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