bit -
I started searching around and couldn't believe how big a deal this is for, I assume, newish pilots and how easily it can be done. In fact any turn for that matter not just base to final.
I think if I'd have read all this before I flew solo I wouldn't have done it. My instructor obviously mentioned it along the way but probably not in a scare story sort of way so I must have put it to the back of my mind in the spur of the moment, but I think if I overshot the turn to final I would have done exactly the things you're not supposed to do; steeper bank, rudder and pitch up. I couldn't get to sleep last night for thinking about this because I could easily not be here now. I hope I'm just overthinking it and don't lose confidence but I had turns 'ticked off' but they are now very much unticked off!

I don't think I need to worry about it clicking any time soon, stalling in a turn is now my number one fear and it'll always be there in the back of my mind at every turn. I am glad it has been discussed here so thanks to everyone for opening my eyes to the danger. Guess who's dreading their next turn now? And every one after that!

Oh dear....

Good luck with that. I've stalled a Yak 52 at 160 kts IAS, and flown many aeroplanes at an IAS off the bottom of the clock, with no stall. So have millions of other pilots.

SO WHY PERSIST IN USING THE WRONG BLEEDIN NOMENCLATURE ?

Two words; wing loading. Can make a hell of a difference.

Bottom line is it doesn't matter a hoot what you call it, but it matters a hell of a lot that you understand what's going on. It seems from some posts on here and historically on aviation forums when the shouting of "PEDANT!" and other derision such as "pundits of AoA" greets a statement of fact, that quite few do not really know what's going on, and worse, they think it just doesn't matter - the ASI will do it OK for them!

Well, I direct you back to pilots who will instinctively react correctly to an aeroplane in a base-to-final turn, perhaps over-ruddered, about to depart due excessive AoA, and those react not at all, or incorrectly, and who will die. Do the instinctive ones have a model in their heads of stall speed, or of AoA?

Exactly! There are ONLY tactile clues, what the airframe is telling you by the way it, and the controls feel. It is a failing, if a pilot is depending only on the indicated airspeed for stall awareness. Firstly because an error or failing of the airspeed indicator will result in the pilot being clueless. Worse, if the pilot is so single minded about a speed being the primary factor in a stall, they will wrongly think that increasing speed will prevent or recover a stall.

Increasing speed might prevent a stall, but it takes time, and is uncertain. Reducing AoA is an instant effect based upon pilot action (instinctive, I hope). I can stall and unstall an aircraft without changing the airspeed at all. I can fly most airplanes in steady flight slower than their published airspeed. Also recall that when the speed at which a stall can be expected is determined, it is expressed as CAS rather than the indicated IAS. Are pilots who are approaching the stall pulling out the position error correction table from section 5 of the Flight Manual to determine the correction for the stall "speed" as they approach a stall?

So, based upon the foregoing series of posts, I now think it important to define a precise and effective understanding of all things stall and AoA as a "click" point for a new pilot. You have not clicked, until you are very conversant with these factors, and your instinctive reaction to approach to unintended stall is to instantly reduce AoA and prevent yaw.

I always assumed that was what every qualified pilot did anyway? :confused:

@Kennyc
 

Being aware of the risk is great and potentially live-saving, being afraid is IMHO unnecessary. Unless you are rough and frantic on the controls (which is bad flying anyway), there is IMO virtually no risk that you will make a garden variety PPL plane suddenly drop into a deadly spin in a turn. Get your instructor to practice approaching this kind of situation at a safe altitude, you will probably see that flying the plane in such a way just feels wrong and awkward, well before there is a real risk of a stall with a wing drop, even if the stall warning were inoperative *wink wink nudge nudge*.

FWIW, I remember an occasion where I got a bit too slow on turning for base and finals (at our aerodrome, this is just one continuous turn, as there is no rectangular pattern). Even before the stall warning kicked in (it never did) the soft und mushy feeling of the controls was enough to tell me that something was amiss. Stick slightly forward, a trifle of power to check the rate of descent, and all was fine again. Just never yank the stick/yoke back in panic when you feel uneasy in a turn at low airspeed, and you should be OK.

Edit: I suppose someone already recommended you go and get (and read) a copy of "Stick and Rudder" by Wolfgang Langewiesche?

If that were true this thread would have petered out long ago. And there'd be fewer pilots pushing up daisies, too.

Can't argue with that. Sad though that so many pilots have crashed. Do you think the training is wrong?

No training is correct its just most don't practise regularly. And thier currency is low.

The reactions don't get instinctive until its been repeated at regular intervals for a while. Which is why instructors click quicker. You can be doing stalling 3-4's a week same with the other exercises. And when you teach it makes you think about your actions which the renforces them.

If ppls would go once a month for an hour doing the exercises for the first year with or without an instructor it makes a huge difference to there reactions under stress.

How about a show of hands when was the last time you did a stall or pfl or steep turn?

I was last month in the sim for stalling and steep turns. Did them single engine in a twin to boot which makes matters a bit more interesting.

Stall awareness and "clicking"

To quote Wikipedia:

Too many times, I have been right seat to a "qualified" pilot who did recognize that they were approaching a stall, either imminently, or the extension of the necessary flight path (too low and slow on final, for example).

I certainly think that some training is very inadequate in this regard.

A new pilot has apparently learned to be scared of stalling in a turn, and thus, by extension, turns themselves. That is a training failure.

Instead the training should be teaching increasing alertness, progressing to alarm when AoA is increasing, and speed or inertia are decreasing at the same time. The ONLY way to meaningfully teach this is to demonstrate then mentor it during training, while preventing it from being perceived as a meaningless head spinning roller coaster. In that case, the student get no value in training, just a scare.

Instructors: Your training stalls and spins, and approach to these, should allow as much time as possible to elapse start to recovery, with meaningful patter appropriately throughout. The blindingly fast "Watch this..." and flish flash it's all done, leaves students unaware and afraid, rather than working toward getting. Let them see what happens, so they learn, and one day click....

Blanking the ASI helps as it gets the student focused on attitude instead of airspeed

OK. Let us assume that numerous pilots rely on the ASI to keep them alive. Fine. But and it is a big but. The ASI is "in most GA light aircraft" the only tool in the box other than the pilots own knowledge/experience/feel. When we discuss stalling at fr instance in this case, different angles of bank at the same weight & balance configuration, it is pointless stating that at straight and level the aircraft will stall at 17.5 deg, however at 45 deg of bank it will stall at 17.5 deg, on the other hand if the bank angle is increased to 75 deg then it will stall at 17.5 deg.
To attempt to do the calculation as the aircraft is actually stalling, working out the effect of all the variables to arrive at what? A SPEED. Absolutely impossible, unless I have seriously misjudged the superhuman Spock like mathematical genius of the average competent pilot.
So I think to be sensible can we just agree, as I always have agreed, that the ASI is no more than a guide to be used with reference to all the other variables, visual cues, airframe feel etc?
I too flew gliders, I also stalled a K13 at 80 knots, my Emeraude stalls at (God help me) 40 knots straight & level clean, though I've managed to fly it at 35. I don't profess to be an expert, all I'm trying to do is use what we all have, an ASI.
Yes I agree it is all angle of attack, I have known this fact for a long long time, please, please, for the love of God please do not keep reminding me, I KNOW.

I also agree with the training thing as well. The instructor who has barely spun the thing himself wants to get it over with as quick as possible, the current system of only doing the "incipient" bit, recover from the stall at the first bleep of the warner. I went to do stalls once (ex 10a/b?). Arrived at the area, stall warner not working, exercise cancelled, full stop!
The K13 didn't have a stall warner, nor did the K6E, nor does the Emeraude. Unless you include the stick shaker, highly sophisticated piece of 1959 technology.
Sad thing to be afraid of the stall, far far better to understand it properly.
Go to a gliding club & learn to actually fly.

I may have mentioned it once or twenty times before...that I think all powered pilots should solo on a glider first. Things like stalls, spins are all so obvious in a glider. You can turn until you start to nibble and just relax the back pressure, it's not even a movement as such to get the wing working again then squeeze to the nibble and release, you can do that all day long and you can hear the wing struggling. You can throw it into a spin one way then the other and feel everything that is going on without the racket and vibration of the engine up front.

I suppose folk will still fly like they drive their cars though.

Agree with that.
Doing a "Mutual" once with a syndicate partner, she asked, do you normally fly at 2 knot above the stall? You do if you want to stay in the lift!
And yes it's a reflex action at the first little shake. It's also definitely transferable to power with all the noise and vibration of that instant lift device up front.

Oh dear again....

This is precisely the sort of arse-backwards thinking about stalling that I'm banging on about.

YOU DO NOT DO A CALCULATION! You have an awareness of what the aeroplane is doing regarding the AoA of the wing, and you fly the wing using attitude, and if neccessary if you push it to the limit, subtle pre-departure clues, which trigger subconscious reactions to reduce AoA (and remove any yaw).

YOU DO NOT ARRIVE AT A SPEED!
The ASI is NOT a reliable anti-stall device as should be plain by now to anyone who has read the posts on here.

However, when an instuctor is teaching a student he will of neccesity use the term 'stall speed' and teach the student not to fly the approach below a certain speed as 'there be dragons'! He does this because there's no way an ab initio student will have the experience to avoid high AoA, and certainly won't have in his toolbox the recognition of pre-departure clues, and the auto-reactions to prevent such departure. So he is taught by rote; by numbers. This is (I think) unavoidable.

However, when we 'grow up' as pilots we should ditch that, as well as ditching stuff like flying circuits the way a PPL is taught ("at this point on base reduce power to x, extend X flap, trim for X speed etc") and just make the aeroplane do what we want it to. Without even thinking about it. It becomes an extension of the pilot's body.

That is, I think, what is meant in this thread by 'Click'. Once it has 'Clicked' with a pilot, he chucks out the baby stuff he was of necessity fed at PPL, and flies like an aviator!

Oh, and :

I started my flying as a glider pilot. I do remember one gristled old instructor, frustrated at trying to teach basic flying techniques in the limited time between cable launch and landing (in a Ka4) saying "these people should get a PPL so they'll know how to fly before they take up gliding!".

I strongly believe that if you use the ASI to identify the stall, you will miss the stall warnings.

Yes, under a majority of conditions the ASI will indicate approximately when the stall will happen, but it's like relying on the Tachometer (fixed pitch) to tell you if you're climbing. The tach will "slow" slightly when climbing and increase slightly when descending under the majority of conditions.

To understand the stall, you have to fly at the stall "speed" (angle of attack, but for that for that aircraft, with that weight loading, temperature, altitude, tach speed, etc, it will equate to a certain speed) aircraft condition for a while until you get used to the feel of it (in that aircraft, with that weight loading, temperature, altitude, tach speed, etc). Do some turns, find out how it affects the stall. This was a big part of my training as far as I can recall (it was 20 years ago), and it's been a part of every aircraft checkout I've ever done. Even when training on a twin, it seems like most of the training was single engine close to the stall speed.

Gliding would be a great way to experience it (I never have, but would like to some day), but it would be limited to the specific aircraft you're in.

If you're using the ASI, or are not comfortable with stalls, or not comfortable with spins, tell an instructor who is comfortable with spins, and go do some "ultra-slow" flight, stalls and spins. (OK, in todays aircraft you might only get to do spin entry) You'll be amazed at how much more confident and comfortable you are flying the plane.

What is the LRI

Problem solved !!

SSD. Your post 62. Please accept my apology for seeming to deride yours and others valuable contributions here and elsewhere on the subject of AofA. That was not my intention, very far from it in fact. From a dictionary, Pundit. Noun. A person who knows a lot about a particular subject and is therefore often asked to give an opinion about it. It follows therefore that I respect your opinion and those of others and had said that I agreed with it.

Crash One explains my predicament precisely! I can only go with what I have fitted (ASI), using it as "a guide to be used with reference to all the other variables, visual cues, airframe feel etc".

My manoeuvres are very limited by the class of aircraft and the various important speeds are tabulated in the POH. My max AoB is only 60 degrees and I know from basic training that I need to keep an eye on the ASI and mind on 1.4 Vs when turning steeply. Awareness of these (hopefully), will keep me safely in the envelope. For my sort of flying, it's all I can do!

Ariels, the last thing I want to do is pull anyone away from what keeps them safe in the air. Robust discussion about 'clicking' such as we enjoy in this thread simply presents the experiences of pilots here. And of course, I don't know your aircraft, in which it may not be practical to experience frequent excursions to the wrong side of the drag curve, and the wrong side of the critical angle of attack.

But hopefully you will have picked up that the ASI is not always a 'get out of jail free' card where stalling is concerned.

BTW the best way, in my experience, to appreciate the lack of a connection between the ASI and AoA, and to teach a pilot to fly by attitude and 'feel' (especially regarding flow breakaway in the stall), is to regularly participate in aeros. Not everyone's cup of milk I know, and of course you need to be in a certified aerobatic aeroplane (please don't ever try to aerobat a non-aerobatic type - one of my PPL instructors killed himself and another guy doing that just after I'd qualified back in the late 70s).

Since the AOA is constant in the vertical in the first part of this clip, at what point can the wing be considered to be stalled? With reference to the ASI?

SSD.
It seems that you are obsessed with the idea that anyone mentioning the phrase "stall speed" obviously has no idea of the concept of the subject.
Oh dear indeed, I am becoming increasingly as frustrated as Aerials and others.
Please tell me what words you want written down & in what order to convince you that some of us here, myself included do actually understand.
To keep banging on about angle of attack as if we don't get it is not getting us anywhere. We do "get it".
The problem is convincing you that we get it.
You can't spin, stall, and generally chuck a glider about with the entire panel covered with a sheet of paper as we used to do years ago without knowing that the ASI is not required. That you "feel" the stall. How else can I put it?
Then when someone in all innocence asks, what speed does it stall at? All hell breaks loose, the !!!!e hits the fan, and instructors go blue in the face with utter joy, "We got another one here boys".
OK. No calculations, No Speed, Just Angle.