X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:49:05 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from QMTA01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.16] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.16) with ESMTP id 3882565 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:16:26 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.62.16; envelope-from=aadamson@highrf.com Received: from OMTA06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.51]) by QMTA01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id rXtg1c00316LCl051YFrLC; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:15:51 +0000 Received: from aadamsonPC ([98.192.103.179]) by OMTA06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id rYFn1c0023sEpC23SYFrJq; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:15:51 +0000 From: "Alan Adamson" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [LML] Re: FAA RESCINDS INFO LETTER X-Original-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:15:33 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <029001ca4aaf$96dd2cd0$c4978670$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0291_01CA4A8E.0FCBB3E0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AcpKpACu3ru1U98nRrqhiDUYrr//tAAChU7A Content-Language: en-us This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0291_01CA4A8E.0FCBB3E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My only nickel on this topic. I don't believe that experiencing a *fully developed* stall is the panacea that some would content. However, I *do* think that experiencing the slow flight characteristics *prior* to a stall are indeed a valuable experience. For example, what do *mushy* controls feel like, how much control authority does it take to recover, etc - all *prior* to a stall. Now some would argue that you have to get into a stall to experience any of the above, however I would argue differently. That first time you get close to a high AOA, and are only *close* to an impending stall is all you need to know you never *really* want to get there. Also, while on this topic... For those with an AOA, *DO NOT* trust that because you bought the model that is made for your particular airframe, and were told that it came *pre calibrated*, that you still don't need to go do the calibration procedure. If we could, we'd ask Roger, a fellow, fallen, Legacy pilot who died in a landing stall at OSH 2 years ago. He and I the week prior to his accident had numerous conversations about calibration. I had just done an FG, and he contended that he didn't need to do his as it was *from the factory* calibrated. I asked him if he'd ever heard the warning while landing his airplane and he said no.... I would content that it was not calibrated then. The calibration procedure sets a buffer of a number of percent *above* the stall where you are to get the "angle, angle, push" warning. He'd never heard it..... I heard it all the time, just as wheels touched down or in the flare, prior to touch down, in the FG that I calibrated! Just to have the device isn't going to do you any good if you don't know how to recognize it's warnings, or it never provides any warnings. BTW, you *do not* have to stall the airplane just to calibrate the AOA, but you *do* need 2 people in the cockpit and you need a way to detect zero g's and you do need to get slow and make some, somewhat abrupt command inputs. Again, just my nickel and I'm sure more wood for the fire... Alan From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Gary Casey Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 2:45 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: FAA RESCINDS INFO LETTER Maybe I'm just adding fuel to the fire, but this talk about practicing stalls is, to me, a little confusing. It is generally acknowledged that a stall in the pattern is unrecoverable, and that seems to be true for certified aircraft as well(I've not heard "I stalled/spun in the pattern and lived to tell about it). So the objective is to avoid that stall. Recovering from a stall at altitude is apparently recoverable, but there are almost no accidents caused by high-altitude stalls - I think. So some recommend practicing stalls as a way to do what? avoid stalls, right? Maybe. There doesn't seem to be a lot of accidents caused by not recovering from stalls correctly - the accidents is caused by getting into the stall in the first place. But isn't the best way to practice avoiding stalls to practice NOT stalling? Just a thought - practice in most other fields of endeavor involves repetitively doing the thing that gives the desired outcome. We don't practice the wrong thing (the thing that produces the bad outcome) to see what it is like. I've got nothing against practicing stalls, but perhaps not doing it isn't a sure-fire path to the coffin. What percentage of the people that perished in a stall/spin had previous stall/spin experience compared to the general pilot population? I have no idea, but I'll propose that it might not be any different. Just a thought. Gary Casey ES157, Chelton stall warning, AOA stall warning, stall strips and ventral strakes installed _____ ------=_NextPart_000_0291_01CA4A8E.0FCBB3E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My only nickel on this topic.

 

I don't believe that experiencing a *fully = developed* stall is the panacea that some would content.  However, I = *do* think that experiencing the slow flight characteristics *prior* = to a stall are indeed a valuable experience.  For example, what do = *mushy* controls feel like, how much control authority does it take to recover, = etc - all *prior* to a stall.

 

Now some would argue that you have to get into a stall to experience any of the above, however I would argue differently. That = first time you get close to a high AOA, and are only *close* to an impending = stall is all you need to know you never *really* want to get = there.

 

Also, while on this topic... For those with an AOA, = *DO NOT* trust that because you bought the model that is made for your particular = airframe, and were told that it came *pre calibrated*, that you still don't = need to go do the calibration procedure.

 

If we could, we'd ask Roger, a fellow, fallen, Legacy = pilot who died in a landing stall at OSH 2 years ago.  He and I the week = prior to his accident had numerous conversations about calibration.  I had = just done an FG, and he contended that he didn't need to do his as it was = *from the factory* calibrated.  I asked him if he'd ever heard the = warning while landing his airplane and he said no.... I would content that it was not calibrated then.  The calibration procedure sets a buffer of a = number of percent *above* the stall where you are to get the "angle, = angle, push" warning.  He'd never heard it..... I heard it all the = time, just as wheels touched down or in the flare, prior to touch down, =  in the FG that I calibrated!

 

Just to have the device isn't going to do you any good if = you don't know how to recognize it's warnings, or it never provides any = warnings.

 

BTW, you *do not* have to stall the airplane just = to calibrate the AOA, but you *do* need 2 people in the cockpit and = you need a way to detect zero g's and you do need to get slow and make some, somewhat abrupt command inputs.

 

Again, just my nickel and I'm sure more wood for the = fire...

 

Alan

 

From:= Lancair = Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Gary Casey
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 2:45 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: FAA RESCINDS INFO LETTER

 

Maybe I'm just adding fuel to the fire, but this = talk about practicing stalls is, to me, a little confusing.  It is generally acknowledged that a stall in the pattern is unrecoverable, and that = seems to be true for certified aircraft as well(I've not heard "I stalled/spun = in the pattern and lived to tell about it).  So the objective is to avoid = that stall.  Recovering from a stall at altitude is apparently = recoverable, but there are almost no accidents caused by high-altitude stalls - I think.  So some recommend practicing stalls as a way to do what? avoid = stalls, right?  Maybe.  There doesn't seem to be a lot of accidents = caused by not recovering from stalls correctly - the accidents is caused by = getting into the stall in the first place.  But isn't the best way to practice = avoiding stalls to practice NOT stalling?  Just a thought - practice in most = other fields of endeavor involves repetitively doing the thing that gives the = desired outcome.  We don't practice the wrong thing (the thing that = produces the bad outcome) to see what it is like.  I've got nothing against = practicing stalls, but perhaps not doing it isn't a sure-fire path to the coffin.  What percentage of the people that perished in a stall/spin had = previous stall/spin experience compared to the general pilot population?  I = have no idea, but I'll propose that it might not be any different.  Just a thought.

Gary Casey

ES157, Chelton stall warning, AOA stall warning, = stall strips and ventral strakes installed

 

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0291_01CA4A8E.0FCBB3E0--