Stalls??

Curt Balluff wrote:

Am Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:53:53 -0800 (PST) schrub "Ol Shy & Bashful"
:

Why is it so many pilots are afraid of stalls?
Depends on the height.

Curt

lol - good point

James
--
Avoid reality at all costs.

On Feb 19, 3:12 am, Centurion wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:


drivel snipped

BTW, it's self-important arse-holes like you that make me glad I'm no
longer "in" the airline industry.


If only you had a smidgen of nous, you'd have watched it. Bob's the
only one on this group that I personally know and have spoken to many
times. He's nothing if not amiable, knowledgeable and above all
unassuming. One chat with him would disabuse you of all your mental
images about the cove.

That the written word is incapable of conveying that vital personal
feel (unless very meticulously worded) is often lost on many a grown
man, as you've just demonstrated. Pity.

Cheers,

Ramapriya

D Ramapriya wrote:

On Feb 19, 3:12 am, Centurion wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:


drivel snipped

BTW, it's self-important arse-holes like you that make me glad I'm no
longer "in" the airline industry.


If only you had a smidgen of nous, you'd have watched it. Bob's the
only one on this group that I personally know and have spoken to many
times.

personal perspective snipped

You have your perspective, I have mine.

Cheers,

James
--
Good day for overcoming obstacles. Try a steeplechase.

D Ramapriya wrote in news:50ff5543-1ef1-4891-9792-
:

On Feb 19, 3:12 am, Centurion wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:


drivel snipped

BTW, it's self-important arse-holes like you that make me glad I'm no
longer "in" the airline industry.


If only you had a smidgen of nous, you'd have watched it. Bob's the
only one on this group that I personally know and have spoken to many
times.


I'm sure he has a plaque commemerating that meeting on his wall.

Bertie

First of all, the stall can occur at ANY speed, and it absolutely
reversible, and it's reversible by decreasing the angle of attack below
stall. THIS is what "starts" the wing flying again...not an increase in
speed...although an increase in speed is coincident with the stall recovery.

Dudley Henriques

It took me a while to get this into my head, as all my primary
training focus was on stall *speeds*. This made it very hard to
separate the two.

"Stick and Rudder" helped me start understanding Angle of Attack.

The final puzzle pieces came together with "Aerodynamics for Naval
Aviators."

Dan

wrote:
First of all, the stall can occur at ANY speed, and it absolutely
reversible, and it's reversible by decreasing the angle of attack below
stall. THIS is what "starts" the wing flying again...not an increase in
speed...although an increase in speed is coincident with the stall recovery.

Dudley Henriques

It took me a while to get this into my head, as all my primary
training focus was on stall *speeds*. This made it very hard to
separate the two.

"Stick and Rudder" helped me start understanding Angle of Attack.

The final puzzle pieces came together with "Aerodynamics for Naval
Aviators."

Dan


I always tell pilots to keep a copy of "AFNA" under their pillows :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

On Feb 19, 8:58 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I always tell pilots to keep a copy of "AFNA" under their pillows :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

I love the grainy black and white pictures. Makes me remember the old
ADVENTURES IN FLYING type books I would check out from the library and
examine for hours.

Dan

wrote:
On Feb 19, 8:58 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
I always tell pilots to keep a copy of "AFNA" under their pillows :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

I love the grainy black and white pictures. Makes me remember the old
ADVENTURES IN FLYING type books I would check out from the library and
examine for hours.

Dan

I've actually seen some of the originals of those prints down at the
Test Pilot School.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:34:09 -0800, "Bob Gardner"
wrote:

To answer your basic question, you could not get a PPL without looking out
the window because ALL training is done in visual conditions. There is a
required lick-and-a-promise three hours of flight training (not instrument
training) in controlling the airplane solely by instrument reference which
is intended ONLY to prepare the visual pilot to keep the airplane right-side
up when visual contact with the outside world is lost through inadvertence.
The value of this training can be assessed by reading the all too familiar
reports of VFR pilots flying into instrument meteorological conditions and
killing themselves and passengers...it is among the leading causes of
aviation fatalities.
Another way of looking at it is when flying VFR we learn to depend on
our senses (seat of the pants) as well as our visual senses as a
reference to controlling the airplane. Good old stick-and-rudder
flying.

When it comes to IFR in real IMC (can't see a thing except the panel)
we can no longer rely on those senses as they are not reliable.
Actually they outright lie to us. You can easily end up in situations
where you can be inverted while thinking you are right side up. You
can be in a steep turn one way when your senses tell you that the
turn is in the other direction. Like ice skating, you tend to go in
the direction you are looking. Try to find land by looking out he left
window and down will result in a descending turn to the left.

One exercise my instructor put me through in instrument training was
to remove all visual input and have me fly the plane (at night). The
test was to see how long I could maintain a safe attitude, not
necessarily straight and level. I managed over a minute and a half
which he said was unusual. IIRC he said 20 to 30 seconds was
normal.However I did cheat a little. I depended on the airplane. I
made small inputs, resisted to correct for what my body was telling me
and managed to stay upright.

Developing a BAD case of spatial disorientation when under the hood
(in the dark) is a real experience. The instruments are telling you
one thing and your body is telling your something else (usually to the
contrary). You can get so dizzy that even your thinking gets stuck in
the mud. I had the privilege of flying like that (in a storm, but it
was daytime) for over an hour. GAWD was I sick! This was my second
time in actual. The first time had been that morning. Yes it was with
an instructor, but he only reminded me if I was straying off course
too far before ATC would bitch. They had the altitude alarms turned
off. It was so rough I kept pointing at the instruments for my scan,
but missing. Then I couldn't remember which instrument I was looking
for. did I mention this was all going on while "GAWD was I sick!"?

BTW this was also my first real flight in the Deb, bringing it home
from MIE.

Bob Gardner

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .
wrote in
:

I guess I'm going to have to start (and perhaps finish) my primary
training in order to understand this comment completely.

I understand that being able to see outside helps the brain make a
connection between the behavior of the airplane and what it looks
like. However, couldn't you learn to feel the airplane and how it
behaves only on instruments ever? Could you complete a PPL without
ever looking out the window? At the risk of sounding like a simmer,
why is this "feel" so necessary when training the beginning pilot and
then relearned for an instrument rating? I know I'm making an error
of logic here (otherwise pilot training would be much different), but
what is it exactly?

I have done enough research to understand the difference between VFR,
VMC, IFR, and IMC and who and why you would fly in each one. I would
imagine this is part of training when getting a PPL. So how would a
pilot mix up these two worlds?


Well, one good reason that visual flying is a better way to go if you
are flying visually.... Umm...

Anyhow, flying instruments has, for instance, one aspect that makes it
very different and that is; you are constantly fighting a number of
signals coming from your body. I'm sure you've heard about spatial
disorientation arising from when the signal from your inner ear
conflicts with the info coming from your eyes. This never really
entirely goes away no matter how much intsrument flying you do. ( at
least it hasn't for me)
Contarily-wise, these signals are an absolute asset to a pilot flying
visually. They are working in concert with your eyes.
So the long and short of it is, when you are flying with your eyes
outside, dozens of signals that give you nothing but grief when your IMC
and soaking up a lot of your resources, are now complementing them and
aiding you in controlling the airplane.

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

On Feb 17, 9:13*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Anyhow, flying instruments has, for instance, one aspect that makes it
very different and that is; you are constantly fighting a number of
signals coming from your body. I'm sure you've heard about spatial
disorientation arising from when the signal from your inner ear
conflicts with the info coming from your eyes. This never really
entirely goes away no matter how much intsrument flying you do. ( at
least it hasn't for me)

There are two kinds of pilots in this regard.

There are those who fly by feel naturally, solo relatively quickly
(even in a taildragger), and never quite get rid of the discomfort
caused by 'seat-of'the-pants' signals in instrument conditions.
They're the ones who need to be really careful about staying
instrument current because for them it's a perishable skill.

There are also those who have a hard time with coordination and with
the flare, take a long time to solo because of it, and find instrument
flying easy because feel doesn't matter anymore. Someone like that
could probably learn to fly takeoff to touchdown without looking
outside ab initio, as long as he ahd a good RADAR altimeter and GPS.
This is the same person who doesn't need to worry about losing his
instrument proficiency because he found getting the instrument rating
to be a cakewalk in the first place.

Of course those are the extremes - the reality is a continuum - but
you get the idea. As we have more and more people growing up in front
of computers, I think we're going to see the pilot population shifting
towards the second. In fact, I think over 100% of the reduction in
VFR-into-IMC accidents seen in the past few years can be attributed to
this trend (since without it things would have gotten worse).

Eventually, we're going to see student pilots who have an easier time
learning to do an ILS than a simple visual pattern. I think this is
already starting.

Michael