Jose wrote:
I was taking issue with the idea that a greaser full stall landing is
self-contradictory.

Well, lot's of semantic problems in this whole discussion. I would say
that what people commonly *call* a full stall is not a good way to
grease it on. I would also say that what is called a full stall landing
is actually a landing where power is off, and the plane is at an
attitude and speed where you run out of elevator authority just as you
touch the ground - perhaps the wing is stalled but what I think is
that the nose is simply dropping to continue flying as you run out of
elevator. The only way out of this is to add power or let the nose drop
until more airspeed is gained.

I can do this in the Maule when I make a minimum speed approach, flare
at the right moment, and touch the ground just as the wheel is pulled
all the way back. Not a good way to grease it on but it is wonderful
thing when it happens.

Normally, I come in at a normal approach speed, flare to the 3 point
attitude and touch down. If I pull back too far or too fast, I can and
will touch the tailwheel first.

So I agree that what we think of as a full stall landing, can be greased
on. It's just not the best way. I also suggest that the idea of
holding it off with power at a high angle of attack (dragging it in) is
neither a 'full stall landing' nor a good way to grease it.

Perhaps just a different perspective.