Full Stall Landing?

"Danny Dot" wrote in message
...
In my opinion the use of the term "Full Stall Landing" is a misnomer. At
least for me the term "Extreme Slow Flight Landing" would be better. I
don't put the wings into a full stall before touch down when I land as
slow as possible. I put the airplane on the edge of the stall and fly it
to the ground. I also use feel of the airplane more that airspeed.

This works for me. Maybe others attempt and get a full stall before
touchdown.

Any comments?

Danny Dot


I generally prefer wheel landings over three pointers.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Danny Dot wrote:
In my opinion the use of the term "Full Stall Landing" is a misnomer. At
least for me the term "Extreme Slow Flight Landing" would be better. I
don't put the wings into a full stall before touch down when I land as slow
as possible. I put the airplane on the edge of the stall and fly it to the
ground. I also use feel of the airplane more that airspeed.

This works for me. Maybe others attempt and get a full stall before
touchdown.

I think most people use the term "full stall" with respect to landing
as you got as much lift from he wing as possible. If you define "full
stall" as no lift, then certainly no certified plane lands like that.
In flight "full stall" has a very different meaning, meaning a full
break, but you'd never know that you achieved that on landing.

-Robert

On 10 Nov 2006 08:20:17 -0800, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:


Danny Dot wrote:
In my opinion the use of the term "Full Stall Landing" is a misnomer. At
least for me the term "Extreme Slow Flight Landing" would be better. I
don't put the wings into a full stall before touch down when I land as slow
as possible. I put the airplane on the edge of the stall and fly it to the
ground. I also use feel of the airplane more that airspeed.

This works for me. Maybe others attempt and get a full stall before
touchdown.

I full stall my Mooney. Wheels touch when yoke is at stops.
I full stall the Deb from a few inches. The yoke doesn't make it all
the way back, but you can feel the stall and the quick settle onto the
mains.



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

That's the correct definition of full stall - the point
where lift is maximized as you increase the angle of attack.

I always thought it was the point at which airflow departs the top of
the wing. Is the airflow still attached at the maximum lift AOA?

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.

I think he thought you were MXManiac.

mike

"Danny Dot" wrote in message
...

"karl gruber" wrote in message
...
Learn to fly a real airplane.


I don't understand the comment. I don't recall saying what planes I have
flown.

Danny Dot
www.mobbinggonemad.org

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

I think most people use the term "full stall" with respect to landing
as you got as much lift from he wing as possible.

That's the correct definition of full stall - the point
where lift is maximized as you increase the angle of attack.

For landing, I think more people define "full stall" as you can't pull
back any more.

In flight "full stall" has a very different meaning, meaning a full
break, but you'd never know that you achieved that on landing.

No, it's the same meaning. Just as when landing, the high
power requirement aloft means a high descent rate.

I don't think most aircraft have the available elevator authority to
achieve your definition of "full stall" while in ground effect. I can
land most SE aircraft with the elevator hitting the stops as the wheel
touch. Most aircraft don't behave that way in flight out of ground
effect. The aircraft will stall break before hitting the stops unless
you yank it into the stall (which you aren't doing during landing
either).


-Robert, CFII

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
Jose wrote:
However, loosely speaking, I suppose you would say that the
airflow is just beginning to depart at the stall.

Its also important to understand that stall is not an event, is a
progression. Different parts of the wing reach their critical AOA at
different times. As the stall gets "deeper and deeper" more parts of
the wing will achieve their critical AOA. In the types of stalls we do
with students, only a small area of the wing near the root ever really
achives that AOA. If the entire wing really stopped producing lift at
the same time, you'd have a pretty wild stall.

-Robert

However, loosely speaking, I suppose you would say that the
airflow is just beginning to depart at the stall.

But *precisely* speaking, the airplane stops flying at the moment of
a "full stall" landing.

vince norris

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

For landing, I think more people define "full stall" as you can't pull
back any more.


BTW, there are two things not discussed above 1) the
possible use of engine to produce the needed extra power
for a level flight stall landing. But who wants a full
power on landing? 2) the real effect of ground effect, which
makes your wings work better.

Ground effect has an effect on the stabilizer/elevator as well
as the wing. Stabs that are close to the ground in landing attitude
lose their effectiveness. I have some time in the Glastar and the 185,
both having rather low-mounted stabs, and both of them lose elevator
effectiveness in the flare, especially at forward CG. They much prefer
wheel landings to three-pointers.
Why this is so, I'm not sure. The AOA of the stab is probably
affected near the ground as the wing's downwash will have less effect
on the stab with the presence of the surface to diminish downwash.
Perhaps the the low-pressure area under the stab is fouled up by the
surface. Dunno. At any rate, there seems to be too little elevator at
that point, while there was plenty aloft.
The early Cardinal had stabilator-stalling problems in the
flare; a few got their nosewheels busted when the nose came down hard.
Cessna slotted the stab to fix it.

Dan

"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
However, loosely speaking, I suppose you would say that the
airflow is just beginning to depart at the stall.

But *precisely* speaking, the airplane stops flying at the moment of
a "full stall" landing.


This is my point. If I attempt a "full stall" landing and mis-judge the
highth by a few feet, I can be in an airplane that is a few feet in the air
and is NOT flying anymore. Before I transitioned to "Extreme Slow Flight"
landings, I stalled a few times a few feet in the air and dropped to the
runway out of control. In a Cessna, this results in a bounce due to no
shocks in the landing rear.

Danny Dot
www.mobbinggonemad.org


vince norris