wrote:
Very few airplanes will reach stall angle in the landing
attitude. The gear won't allow it. Most pilots are seeing sink, or at
most, partiall stall, not full stall. It's proven when a sudden gust
lifts the airplane clear of the pavement just after touchdown even with
the nose all the way up.
The AOA would need to be 17 or 18 degrees to reach stall.
Measure your wing chord against level with the tailwheel on the ground
or the tail of a trike just clear of the ground, and you'll likely find
something like 12 or 15 degrees. Remember, too, that the stall speed
in ground effect is considerably lower than the book value.
I did some quick and dirty chord angle measurements in the
hangar. The Citabria has 12 degrees in the three-point attitude, and
the 172 has 14 at the root and 12 at the tip with the tail right on the
ground. With the flaps down there's 25 degrees at the root. So the wing
would stall inboard if the tail was really close to the runway, but the
rest of the wing is still flying.

In this context I'm not sure what a "full stall" means but the wing is
certainly not without lift. The Citabria is almost a special example
though. In the 3pt position, the Citabria (or at least the Decthalon
that I instructed in) is no where near stall. You fly it right onto the
runway in the 3pt position. If you did full stall it, the mains come
down in a crash.
The J-3 is different. You really need to be pretty close to the stops
to have the tail touch down at teh same time. However, the J-3 is
forgiving and if you touch down with the tail still a foot up, the
plane will be nice to you. However, the wing still does produce lift.
In the Chief, I often had the upwind wing lift up as I pulled off the
runway at about 5mph during a gust (forgetting to set the controls for
the wind). So, if that is your definition of full-stall in this
context, then it certainly isn't.



-Robert, CFII