About Stall Psychology and Pilots

That's true. After the war a lot of highly qualified pilots hit the
streets as new GA instructors. They brought with them the military
approach to flying that was based on maximum result in minimum time,
which was the natural process of the military scenario.
Many of these pilots were great sticks, but few of them possessed any
teaching skills at all as we define those skills in a GA market place.
The result of this influx was a no nonsense teaching environment that
actually clashed with the changes that were occurring in GA at that time.
Gradually, these military pilots became a liability in the new
marketplace and many were "replaced" as FBO's began to realize that new
students like "Mrs. Duffy" the housewife, was coming back in from her
hour of dual looking a bit pale and concerned :-)

What happened is what we have now; a few holdovers from the "old school"
and a whole lot of the "new breed" of instructor.

The ultimate answer to getting the quality level up in the GA pilot
community will in my opinion require a whole new look at the way flight
instruction is conducted.

I know from my own personal experience that it is possible to take an
average newbie with the average apprehensive feeling about flying and
take that newbie through a learning process that replaces the
apprehension with confidence. These newbies can be trained by GOOD
instructors to function not only well, but VERY well in the flying
environment with comfort zones well beyond their initial level of
apprehension found at the initiation of training.

Barring the influx of CFI's who are capable of teaching students in this
manner, I would project no meaningful changes in the present GA environment.

Dudley Henriques





wrote:
On Feb 15, 3:36 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Let's explore this a bit more and take a look at some history.

Aviation is a business. To make it in business, you need to sell
product, services, or both. Aviation involves both. No sales, no aviation.
Now if one looks at a prospective pilot base as well as a prospective
aircraft sales base, it doesn't take very long to discover that for General
Aviation, if you want to make money and get the public in the air to
make that money, you have to SELL aviation as a safe, non-threatening-
and most of all, non- FRIGHTENING endeavor.

Now, if you look back to the fifties, you will find a concentrated and
skillful marketing program generally involving Fixed Base Operators, Flight
Schools, Airplane Manufactures, and indeed lobbyists in Washington; all
involved in structuring general aviation to be as safe as a walk in
the park.

Dudley Henriques

A very interesting and trenchant analysis.

I think some other relevant historical data points are that in the
late 60's and early 70's many of the WW2 era military-trained pilots
started retiring, quitting, or dying. At the same time there was a
change in educational philosophy that stressed the learner over the
content.

We saw a related change in the Army in the 80s -- from "Do it cuz I
said so, maggot" to "Here's the task, here's how, (and sometimes,
'here's why') -- now move out smartly."

As in most social movements, as the pendulum swings the baby and the
bathwater get tossed.

The GA Flying industry has to push utility and fun. They have to --
the opposite -- the innate fear that is resident in most normal humans
with the brain capacity and means to pursue GA flying -- counters the
"utility and fun" with loads of "That's scary."

But unless a person is ignorantly unaware of the inherent danger or
suicidal, I assume most pilots with more than 15 hours continue to
think, "Gee, this is dangerous -- I'd better do things the right way,
and avoid the things that can kill me."

So maybe the sell for spins and other advanced maneuvers is not, "Do
it cause it's in the PTS, maggot!", or "Do it cuz I did it" but
rather, "Here's a way to save your life and the life of your
passengers."

Oh, so spin recovery is part of that learning? Good. Sign me up.

You're right, I fly in mountains and should know how to perform a
maximum performance 180 at the edge of stall. Great, show me how.

This presumes a relationship with a trusted instructor who knows his
audience, knows what is needed, and then persuades him/her to act.

Too much of the current system is geared towards producing ratings,
and CFIs are cogs in that machine.

Those CFIs who've "been there" and yet still "hang around the airport"
are sorely needed.

Dan







--
Dudley Henriques

The ultimate answer to getting the quality level up in the GA pilot
community will in my opinion require a whole new look at the way flight
instruction is conducted.
...

Dudley Henriques


That is a requirement. But there is something else: GA has become so
expensive that it takes an extraordinary commitment to attain the
higher skill levels and quality that you are writing about. I read
somewhere recently that survival and skill depend for the greatest
part on experience. I believe that is true -- and it builds on itself.
These days it is financially very difficult if not impossible to get
the kind of flight experience required to attain and maintain the high
skill and confidence just within 30/60 -- let alone beyond it. At
least for the average person who is not a professional pilot of some
sort.

I would like to fly once every two to three days, weather permitting,
but at $80 an hour MINIMUM it is just not possible as a renter -- even
with a very high paying job. And most aircraft cost more like $100 for
that one hour.

The only way to get the chance for the experience you guys are talking
about (other than being a professional) is to build a plane or
possilby share a used plane with another couple of pilots. That would
be doable. Rental is just simply out in many parts of the country.

Price is THE obstacle to higher quality in GA from my perspective --
especially because many pilots just aren't up to the commitment to
homebuild. Because even if you find a really good instructor, after
the aerobatics course you still have to fly ... and fly a lot.

I hope to push through to a higher level by building something simple
first, and then later an aerobatic bipe. In the meantime my club has
an 152 Aerobat for rent and I've got Kershner on my desk top. I sneak
in the payments under the old lady's nose.

On Feb 15, 9:06*pm, wrote:
The ultimate answer to getting the quality level up in the GA pilot
community will in my opinion require a whole new look at the way flight
instruction is conducted.
...

Dudley Henriques


Obliquely related to the topic of comfort in the left hand curve of
the flight envelope, some low speed F22 aerobatics:

http://www.airventure.org/2008/news/080214_raptors.html

What a ride that aircraft provides.

wrote in
:

On Feb 15, 9:06*pm, wrote:
The ultimate answer to getting the quality level up in the GA pilot
community will in my opinion require a whole new look at the way
flight instruction is conducted.
...

Dudley Henriques


Obliquely related to the topic of comfort in the left hand curve of
the flight envelope, some low speed F22 aerobatics:

http://www.airventure.org/2008/news/080214_raptors.html

What a ride that aircraft provides.



Well, that thing looks after alpha for you.


Bertie

wrote:
The ultimate answer to getting the quality level up in the GA pilot
community will in my opinion require a whole new look at the way flight
instruction is conducted.
...

Dudley Henriques


That is a requirement. But there is something else: GA has become so
expensive that it takes an extraordinary commitment to attain the
higher skill levels and quality that you are writing about. I read
somewhere recently that survival and skill depend for the greatest
part on experience. I believe that is true -- and it builds on itself.
These days it is financially very difficult if not impossible to get
the kind of flight experience required to attain and maintain the high
skill and confidence just within 30/60 -- let alone beyond it. At
least for the average person who is not a professional pilot of some
sort.

I would like to fly once every two to three days, weather permitting,
but at $80 an hour MINIMUM it is just not possible as a renter -- even
with a very high paying job. And most aircraft cost more like $100 for
that one hour.

The only way to get the chance for the experience you guys are talking
about (other than being a professional) is to build a plane or
possilby share a used plane with another couple of pilots. That would
be doable. Rental is just simply out in many parts of the country.

Price is THE obstacle to higher quality in GA from my perspective --
especially because many pilots just aren't up to the commitment to
homebuild. Because even if you find a really good instructor, after
the aerobatics course you still have to fly ... and fly a lot.

I hope to push through to a higher level by building something simple
first, and then later an aerobatic bipe. In the meantime my club has
an 152 Aerobat for rent and I've got Kershner on my desk top. I sneak
in the payments under the old lady's nose.

I am in complete agreement and sympathy with what you have said here.
There is no doubt that the cost involved in general aviation,
specifically for non professional pilots has increased to almost
unbearable levels.
I always, when talking on these issues in public, have to recognize the
cost factor.
Fortunately for the GA pilot, the price for the increased quality I'm
speaking of doesn't have to be all that high. Considering a good
instructor/student pairing, a pilot could easily be upgraded to a much
higher comfort zone in 5 hours of highly concentrated dual in the right
airplane.

5 more hours of dual seems a low enough price to pay to gain this higher
comfort zone.
I can't count the amount of pilots I have taken through a 5 hour upgrade
that included upset recovery, advanced stall and spin training, and
basic aerobatics.

You don't have to do this in an S2 Pitts. The instructor is the key, NOT
the high priced airplane. This upgrading can easily be done in an
Aerobat, or if you have a few dollars more, a Decathlon or Citabria.

The bottom line is your comfort zone and where you feel you are as a
pilot vs where you would like to be. You might not need such an upgrade.
You're right. There is some added cost involved, but the gain in skill,
confidence, and experience could be priceless.

In my opinion, an average VFR pilot investing in this added 5 hours of
highly specialized dual with a carefully chosen instructor could easily
experience the most important investment they will ever make in aviation.


--
Dudley Henriques

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:36:35 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

you will
be a MUCH better pilot if your comfort zone in the air includes a
complete familiarity with the left side of the flight envelope, you feel
comfortable doing a full stall and recovery with the airplane, and your
butt cheeks don't squeeze together ever more tightly as the pitch
exceeds 30 degrees and the bank goes beyond 60 degrees.

Do you look to find a CFI that will teach stalls as you suggest above or
find another one (if yours doesn't) that will?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:36:35 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

you will
be a MUCH better pilot if your comfort zone in the air includes a
complete familiarity with the left side of the flight envelope, you feel
comfortable doing a full stall and recovery with the airplane, and your
butt cheeks don't squeeze together ever more tightly as the pitch
exceeds 30 degrees and the bank goes beyond 60 degrees.

Do you look to find a CFI that will teach stalls as you suggest above or
find another one (if yours doesn't) that will?


I would strongly suggest that you do this. You can learn to fly and be a
safe pilot flying with a CFI who teaches you completely within the 30/60
comfort zone, but there is absolutely no doubt at all in my mind that
you will be a BETTER pilot if you seek out and fly with a CFI who
teaches you in such a way that you have no fear of being outside that
30/60 zone.
A point that is critical to make here is that it's not necessary that
you actually fly outside the 30/60 on any constant basis for you to be
comfortable there. What IS important is that although the vast majority
of your flying will remain inside the 30/60 zone, your training has
resulted in your not being uncomfortable outside your normal area.
In other words, the complete objective of this type of flight training
is to produce a pilot who flies normally while at the same time feeling
comfortable with the airplane completely throughout it's flight envelope.
Keep in mind that although possessing this expanded comfort zone, your
general flying will still remain (if you choose to remain non aerobatic)
exercised as it always has been. You will just be a better pilot and
much more secure in the aircraft than you were before.

--
Dudley Henriques

A point that is critical to make here is that it's not necessary that
you actually fly outside the 30/60 on any constant basis for you to be
comfortable there. What IS important is that although the vast majority
of your flying will remain inside the 30/60 zone, your training has
resulted in your not being uncomfortable outside your normal area.
...
Dudley Henriques

I'm probably much luckier than many in that my club has both an
Aerobat and an instructor available with an aerobatics rating (or
endorsement, whatever it's called). She has me working through the
Kershner book as a prereq. I plan for a 5 or 6 hour course this April/
May.

Speaking directly to the discomfort outside of 30/60: I had moderate
nerves flying slow at first, but after a time or two of dual I found
myself settled. I became at ease with power-off stalls, as the
aircraft just wasn't doing any bucking or dipping. But I didn't get
comfortable with power-on -- even though I was comfortable in the
reverse power curve in steady slow flight with the stall horn buzzing
constantly. Still, solo I was quite nervous with power-on stalls. When
it came time to really practice that before the checkride I had a hard
time finding the same calm place I was at with power-off stalls. The
power-on has a harder break in the Aerobat; I had trouble holding
course and keeping coordinated. On one flight I got rather exasperated
with myself and thought "dang it, this is an airplane, it's okay if it
banks and pitches and rolls about!", then, after doing some clearing
turns I did some steeper banks while power-off in a moderately steep
nose down attitude (less than 30 -- but definitely far from straight
and level).

I kept doing that until I settled down. Even though I knew before I
did those steeper maneuvers that I could recover from them (they were
"unusual attitudes"), nevertheless ACTUALLY performing them and
recovering made a huge difference to my comfort level.

After than I was able to do better power-on stalls and not have the
nerves about when the plane would suddenly lose lift. They weren't
perfect but I didn't have the nerves anymore.

By the way, though the checkride DE did not make be do a power-on to
full stall break, my instructor always did. In retrospect, though it
was more uncomfortable at first, I'm glad she always made me do to a
full break stall. If I didn't, she'd say "let's do that again", rather
sternly.

Oddly, I was more frightened of the spin from power-on than power off
(which may be reasonable, I'm not sure); even though the two spins she
demonstrated for me were done power-off. I think maybe because I felt
it was easier to stay coordinated power-off, without all those extra
precession and p-factor effects twisting the plane, thus was at lower
risk to a flight condition I had not myself recovered from.

For me there's a mental wall of nerves/fear when I have not done a
manuever myself -- even if I know how in theory. For spin, PARE. But I
haven't done it; thus, a wall exists that I have to bust through.

That is one big motivator for Aerobatic training, but not the only.
All told, I just want to understand control inputs to make the plane
do what I want it to do regardless of my orientation in the sky.

wrote:
A point that is critical to make here is that it's not necessary that
you actually fly outside the 30/60 on any constant basis for you to be
comfortable there. What IS important is that although the vast majority
of your flying will remain inside the 30/60 zone, your training has
resulted in your not being uncomfortable outside your normal area.
...
Dudley Henriques

I'm probably much luckier than many in that my club has both an
Aerobat and an instructor available with an aerobatics rating (or
endorsement, whatever it's called). She has me working through the
Kershner book as a prereq. I plan for a 5 or 6 hour course this April/
May.

Speaking directly to the discomfort outside of 30/60: I had moderate
nerves flying slow at first, but after a time or two of dual I found
myself settled. I became at ease with power-off stalls, as the
aircraft just wasn't doing any bucking or dipping. But I didn't get
comfortable with power-on -- even though I was comfortable in the
reverse power curve in steady slow flight with the stall horn buzzing
constantly. Still, solo I was quite nervous with power-on stalls. When
it came time to really practice that before the checkride I had a hard
time finding the same calm place I was at with power-off stalls. The
power-on has a harder break in the Aerobat; I had trouble holding
course and keeping coordinated. On one flight I got rather exasperated
with myself and thought "dang it, this is an airplane, it's okay if it
banks and pitches and rolls about!", then, after doing some clearing
turns I did some steeper banks while power-off in a moderately steep
nose down attitude (less than 30 -- but definitely far from straight
and level).

I kept doing that until I settled down. Even though I knew before I
did those steeper maneuvers that I could recover from them (they were
"unusual attitudes"), nevertheless ACTUALLY performing them and
recovering made a huge difference to my comfort level.

After than I was able to do better power-on stalls and not have the
nerves about when the plane would suddenly lose lift. They weren't
perfect but I didn't have the nerves anymore.

By the way, though the checkride DE did not make be do a power-on to
full stall break, my instructor always did. In retrospect, though it
was more uncomfortable at first, I'm glad she always made me do to a
full break stall. If I didn't, she'd say "let's do that again", rather
sternly.

Oddly, I was more frightened of the spin from power-on than power off
(which may be reasonable, I'm not sure); even though the two spins she
demonstrated for me were done power-off. I think maybe because I felt
it was easier to stay coordinated power-off, without all those extra
precession and p-factor effects twisting the plane, thus was at lower
risk to a flight condition I had not myself recovered from.

For me there's a mental wall of nerves/fear when I have not done a
manuever myself -- even if I know how in theory. For spin, PARE. But I
haven't done it; thus, a wall exists that I have to bust through.

That is one big motivator for Aerobatic training, but not the only.
All told, I just want to understand control inputs to make the plane
do what I want it to do regardless of my orientation in the sky.

Your assessment of your entire situation sounds completely normal to me
in every respect. It's a healthy attitude, and as well a good summation
based on sound principle.
You're right. Power on stalls have a natural tendency to make newbies
more nervous than power off. The nose attitude is generally higher, it's
louder, (this is a factor BTW), the break is cleaner and more sudden,
and the recovery can seem hurried to a newbie who is experiencing the
recovery under stress.
This can be partially addressed by allowing the aircraft to slow as the
nose is raised to normal climb speed before climb power is applied.
This will generally cause the break with a lower nose attitude which can
show an immediate improving effect on a newbie.

One thing that will definitely help you develop some added confidence
doing power on stalls is in actively changing your attitude up front
about them.
Think about this for a second. You know what to expect, and you know the
airplane will recover with normal recovery control application, so the
only thing left that is contributing to your apprehension is the stall
itself.
Think for a moment what would happen if instead of getting that sudden
adrenalin flow you have been experiencing as your system reacts as the
stall breaks, you were instead mentally and physically AHEAD of the
stall break and now EXPECTING it, and more importantly, WANTING IT!
You have just changed your entire interface with the stall. When it
happens, your system is waiting for it; you react as trained, and
recover the airplane.
The ingredient that has been added to your equation is simply EXPECTATION.
You do several power on stalls in this frame of mind and I guarantee
that you will not be apprehensive again when dealing with power on stalls.

Just something to think about before you fly again :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Think for a moment what would happen if instead of getting that sudden
adrenalin flow you have been experiencing as your system reacts as the
stall breaks, you were instead mentally and physically AHEAD of the
stall break and now EXPECTING it, and more importantly, WANTING IT!
You have just changed your entire interface with the stall. When it
happens, your system is waiting for it; you react as trained, and
recover the airplane.
...
Just something to think about before you fly again :-))

Dudley Henriques-

Thanks, this sounds like a really good approach to try.

I'll give it a shot next time I'm up & let you know the results.