Loss of Control - inadvertant spins

[DRGT]

I just read another article about loss of control due to an inadvertant spin. It was like many other good articles that I have read about spins - they are good/accurate as far as they go. One thing I believe could be made clearer: a spin will only occur when: 1) wing stalls and 2) the airplane is skidding. No skid no spin. Everyone gets the first point right and kind of obfuscates the second. Most articles correctly state that an airplane can be stalled at any airspeed or attitude. I would like to see a similar type statement about a skid - e.g. the airplane can be made to skid while coordinated or slipping by improper use of the controls. The airplane has to be skidding to spin. The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook hints at this, but does not state it clearly or explicitly. In fact, it misleadingly states that a slipping or yawed airplane can enter a spin. It is true that while the airplane is slipping or is yawed, the pilot can misapply the controls and enter a skid/stall/spin. The same can said about straight and level flight. An airplane only spins from a skid.

I started flying in WV during the Nixon administration. I learned several valid reasons to slip an airplane. I have never learned a valid reason to skid an airplane.

[FlyingRon]

Eh? You lost me. An airplane can't skid while coordinated. That's contradictory. An airplane can be uncoordinated and skid or slip while the controls are not crossed (if that's what you mean).

[WLIU]

If you mean that an airplane can only spin when it is stalled and there is a yaw input, then you are correct. If you are speaking about loss of control while in turning flight, then you can spin in either direction depending on whether you are yawing to the inside or the outside of the turn.

I will repeat the lament that too many "modern" pilots are not competent in their footwork. The only way you can yaw to the inside or outside of a turn is by mis, or under, using the rudder pedals. And of course not "listening" to the airplane and paying attention to the airspeed indicator. Modern airplanes complain a LOT when you get slower than you should. In between the electric/electronic complaints, and the airframe buffet complaints, inadvertent spins are a real failure of Mother Nature's pilot aptitude test.

Stalls are just another maneuver to master. Intentional spins are also. Not rocket science. Every student pilot should be comfortable with both. Having done them intentionally a pilot is better prepared to recognize when distractions have the airplane and pilot nibbling at going there unintentionally.

Best of luck,

Wes

[jedi]

I just read another article about loss of control due to an inadvertant spin. It was like many other good articles that I have read about spins - they are good/accurate as far as they go. One thing I believe could be made clearer: a spin will only occur when: 1) wing stalls and 2) the airplane is skidding. No skid no spin. Everyone gets the first point right and kind of obfuscates the second. Most articles correctly state that an airplane can be stalled at any airspeed or attitude. I would like to see a similar type statement about a skid - e.g. the airplane can be made to skid while coordinated or slipping by improper use of the controls. The airplane has to be skidding to spin. The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook hints at this, but does not state it clearly or explicitly. In fact, it misleadingly states that a slipping or yawed airplane can enter a spin. It is true that while the airplane is slipping or is yawed, the pilot can misapply the controls and enter a skid/stall/spin. The same can said about straight and level flight. An airplane only spins from a skid.

I started flying in WV during the Nixon administration. I learned several valid reasons to slip an airplane. I have never learned a valid reason to skid an airplane.

"An airplane only spins from a skid." Not true!

A spin will result from a slip or a skid, in other words any yawed flight.

I believe the current common explanation of the skidded turn to final is not the common cause of loss of control accidents. I also do not believe the "bad piloting" excuse. Too many experienced pilots have bought the farm to have that hold up in the court of common sense. I can name many examples.

I would gladly give more details but I have a plane to catch. I have tried to get the word out on this but there is limited interest as "all airplanes perform well at low speeds" and all "pilots are trained to the FAA standard and know about stall spin issues".

Name one production airplane or popular kit that has poor stall spin characteristics or ask one pilot to come forward that has inadequate stall spin training. I would like to have a discussion about that. Furthermore, stall spin is not the only loss of control associated with the "turn to final" crash. What about "loss of aileron effectiveness". Have you been trained in that scenario? Is that a "hot topic". Should be, IMHO.

Buy the way do you know that an aircraft in a spin may have the ball either left or right or centered. It is the turn needle that shows the direction of the spin. Can you tell me where the turn needle is in a glass cockpit. Not easy to find in many cases.

[WLIU]

I fall into the camp that observes that too many pilots rely exclusively on what they see on the panel and not enough what their senses are telling them. I am introducing an acquaintance with a Cessna background to a Pitts that has nothing in the panel other than airspeed and altitude. Right now, when I give this young man the airplane I always feel that I am sliding off my seat to the right. A sample of one, but I think a symptom of what "modern" training produces.

Having flown a relatively large list of airplanes I will suggest that modern aircraft certification standards has produced airplanes with no, or very few, bad habits at low speeds. Every airplane that you fly has been extensively flight tested in every possible configuration. While "modern" flight training may leave some pilots surprised by what they find once they go out on their own, that speaks more to the failure of the training than the airplanes.

Tape a sheet of paper over the panel glass and listen to what your butt is telling you.

Wes

[jedi]

I fall into the camp that observes that too many pilots rely exclusively on what they see on the panel and not enough what their senses are telling them. I am introducing an acquaintance with a Cessna background to a Pitts that has nothing in the panel other than airspeed and altitude. Right now, when I give this young man the airplane I always feel that I am sliding off my seat to the right. A sample of one, but I think a symptom of what "modern" training produces.

Having flown a relatively large list of airplanes I will suggest that modern aircraft certification standards has produced airplanes with no, or very few, bad habits at low speeds. Every airplane that you fly has been extensively flight tested in every possible configuration. While "modern" flight training may leave some pilots surprised by what they find once they go out on their own, that speaks more to the failure of the training than the airplanes.

Tape a sheet of paper over the panel glass and listen to what your butt is telling you.

Wes

Thanks Wes,

Appreciate you teaching the young fellow a thing or two. Right on. Nice to have that spare set of wings to really be able to see if the airplane is level. All that extra stuff to secure the wings helps a bit too. Interplane struts should cut the horizon at the the same place on each side of the airplane.

Young pilot should be able to see the right wing is low. Look out to the right and left horizon and level the wings with aileron, hold the heading with the rudder. Fly straight with the rudder, not with the ailerons. Ailerons control bank. Rudder controls direction. Pilots trained today hold heading with the ailerons in most cases.

Exceptions are V tail Bonanza and aircraft with yaw dampers. Perhaps a few others also.

[DRGT]

Eh? You lost me. An airplane can't skid while coordinated. That's contradictory. An airplane can be uncoordinated and skid or slip while the controls are not crossed (if that's what you mean).

I am not sure what I wrote that could be interpreted that way. I will repeat: no matter if the airplane is yawed or not, if the controls are misapplied, the airplane can skid, stall, and spin. The airplane must be in a skidding turn to spin.

[Joda]

Ailerons control bank. Rudder controls direction.

Huh? An airplane is not a boat. You don't steer it with the rudder. You bank the airplane to redirect the lift vector so it will turn. You use the rudder to keep the airplane coordinated (i.e., the ball in the center, not slipping or skidding). The rudder is not turning the airplane. The wings are. Read the FAA's "Airplane Flying Handbook" (FAA-H-8083-3B), starting on page 3-10. The section titled "level turns" will give you the whole scoop. One quote from the handbook that is germane to this discussion:

"The pilot uses the rudder to offset any adverse yaw developed by wing’s differential lift and the engine/propeller. The rudder does not turn the airplane. The rudder is used to maintain coordinated flight."

Note that it specifically states that the rudder does not turn the airplane.

Getting back to spins, others have already stated that you can enter a spin from either a slip or a skid. If the airplane is coordinated during the stall, it won't spin. If it's uncoordinated, it may spin. Keep the ball in the center and all is well!

[FlyingRon]

I am not sure what I wrote that could be interpreted that way. I will repeat: no matter if the airplane is yawed or not, if the controls are misapplied, the airplane can skid, stall, and spin. The airplane must be in a skidding turn to spin.

Because I'm trying to understand what you meant by "the airplane can be made to skid while coordinated". An airplane can't be slipping or skidding while coordinated. Yaw is a motion, not a position.
A skid is by definition a departure from coordinated flight. Sure you can skid while not turning and you can turn without skidding, but you can't skid while maintaining coordinated flight.

[Joda]

The airplane must be in a skidding turn to spin.

I think you are confusing the matter by using the term "skid" to mean uncoordinated flight in EITHER direction. That's not technically correct. In simple terms, a skid is a specific condition where too much rudder is applied in a turn and the ball is forced to the outside of the turn. If the ball is off center to the INSIDE of the turn, that's a slip, not a skid.

You are correct is as much as the airplane has to be in uncoordinated flight in order to spin, but it may be skidding OR slipping, depending on which way the ball is being deflected. Either way, as I stated in my previous post, keep the ball in the center and you're not going to spin.

[DRGT]

"A spin will result from a slip or a skid, in other words any yawed flight." ​Not entirely correct. Prior to entering the skid, the airplane could be yawed or slipping. It also could also be in coordinated flight. No matter, it must be skidding to spin.

When you have time, I can explain it to you. Or you could get a competent instructor, take an airplane to sufficient altitude and try it. Never skid the airplane and it won't spin.

[robert l]

About a year after I got my PPL in a Cessna 150, I the opportunity to fly front seat in a Piper J 5. The WW II pilot in the back seat said, do you always fly without using the rudder ?! Wow, thanks for the lesson! I still think about that whenever I fly. On the subject of skidding, wasn't it the Red Baron that would make a 180 degree flat skidding turn in a dog fight ?
Bob

[DRGT]

I fall into the camp that observes that too many pilots rely exclusively on what they see on the panel and not enough what their senses are telling them. ...
Tape a sheet of paper over the panel glass and listen to what your butt is telling you.

Wes
I am also in that camp. If the airplane is slipping, it can do a spin entry (called an over the top spin entry). But it will not spin until the airplane is in a skid. No skid, no spin. Your eyes and butt will tell you when the airplane is yawed, slipping, or skidding. No need to look at the turn coordinator or the artificial horizon when the real horizon is out there!

[Bill Berson]

I think some older planes or homebuilts will fall into a spin while coordinated if a gust stalls one wing first. The first wing that stalls has more drag and less lift and that wing drops and now that falling wing has more angle of attack. So it goes into aggressive autorotation if the pilot doesn't catch it instantly. The primary issue is angle of attack.

[cub builder]

Here's a good stall video for you experts to analyze. VIDEO (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWrG3_YqGZc)

The pilot was flying a coordinated, although extremely high AOA approach in a STOL Competition. When he attempted to roll level with ailerons to correct for a gust, the additional drag of the down aileron triggered that wing to stall.

No doubt many will disagree with this statement, so I'll put it out here for discussion. I was taught 40+ years ago when I was learning slow taildraggers: "In normal flight, use the ailerons to roll the plane level. In high angle of attack situations, use the rudder to control the roll of the plane as the aircraft will respond quicker and hard aileron inputs can trigger a stall as is demonstrated in the video." Before criticizing the statement, I would suggest trying it... at altitude.

I have had aircraft do a spin entry from coordinated flight in an accelerated stall. That comes from the wings being less than identical in either shape, drag or rigging. In an accelerated stall, usually one wing will give up first causing an immediate hard roll, and the plane will spin without any additional input to intervene.

[FlyingRon]

Must be some microgust I've not encountered. Usually gusts are don't affect one wing separately from the other.

It's easier to spin out of a skid because you've got both the yawing of the aircraft and the up aileron working against you. In a slip, they're trying to counteract each other, but its still possible to spin.

[Bill Greenwood]

As a pilot one should have a almost 2nd sense about approaching a stall, coordinated or not. Its easy to say , "if you dont yaw you dont spin. " But that misses two points, first any pilot, no matter how good is going to have some uncoordinated flight, that is when the ball is not fully centered. Now you dont want to get way out of center when also low and slow, but most planes are forgiving of flight with the ball maybe half or one mark out. 2nd and most important, a plane wont spin if it doesn't stall . And a stall , not just a spin is also bad when low and slow, unless on touchdown. And to me, a sense of having a reserve above stall is important, even vital.
There are many situations, other than just normal cruise where you may need to have extra margin above stall. Thats when doing acro, especially overhead maneuvers like loops , hard turns with gs and steep climbs, hard turns in fly bys. any situation where you are using some of your lift margin above stall. Stall is not just a matter of airspeed, but also a matter of gs. If you are pulling gs, you can stall the plane most any way. If you are about to stall, reducing pulling is more direct than adding power. If you find yourself a little slow in a loop, easing the pull may avoid a stall. And if you do stall, letting go is the first response, just stop pulling to break the stall. You may also add power.

[FlyingRon]

Touching down doesn't involve stalling an aircraft. It's near impossible to stall most aircraft with the mains on (or just above) the runway.
No longer generating enough lift for (level) flight does not equate to a stall.

[JohnAJohnson]

In turbulence, and flying at Va we allow the airplane to stall on the big hits to keep from over stressing it. Many times during those big hits, and with the stall warning chirping, the ball swings wildly. Stalled and uncoordinated. And in the pattern when gusty and well below Va (1.3 - 1.5 Vso), this is not uncommon either. As the OP stated, too many experienced pilots have lost control in the pattern (base>final) for unexplained reasons. I've always wondered if this could be a factor.

[martymayes]

Can stall a plane in a slip and it won't spin if there is no yaw. Can hold the nose right on a point in a slip and enter a full stall. Some planes like a Citabria will float down like they are under a parachute in that condition.

[Bill Berson]

Wolfgang (Stick and Rudder) said most of those turning final spins are because the pilot thinks the ailerons are the bank control. So they get slow on base to final and then rapidly try to unbank from the turn with just aileron and that draggy down going aileron drags the wing back into a spin.
Should have used plenty of rudder to unbank when flying slow with the stick back.
(sort of what Cub Builder said)

I say don't overuse the rudder (skidding) while banking into the turn. But banking into the turn usually isn't the problem. The problem is getting out of that turn because after some time the aircraft slows and the pilot has a lousy pitch sight picture so gets near stall. Best to lead with top rudder getting out of that turn. But most lead with aileron.

[lnuss]

I fall into the camp that observes that too many pilots rely exclusively on what they see on the panel and not enough what their senses are telling them. I am introducing an acquaintance with a Cessna background to a Pitts that has nothing in the panel other than airspeed and altitude. Right now, when I give this young man the airplane I always feel that I am sliding off my seat to the right. A sample of one, but I think a symptom of what "modern" training produces.
...
Tape a sheet of paper over the panel glass and listen to what your butt is telling you.

Wes
Prior to solo, I have always had my students fly around the practice area (first) with my coat covering the panel, asking them to hold a specific airspeed in slow flight. I'd periodically lift the coat from the airspeed momentarily to let them see how close they were, usually within two to three mph. Later we'd fly the pattern several times with the coat over the panel (full stop-taxi backs only). This assures them (and me) that they can fly perfectly well by looking outside and paying attention to feel and sound. Even prior to that, I've had them sit limp in the seat while I flew, first, in coordinated flight, then with the ball off to both right and left, differing amounts, while looking at the ball and ensuring they can actually feel the side forces. Included in this would be having them sitting tensed up while I do the same thing, to show how little you can feel under those conditions. Then, of course, it's their turn.

Another thing to help them is to be sure they understand to use a light touch on the controls, so they can feel what's going on.

All of the above is so they know how to feel and see and hear what the airplane is telling them.

[jedi]

Huh? An airplane is not a boat. You don't steer it with the rudder. You bank the airplane to redirect the lift vector so it will turn. You use the rudder to keep the airplane coordinated (i.e., the ball in the center, not slipping or skidding). The rudder is not turning the airplane. The wings are. Read the FAA's "Airplane Flying Handbook" (FAA-H-8083-3B), starting on page 3-10. The section titled "level turns" will give you the whole scoop. One quote from the handbook that is germane to this discussion:

"The pilot uses the rudder to offset any adverse yaw developed by wing’s differential lift and the engine/propeller. The rudder does not turn the airplane. The rudder is used to maintain coordinated flight."

Note that it specifically states that the rudder does not turn the airplane.

Getting back to spins, others have already stated that you can enter a spin from either a slip or a skid. If the airplane is coordinated during the stall, it won't spin. If it's uncoordinated, it may spin. Keep the ball in the center and all is well!

Agreed, "The rudder does not turn the airplane." In post #5 the young chap flew right wing low in straight flight. This is one of the most common errors CFIs see with students while climbing out on takeoff. The rudder is used to counter engine torque and P factor, etc. to avoid yaw or slip. If the wings are level, rudder must be applied to resist the heading change of the skidded turn. Level the wings and hold heading with the rudder will keep the ball centered and errors are more easily seen than by looking at the ball or yaw string or felt in the seat of your pants.

In turbulence the ball swings from side to side faster than the footwork can handle. Large aircraft have yaw dampers to counter the yaw. The light plane pilot can counter the heading swings with rudder similar to a yaw damper and smooth the ride. Countering the turbulence that raises a wing with only aileron adds adverse yaw that amplifies the heading swings in turbulence. The side to side yawing motion is what generally makes passengers airsick.

I would be happy to give a more detailed explanation of the flight dynamics if you are interested. Summery, use ailerons to hold the wings level or at the desired bank angle and rudder to eliminate yaw. Yaw (heading change) with wings level should be countered with rudder.

If you can agree with that next discussion should be how insufficient rudder use (just opposite the common explanation of too much rudder) can lead one into the fatal turn to final and that can be followed by how aileron effectiveness at high AoA can lead to loss of control as in the video of post #15. Notice that the rudder is centered as the loss of control continues to impact.

[Bill Berson]

I agree the pilot in post #15 should have been holding some right rudder to offset the high angle power factor (p factor or whatever you call it)
Instead he was likely holding some right aileron to prevent left turning which stalled the left wing first. His first reaction was full right aileron which was the worst possible reaction and made it yaw left violently.

So with insufficient right rudder up to the event he was not coordinated. The power was perhaps the cause of the left stall break.

[martymayes]

No doubt many will disagree with this statement, so I'll put it out here for discussion. I was taught 40+ years ago when I was learning slow taildraggers: "In normal flight, use the ailerons to roll the plane level. In high angle of attack situations, use the rudder to control the roll of the plane as the aircraft will respond quicker and hard aileron inputs can trigger a stall as is demonstrated in the video." Before criticizing the statement, I would suggest trying it... at altitude.

That is true of most airplanes, not just slow taildraggers (ref: USAir Boeing 737, Flt 427 rudder hardover). As AOA increases there is a point where rudder becomes more effective for rolling the plane and can overpower the ailerons for roll control. In fact, some refer to that as "crossover alpha" or "crossover speed" and most CFI's will touch on that concept with students when performing slow flight but there is not a lot of emphasis and it's one of those things quickly forgotten after the checkride.


I have had aircraft do a spin entry from coordinated flight in an accelerated stall. That comes from the wings being less than identical in either shape, drag or rigging. In an accelerated stall, usually one wing will give up first causing an immediate hard roll, and the plane will spin without any additional input to intervene.

If there is no yaw when the plane stalls, the plane won't spin. Any of the factors you describe (and many others) can impart a yawing moment and yaw is what causes the spin. I'll bet you may have done the old exercise of stalling a plane and holding elevator backpressure to prolong the stall while keeping wings level with rudder only. Any misapplication of rudder will result in a spin.

[DRGT]

Here's a good stall video for you experts to analyze. VIDEO (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWrG3_YqGZc)

There are several factors that eliminate me as an expert - including

I have never flown that make/model of airplane
I do not know how the airplane was loaded
I do not know what atmospheric conditions existed at the time
etc.

I will note some of the things I see in the video:

there is counterclockwise rotation around the longitudinal axis (initially)
before the aircraft strikes the ground, there is clockwise rotation around the longitudinal axis
there is counterclockwise rotation around the vertical axis
the airplane is held in a high angle of attack; exceeding critical AOA

Here is what I surmise:

There was no spin
The pilot could have lowered the angle of attack, breaking the stall
The pilot could have used (more?) right rudder to stop the rotation around the vertical axis


IMHO

[Bob Dingley]

Touching down doesn't involve stalling an aircraft. It's near impossible to stall most aircraft with the mains on (or just above) the runway.
No longer generating enough lift for (level) flight does not equate to a stall.
I don't know about that Ron. When I was a Guard pilot checking out in the Bird Dog, they had to show me the "Army Way". I was getting an add on FW designation to my RW. I had an FAA com/inst (basic requirement) and was in a FW slot. I was getting instruction from a former USN Neptune pilot.
Norm didn't like my grease jobs and showed me the right way. Stay at least 3 feet off the RW and when the stick hits the rear stop, let her drop. The bottom dropped out. Sure felt like a stall to me. Every other pilot in the unit did it the same. There were reports of the A/C light between the MLG ocasionaly getting busted.

[Bob Dingley]

When I was learning to fly in the J-3, my CFI had me do a lot of slow flight practice. 15 to 20 minutes at a time. I'm talking slow, right at the stall. One day he showed me accelerated stalls. Shallow turn, close to stall, ailerons neutral, stick back to the stop. apply bottom rudder until back to level flight. The Cub wanted to roll out opposit the turn and would go into a bank the other way if you let it. I would think that the inside wing would stall first and that wing would drop. Anybody?

A late friend instructed in B-24/B29's. He told me that stalls in a sixty degree bank were in the syllabus. All crew members were on board.

[FlyingRon]

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.

What happens with high AOA's and slow airspeed is the combinatino of the decrease in lift and HIGH amounts of drag. This means you drop and slow down even faster, but it doesn't mean you're stalled.


Again, to spin you need to be:

1. stalled.
2. have an assymetric angle of attack.

Note that some of the stall/spin mystique comes from the fact that people think that all lift goes away when you stall. In fact, the lift vs. aoa curve is pretty symmetrical. What enables a spin is that before the stall an increase of AOA makes more lift, after an increase of AOA makes less lift. This is what allows the spin to self sustain.

[WLIU]

Um, no. In a spin the entire wing is generally on the back side of the L/D curve and there needs to be a sustained yaw input. That can be due to engine and propeller forces (power is destabilizing). It can be due to my foot holding the rudder pedal full forward. It can be to an under-trained pilot holding some unintentional rudder input during an intentional or unintentional slowing below the wing's critical AoA.

The "asymmetric angle of attack" is what we do to execute a snap roll. We put the wing just on the plus side of the L/D curve and then add max yaw. One wing remains at max lift driving the rotation, the other wing goes to be on the "back" side of the L/D curve generating drastically less lift and much drag. Having one wing driving the rotation is why snap rolls rotate so much faster than simple "slow" rolls. As I think about this I will agree that a unintended spin can be entered by flying uncoordinated so that one wing stalls before the other. But if the resulting unintentional attitude allows an increase in airspeed, the accident pilot likely gets into a spiral. Still not a good place to be.

One factor that likely leads to failure to recover from unintentional spins is a pilot attempting to put the nose down rather than removing the yaw input, and maybe adding power, which is a pro-spin input. 99% of the well known emergency spin recovery methods (PARE, Beggs-Mueller, Finagin) start with pulling the throttle hard against the idle stop, and applying anti-spin rudder input. This is counter-intuitive to the typical modern trained Cessna/Piper/Mooney pilot. But its the quickest and most effective way to start an emergency spin recovery.

Some homework - Go up to a high altitude, slow the airplane into a stall, add and hold rudder. Push the stick forward while holding rudder. Observe that the rate of rotation increases and no recovery occurs. Pull the stick all of the way back. Observe that the rate of rotation slows. Now add power. Observe that the spin changes pitch but no recovery occurs. Reduce power to idle, move stick to neutral or simply release, apply and hold anti-spin rudder. When the rotation stops release the rudder input, move the stick to allow the airspeed to increase to 100, and return to level flight. This exercise is used to introduce new acro students to spins. It demonstrates that exit from a spin can only occur when power is reduced and anti-rotation/spin rudder input is applied.

Now we know that for the first two rotations of a spin we are in the incipient phase and immediate anti-spin control inputs combined with pulling the power will get us flying again quickly and with minimum loss of altitude. Which is to say that a spin entry during the base to final turn need not be guaranteed sudden death, but too few pilots have the knowledge and understanding to react promptly and correctly.

Which is another long way to say that our current training is deficient.

Best of luck,

Wes

[gyrojohn]

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.

[martymayes]

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.

[Ron Blum]

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 :)

[Ron Blum]

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

[Bill Berson]

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.

[Ron Blum]

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

[rwanttaja]

Ron (still the lesser known) Blum
Well, just remember: Two Rons don't make a Wright. :-)

Ron "one of them" Wanttaja

[Ron Blum]

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.

[Bob Dingley]

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.

[FlyingRon]

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.

[FlyingRon]

Well, just remember: Two Rons don't make a Wright. :-)

Ron "one of them" Wanttaja

But three can cause a heck of a lot of trouble, especially if alcohol is involved.

Ron "The Other Ron" Natalie

[Ron Blum]

But three can cause a heck of a lot of trouble, especially if alcohol is involved.
Sorry, all y’all, but this thread has taken multiple wRONg turns. I’m just trying to put a better spin on it before it spirals out of control.:rollseyes:

Leaving for OSH on Friday. Looking forward to meeting each of you.