![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Mxsmanic wrote: Listening to the radio transmissions of a VFR pilot who had a panic attack in a cloud of IMC, I heard him mention to a controller that "the stall horn goes off every time I land." I thought that was bizarre. Is a touchdown supposed to be a stall? My stall horn doesn't sound on landing. I gather you are using a toy flight simulator. Okay, in a real airplane the stall warning horn does not go off every time, either, but many pilots consider it the ideal. It means that you are landing at the slowest possible speed. Or it at least is supposed to. My opinion, that of most manufacturers, and of many commercial pilots, is that the stall warning horn is a very poor indicator of proper landing speed. Cessna does not say in their operating handbooks to land with the stall warning horn blaring. It does not say it on their checklists. Cessna says to land at, say, 50 KIAS. No mention is made of the stall warning horn except in the section on stalls. There. I said it. I know it goes against the deepest heart of hearts of some people here, including those I greatly respect or even admire, but there it is. They are wrong. And we would have a lot fewer Cessnas and other airplanes with broken tail cones if they would admit it. You would not believe the number of tail strikes I have seen generated by these guys. And I also think Langewische was wrong about some things. He was not God. Some of the things he asserts in "Stick and Rudder" are downright idiotic. Among other things, he advocates a "stall-proof" airplane, which may not be possible and which certainly is not desirable. He perpetuates certain myths about the cause of lift. I simply cannot recommend this book for the student pilot, although it is a step above "Junior Birdman" kits. Langewische should be used judiciously by flight instructors who have a thorough grounding in the principles of flight, if at all. The ONLY time you should consider it absolutely necessary to land at the slowest possible airspeed is when you are performing short field landings. Higher airspeeds are helpful, and possibly even necessary, in crosswinds, gusty conditions, soft field operations, or when you just want an especially gentle landing and you have a long runway. The best speed at which to land the airplane is the one recommended (adjusted for local conditions) by the manufacturer, who presumably knows something about the airplane's envelope. The manufacturer, after all, designed the plane, did the engineering, and flew the certification tests. The manufacturer knows what angle of attack will cause you to bang the tail on the runway. The manufacturer knows what rate of descent will smash the gear. The manufacturer knows what angle of attack will lift the nose enough to keep you from banging the nose wheel. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 05:14 AM |
Tamed by the Tailwheel | [email protected] | Piloting | 84 | January 18th 05 04:08 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |
Wing Extensions | Jay | Home Built | 22 | July 27th 03 12:23 PM |