3 more gone too soon. Near Maffra 16/11/24

[djpacro]

3 hours ago, KING said:

Rule of thumb for a decent approach speed: Stall 35mph * 1.3 = 45.5mph vref + 50% steady state wind value + 50% gust value,

 

So on an example 10G15kn day approach would be 45.5mph + [5kn]5.75mph + [2.5kn]2.9mph = 54.15mph or 47.05kn - so 50kn seems ok on an average day....

You need to redo your calculations using CAS. In the absence of info published for that aircraft I suggest you use my estimated stall speed flaps up of 58 kts CAS. 
 

If you are flying it then do the conversion back to IAS, the number you see on the ASI, for your approach speed. If you are comparing it with GS data then continue to use CAS/TAS.

[facthunter]

Go to a safe height and  fly till its buffeting and NOTE indicated speed and use that as you initial Vs. The actual stall is done full nose heavy and max weight.. That's the WORST case scenario.. Stall speed is a variable and what you add on varies too.. No one lands flying on the ASI.. IF you don't change anything the Plane will keep on doing what it was doing pretty much . You will have ground effect and some wind shear effects. IF it starts to drop out of the sky you should feel it and add power. Unfortunately many just instinctively pull the stick back.   Nev

[aro]

38 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Go to a safe height and  fly till its buffeting and NOTE indicated speed and use that as you initial Vs.

As djpacro pointed out, that gives you IAS which can have significant errors near the stall. If you are calculating margins you need to use CAS not IAS.

[facthunter]

 Errors yes but they don't vary nce they are noted. You have established  a figure that is useful and you can refer to it when you are at lower speeds. They usually read LOWER than actual so take that into your safety margjns calculations. The ONLY ASI you have is the one in your plane. NOT some ASI you'd like from Santa.. Location of the static Ports is often the cause. You can set up an independent stall warning vane which operates on Angle of attack of the wing to go off at about 9 Knots before stall.  Nev

[aro]

3 minutes ago, facthunter said:

 Errors yes but they don't vary nce they are noted.

The error typically varies with airspeed.

E.g. using the calibration chart from a C172 POH, if you calculate 1.3 VS0 based on IAS, you actually only have 1.14 VS0. About 8-10 knots worth of the "extra" airspeed is just reduced error as the AOA reduces.

[facthunter]

I've covered that. Safety is top of my list . Getting a better ASI is great but you can fly safe with some very basic indications. The ASI on a Gypsy moth is a plate on a RH strut which bends back over a scale. Mud wasp's block Pitot tubes quickly in some locations. It pays to be able to fly without any indication of airspeed..  ANGLE of ATTACK indication is the ultimate. It is AoA that causes the STALL after all. NOT an  AIRSPEED. Nev

Edited November 23 by facthunter

[Moneybox]

The Harmony I fly in training has no stall warning but my Sportstar has a factory fitted stall warning. I'm looking forward to seeing how effective it is. My instructor has picked me up a few times on failing to keep sufficient speed when concentrating on other aspects of landing the plane. I'm male so not the best at multitasking, I need al the help I can get.

[kgwilson]

I find stall warnings a pain in the neck. They are always going off in turbulence & come on too early at times.

 

Know the stall speed of your aircraft. Practice it at high altitude till you know exactly what the symptoms are, like buffeting etc and know the airspeed. Have plenty of airspeed during approach especially in turns & even more especially in the turn on to final. 1.3 is the bare minimum.

 

 

[djpacro]

58 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Practice it at high altitude till you know exactly what the symptoms are, like buffeting etc and know the airspeed. 

Yes, but it must not be the usual practice stalls from straight and level with power off. CASA's Part 61 MOS has a broader suite of stall exercises. The FAA has some important additional ones. I fly with many instructors and instructor trainees - too many cannot tell me the correct method to recover from those, as if they didn't do them in their flight training at all. They were trained to pass the test, not trained for competency required in the elements specified in the MOS.

CASA AC 61-16 https://www.casa.gov.au/spin-avoidance-and-stall-recovery-training has good advice such as:

"Spin avoidance training where a wing may drop at the stall is best achieved through the following scenario based flight situations: − Approach configuration descending turns (base to final turn) − Go-around from approach configuration (significant change in trim state) − Climbing turns in departure configuration (trim changes, flap retraction and turns) − Engine failure after take-off (potential out of trim condition) − Slow flying o Turns o Distractions"

I rarely encounter anyone who has practiced a stall in a climbing turn or a go-around and it shows by their dangerous WAG at the recovery actions.

 

Most instructors get a surprise when I demo an inadvertent stall/spin with little or none of the usual stall warning symptoms that they are teaching.

58 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Have plenty of airspeed during approach especially in turns & even more especially in the turn on to final. 1.3 is the bare minimum.

I always advise my trainees to maintain the usual speed on base all throughout the turn so as not to be in the habit of pulling back and increasing the AoA in that turn.

Edited November 23 by djpacro
minor grammar

[Love to fly]

37 minutes ago, djpacro said:

 

I rarely encounter anyone who has practiced a stall in a climbing turn or a go-around and it shows by their dangerous WAG at the recovery actions.

 

WAG?

[facthunter]

IF I said I've never HAD an inadvertent stall, No-one would believe me..  In a tight situation, you can fly on the stall warning. Not steady though. Beeping on and off. .  Nev

[djpacro]

32 minutes ago, Love to fly said:

WAG?

I am not referring to you. It is an engineering term

https://www.businessballs.com/glossaries-and-terminology/acronyms-finder/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wild-ass_guess 

 

[Love to fly]

5 minutes ago, djpacro said:

I am not referring to you. It is an engineering term

https://www.businessballs.com/glossaries-and-terminology/acronyms-finder/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_wild-ass_guess 

 

Didn't think you were referring to me 🤔😂 And hadn't heard it before. Thanks for the explanation kind sir. 

Edited November 24 by Love to fly

[kgwilson]

It was part of the PPL syllabus when I learned to fly but not climbing stalls other than power and wing drop. The C150 dropped the left wing quite quickly with about 1700rpm & full up elevator.

 

My aircraft won't drop a wing at all & will fly right through the stall and then just descend at idle and up to altitude level rpm. I need to have about 2000rpm with full up elevator & then kick the rudder full over to make it drop a wing which it does quite violently going almost vertically towards terra firma.

[spacesailor]

WAG.

Cricket's

Wives And Girlfriends . 

spacesailor

 

[Blueadventures]

WAG to me 'Wild Arse Guess'.

[Love to fly]

27 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

WAG.

Cricket's

Wives And Girlfriends . 

spacesailor

 

Nope. Not this time. DJPacro responded to my query above. 

[facthunter]

Keep your Wives and your Girl friends apart..  Nev

[Moneybox]

I find it difficult to detect a stall in the Harmony. If I'm alert I can feel the slight buffeting but there's no easily noticeable difference to the feel of the plane. On one practice session my instructor had to point out the rapidly reducing altitude. I was meant to be reducing speed in the climb to stall but at 4000' there's no reference point and I never felt a change. I think I'll welcome an annoying alarm to warn me.

Edited November 24 by Moneybox

[facthunter]

IF it's annoying you that confirms it's needed..  STALL is an Angle of Attack THING.  Nev

[KING]

5 hours ago, kgwilson said:

It was part of the PPL syllabus when I learned to fly but not climbing stalls other than power and wing drop. The C150 dropped the left wing quite quickly with about 1700rpm & full up elevator.

 

My aircraft won't drop a wing at all & will fly right through the stall and then just descend at idle and up to altitude level rpm. I need to have about 2000rpm with full up elevator & then kick the rudder full over to make it drop a wing which it does quite violently going almost vertically towards terra firma.

Like you Stalling and Spinning were part of the PPL syllabus in the UK [thirty+ years ago], however the problem came when the US statistics showed that more people were dying in spin training than actual accidental spins. Power on stalls in the climb can lead to violent wing drops and therefore [bearing in mind many RAA training types aren't spin rated] it seems it is impossible to do anything but thoroughly brief around scenarios that might lead to stalls in the climb, and what to do if God forbid a low hour/non-aerobatic pilot get themselves into that position.

 

For what it's worth my advice to new pilots is to go and do an unusual attitudes/upset recovery course after initial training with an instructor who specialises in that. An FI with limited experience in these matters is more likely to cause problems than solve them IMHO.

[turboplanner]

36 minutes ago, KING said:

Like you Stalling and Spinning were part of the PPL syllabus in the UK [thirty+ years ago], however the problem came when the US statistics showed that more people were dying in spin training than actual accidental spins. Power on stalls in the climb can lead to violent wing drops and therefore [bearing in mind many RAA training types aren't spin rated] it seems it is impossible to do anything but thoroughly brief around scenarios that might lead to stalls in the climb, and what to do if God forbid a low hour/non-aerobatic pilot get themselves into that position.

 

For what it's worth my advice to new pilots is to go and do an unusual attitudes/upset recovery course after initial training with an instructor who specialises in that. An FI with limited experience in these matters is more likely to cause problems than solve them IMHO.

There is a long thread on this subject on the site including the different g loads in turns (so there's no point in thinking a single speed is all you need to know; you'll just fall into a stall on a steeper turn and so on; but the biggest consensus was on your suggestion about going for specific training on unusual attitudes/upset recovery and several people did the training and swore by it.

[aro]

39 minutes ago, KING said:

For what it's worth my advice to new pilots is to go and do an unusual attitudes/upset recovery course after initial training with an instructor who specialises in that.

That's the conventional wisdom, but reading a few accident reports made me wonder.

 

I went back through ATSB accident reports and looked at fatal accidents involving stall/spin/loss of control etc. An awful lot of them happened to people with aerobatic endorsements/qualifications. You can't be sure without knowing what percentage of pilots have aerobatic endorsements, but the impression I got was that pilots with aerobatic endorsements were more likely to crash due to loss of control.

 

The pilot in this case was an instructor and reportedly had done an aerobatics endorsement in a Pitts.

[pmccarthy]

Having trained back when we did full spin recovery after three rotations, stalling and recovering have never bothered me if there is sufficient height. But it has made me super vigilant about airspeed and attitude when at 2000 feet or less AGL, because I know how much height you lose. I think that sort of training should be compulsory still.

[djpacro]

14 hours ago, KING said:

.... Power on stalls in the climb can lead to violent wing drops and therefore [bearing in mind many RAA training types aren't spin rated] it seems it is impossible to do anything but thoroughly brief around scenarios that might lead to stalls in the climb ...

As CASA recommends, flight schools should choose appropriate types for stall training & spin prevention training. Seems to me that many do not and skip many of the required stall exercises. Some types are prohibited from doing accelerated stalls (for a reason).

Quote

For what it's worth my advice to new pilots is to go and do an unusual attitudes/upset recovery course after initial training with an instructor who specialises in that. An FI with limited experience in these matters is more likely to cause problems than solve them IMHO.

I disagree. The buzzword these days is UPRT, Upset Prevention and Recovery Training with the emphasis on Prevention. Some schools have just rebadged their UA courses as UPRT so little or no Prevention training.

13 hours ago, aro said:

I went back through ATSB accident reports and looked at fatal accidents involving stall/spin/loss of control etc. An awful lot of them happened to people with aerobatic endorsements/qualifications. You can't be sure without knowing what percentage of pilots have aerobatic endorsements, but the impression I got was that pilots with aerobatic endorsements were more likely to crash due to loss of control.

Like the experienced Pitts instructor killed with a student in Cessna 150 spin training who, according to the ATSB report, did not know the correct technique for the 150. Perhaps a separate discussion. Aerobatic training is not UPRT, it doesn't help much with avoiding LOC-I accidents.

Quote

The pilot in this case was an instructor and reportedly had done an aerobatics endorsement in a Pitts.

So, he would've known how to recover from a spin in a Pitts. I do spin endorsements for instructor trainees then emphasise that the technique I taught them only applies to the type that we did the training in, and they should read the POH for the type they will be instructing in. Then one needs enough height to recover hence the focus on prevention in UPRT.