From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] More AOA
To: lml
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:46:29 -0400
Message-ID: <web-424768@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <415065A1.4070801@tele2.it>
References: <list-422386@logan.com>
 <415065A1.4070801@tele2.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "John F. Herminghaus" <catignano@tele2.it>:

  Mark,
  
  Please, there is no relationship between airspeed and stalling speed. The
rule is "a stall can happen in any configuration, in any attitude and at any
AIRSPEED".
  
  To sum up the choices at hand:
  
     * An AOA tells you how far you are away from a stall,
     * The classic stall warning tells you that you are almost there,
     * Airspeed tells you nothing unless you take out the POH, go through
       the charts and evaluate the situation you were in 20 or 30 seconds
       before to get the information the AOA would have given you with
       one glance.
  
  Not everything required is spam cans is bad, and stall warning is one of
them. I have never understood why Lancair does not foresee them in their kits.
The explanation given that the approach speed is high enough that you don't
need one is ridiculous. Aircraft don't need stall warning, but pilots do.
  
  If you have ever done an missed approach in solid IMC at night, you will
never fly an a/c without at least a stall warning and preferably an AOA. I
have and I won't.
  
  Regards,
  
  John Herminghaus