X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 07:45:56 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.59.227] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.8) with ESMTP id 6706635 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 13:56:02 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.59.227; envelope-from=jmorgan1023@comcast.net Received: from omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id KRk71n0020bG4ec5CWvUGo; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:55:28 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([24.11.157.196]) by omta03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id KWvT1n00c4EXR5U3PWvT0N; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:55:28 +0000 From: Jack Morgan Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_93C4C021-8FBF-4757-86E9-C37C6519CC1F" Subject: Cirrus spin in X-Original-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 13:55:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) --Apple-Mail=_93C4C021-8FBF-4757-86E9-C37C6519CC1F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sorry to fuel the controversy but looking at the instrument panel (AOA = or otherwise) when an aircraft has been placed in an unusual attitude by = a alarmed pilot is the last place that can save the outcome. Once the = rotation started and before the aircraft was inverted, the only way out = was lots of forward stick and proper rudder management while looking = outside. This is not the instinctive reaction for any pilot unless he = has significant hours of aerobatics. I would like to avoid the argument = about whether or not an AOA yelling at an alarmed pilot would help or = hurt. The lesson is don't do anything when confusion sets in until you begin = to understand the situation you are in. In any case, rapid control = inputs when at pattern altitude and speed must be avoided=85. especially = when flying high performance aircraft like the Cirrus and our Lancairs. = If the pilot had taken a second to verify that no mid air was imminent = and then flown the airplane rather than reacting to a harried controller = we would not be trading emails on this. I am not arguing against AOA's or trying to promote aerobatics. Having = an AOA on the panel should not give a pilot a false sense of security = that all unusual attitudes can be avoided. The accident rate while = getting properly trained in aerobatics is slightly higher so it is also = understandable that it is not for everyone. Don't care whose fault it was on this one=85.. after the mistakes were = made, the pilot was the only one who could have prevented the accident=85 = his fault or not. Jack Morgan On Jan 28, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Lancair Mailing List wrote: > From: Terrence O'Neill > Subject: Re: [LML] Re: LOBO eNews -- January 2014 > Date: January 27, 2014 2:24:52 PM EST > To: lml@lancaironline.net >=20 >=20 > Kevin, > Yes, I agree. He pulled his wing up into a stall-angle -- because he = did not have or did not use an AOA -angle of attack indicator. >=20 > An AOA indicator PRIMARILY shows a pilot -- instantly, eye-to-hand -- = how close he himself is pitching his wing -- to its stall angle. > Speed has nothing to do with that; a wing stalls at an ANGLE. >=20 > The FAA is STILL not requiring training using AOAs -- fifty (50) years = after the US Navy put them on every carrier-based aircraft. > What was the result of using AOAs on landings by the excellent Navy = pilots' accident rate? > It cut landing accidents fifty (50) percent in the very first year! > Unintentional stalls cause about a quarter to a third of all general = aviation fatalities every year. > The FAA is a stubborn, slow learner, imho. > It is so sad to lose the wonderful pilots and their friends and = families, and their beautiful flying machines .. needlessly. >=20 > Terrence O'Neill > 4 yeas a Navy pilot. > I designed, built and flight tested and major-modified and flight = tested six original aircraft, using my own-design of a simple AOA = vane... so I could SEE how close I was flying my wings to their fixed = stall AOA. > Have published magazine articles ranting on the same need for 50 years = ... but pilots seem to be locked into thinking programmed by their = first FAA-dictated flight training. --Apple-Mail=_93C4C021-8FBF-4757-86E9-C37C6519CC1F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Sorry = to fuel the controversy but looking at the instrument panel (AOA or = otherwise) when an aircraft has been placed in an unusual attitude by a = alarmed pilot is the last place that can save the outcome. Once the = rotation started and before the aircraft was inverted, the only way out = was lots of forward stick and proper rudder management while looking = outside. This is not the instinctive reaction for any pilot unless he = has significant hours of aerobatics. I would like to avoid the argument = about whether or not an AOA yelling at an alarmed pilot would help or = hurt.

The lesson is don't do anything when confusion = sets in until you begin to understand the situation you are in. In any = case, rapid control inputs when at pattern altitude and speed must be = avoided=85. especially when flying high performance aircraft like the = Cirrus and our Lancairs. If the pilot had taken a second to verify that = no mid air was imminent and then flown the airplane rather than reacting = to a harried controller we would not be trading emails on = this.

I am not arguing against AOA's or trying = to promote aerobatics. Having an AOA on the panel should not give a = pilot a false sense of security that all unusual attitudes can be = avoided. The accident rate while getting properly trained in aerobatics = is slightly higher so it is also understandable that it is not for = everyone.

Don't care whose fault it was on this = one=85.. after the mistakes were made, the pilot was the only one who = could have prevented the accident=85 his fault or = not.

Jack Morgan

On Jan = 28, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Lancair Mailing List wrote: