Who does flight plans?

You are kidding, right?

None of the a/c flown by most of us can be 'flown' while stalled no
matter how much engine power is applied. They may be flown below normal
stall speed in such a config but they are not stalled. They can be
'dragged in' below stall speed and even smoothly landed, but not
stalled. And with power-on, the stall will probably be more exciting.

Stall speed and a stalled wing are 2 different things. Right?

Jose wrote:
If you have enough speed to grease it on, you're not even close to a
stall.


While this may be generally the case, it is not of necessity true. One
can stall and maintain altitude (with power). Maintain one foot of
altitude, and gradually reduce power on a calm day. Greaser.

Jose

None of the a/c flown by most of us can be 'flown' while stalled no matter how much engine power is applied.

Then what am I doing when I practice stalls at altitude, holding the
aircraft at the stall buffet? I suppose that's not fully stalled yet,
and when it does fully stall I would lose altitude, but ok, fly it juat
above this speed (unstalled) six inches above the runway, and reduce power.

I don't reccomend this, but put it out since it would not be impossible
to do, and would result in a full stall greaser if all conditions were
right.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain."
(chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Recently, Jose posted:

None of the a/c flown by most of us can be 'flown' while stalled no
matter how much engine power is applied.

Then what am I doing when I practice stalls at altitude, holding the
aircraft at the stall buffet?

You're holding the aircraft at just above the stall speed. When you're
stalled, you're falling, not flying.

What I thought you were describing in your earlier post was there is
adequate power to remain in flight strictly on the engine alone. Think
F-18, not C-172. ;-)

I don't reccomend this, but put it out since it would not be
impossible to do, and would result in a full stall greaser if
all conditions were right.

What you seem to describing now is one where you reach stall speed at
exactly the point where your wheels touch down. What's the point in that,
when you can grease it on at 2-3 kts above stall without the risk of being
wrong and dropping, or hitting a gust and being lifted a few feet and
*then* dropping because you don't have the airspeed to fly?

Neil

What you seem to describing now is one where you reach stall speed at
exactly the point where your wheels touch down. What's the point in that,
when you can grease it on at 2-3 kts above stall without the risk of being
wrong and dropping, or hitting a gust and being lifted a few feet and
*then* dropping because you don't have the airspeed to fly?

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

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain."
(chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

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.

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:52:58 GMT, Maule Driver
wrote:

You are kidding, right?

None of the a/c flown by most of us can be 'flown' while stalled no
matter how much engine power is applied. They may be flown below normal
stall speed in such a config but they are not stalled. They can be
'dragged in' below stall speed and even smoothly landed, but not
stalled. And with power-on, the stall will probably be more exciting.

Most of my landings are "full stall". The horn goes off whitht he
nose way "up there", then the stall breaks. Being that close to the
runway it just drops onto the mains, nose high.

But I agree. Once that wind stalls you are not going to stay up there.
If you don't come down the wing isn't stalled.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Stall speed and a stalled wing are 2 different things. Right?

Jose wrote:
If you have enough speed to grease it on, you're not even close to a
stall.


While this may be generally the case, it is not of necessity true. One
can stall and maintain altitude (with power). Maintain one foot of
altitude, and gradually reduce power on a calm day. Greaser.

Jose