Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Loss of Control - inadvertant spins

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Middleville MI
    Posts
    8
    Not to take away from all the points made but when I worked at JET I learned that the glass tubes for the needle ball were only speced for smooth ball movement when the tube was vertical. If the aircraft is at a high angle of attack the ball may not be reliable.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,243
    Quote Originally Posted by gyrojohn View Post
    Not to take away from all the points made but when I worked at JET I learned that the glass tubes for the needle ball were only speced for smooth ball movement when the tube was vertical. If the aircraft is at a high angle of attack the ball may not be reliable.
    It's not very reliable period, it's just there to use when you can't see outside but unfortunately, the mantra starts early in training about "step on the ball" and I think the only way we'll ever get past that is when the slip/skid ball is removed from the panel.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    199
    Wanted to have an open discussion, OSH forum about this exact topic, but I was not selected to do so. Mark Forss has a very difficult job of selecting forums, many presentations have to be turned away, and Mark does a great job of picking fantastic forums. I learn so much during the week! I'm sooooooooo excited!!!!

    I sit on the ASTM committee working this exact issue, and I would love to hear from each and every one of you personally. If you would like, please email me at solutions@blueontop.com With that said …

    1. The vast, vast majority of what groups are labeling fatal loss of control accidents are at or below pattern altitude. Recovery from these altitudes is unlikely. Remember, pilots are not intentionally (can be replace with "inadvertently" or "unknowingly") causing the airplane to depart controlled flight. Or, better stated, the airplane is not going where the pilot believes it is being commanded.

    2. After the airplane is stalled, it may rotate due to many factors, control inputs are just one of them. Note I said rotate and not spin or spiral. Either a spin or spiral in the pattern is typically fatal. By definition, a stall is uncontrolled flight (and the airspeed remains around Vs), and a spiral is controlled flight (and the airspeed is rapidly increasing). Both are typically fatal at or below pattern altitudes.

    3. AOPA has an excellent summary of the NTSB accident database on loss of control accidents. It is entitled, "Keep the Wings Flying" and can be found online. They did a GREAT job!

    4. From point 3 above, the vast majority of fatal, loss of control accidents are during takeoff and go-around, not the base to final turn.

    5. All certificated airplanes by definition have to stall nicely (+/- 15deg of bank) and recover from all incipient spins (1 turn or 3 seconds) in one additional turn. Basically, if the airplane is certificated, it stalls nicely.

    So, here is what I want to know. What is occurring that allows the pilot to unknowingly get to the stalled condition? We are looking at several ideas, but what are yours?
    a. configuration changes (flaps, gear, throttle, etc.)
    b. flight control inputs (aileron, rudder, etc.
    c. your ideas here?
    d. your copilots' ideas here?
    e. your friends' ideas here?
    f. you get the idea.

    We need to get the pilots' attention BEFORE they stall the airplane.

    Thanks,
    Ron Blum (the lesser known Ron

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    199
    Just saw an email from Mark Forss, and I stand corrected on my forum schedule. Now I am panicked to get them all done in time, but SO EXCITED to make it happen!


    I INVITE ALL OF YOU TO JOIN THE FATAL STALL/SPIN OPEN DISCUSSION ON THURSDAY, JULY 26, 2:30PM - 3:45PM, FORUM STAGE 6.


    Thank you, thank you, thank you, Mark!

    So excited to learn from all of you,
    Ron (still the lesser known) Blum

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    895
    Glad you got the forum Ron. (in the big one). Sadly, my forum is same time.

    I don't think certified airplanes stall nicely at full power. They are not required to demonstrate full power stalls.
    I got my old Chief in an accidental spin at 3500 feet just doing a stall demo. Fortunately I had a bit of spin training but most don't but should for the old airplane designs that are still sold, like Cubs.
    Also, pilots are rarely told that ailerons are ineffective or worse they can reverse.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Berson View Post
    I don't think certified airplanes stall nicely at full power. They are not required to demonstrate full power stalls.

    Also, pilots are rarely told that ailerons are ineffective or worse they can reverse.
    Bill: I agree with you! Power on stalls are only required up to 75% power … long story. I will miss you being at the forum.

    One of the areas that we are looking at on the ASTM committee is what is NOT required to be tested by the current regulations. In other words, we don't test stalls due to configuration changes or stalls initiated by flight control input(s). These may be cases were the stall warning is ineffective (too late, not recognized, or not recognized in time to prevent the stall).

    Thanks!
    Ron

  7. #37
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Blum View Post
    Ron (still the lesser known) Blum
    Well, just remember: Two Rons don't make a Wright. :-)

    Ron "one of them" Wanttaja

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by rwanttaja View Post
    Well, just remember: Two Rons don't make a Wright. :-)

    Ron "one of them" Wanttaja
    LOL. Now that’s just funny. Still wish one could just emoji others replies.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NW FL
    Posts
    388
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingRon View Post
    I can guarantee a birddog is not stalled with the main gear on the ground, PERIOD. Running out of lift does not equate to a stall. The Birddog will quite happily takeoff from the three point attitude.
    Like Wes said. The drag curve goes out of sight. With 60 degrees of flaps, its awesome. The engine is now at idle and I've been told that that big prop now no longer blows a breeze over the in board parts of the wing. More loss of lift. The way the tires squat, it appears that the majority of weight is on the wheels. A minor amount on the wings.
    You bet a B.D. will take off in a three point. Normal. It looks like to me that the tailwheel is the last wheel to leave the ground. If you keep the throttle at idle you are OK. If you are abrupt, you will get a lesson in P effect. Too bad for you if have to go around with 60 deg of flaps deployed. 40 deg is just as good, and it doesn't take an eternity for the flap motor to retract for climb. This is where the stall/spin happens. The nose will rise and airspeed will decay.

  10. #40
    FlyingRon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NC26 (Catawba, NC)
    Posts
    1,968
    Agreed. DRAG goes up like crazy past the stall point. That's why most AOA vs. Lift plots stop shortly beyond the stall because there's just no stable flight to be had there because the drag and the decreasing lift just tend to send things crazy.

    However, but high drag and low lift do not EQUAL stall. AOA is the only thing that matters and the L-19 (and most planes) will not be stalled with the mains on the ground (or very close to it). The practical proof of this is that you can takeoff from the three-point attitude in that plane. Would be rather hard to accomplish if she were stalled.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •