IDAHO FATALITY

I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit, dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21 shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another mechanical
gadget to go wrong.


At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:
Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is counterproductive). Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware of it. Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66

I think there are several misconceptions in Jim's post below.

First, we are not talking about "stick shakers" which produce large,
low frequency shaking. No glider would have the electrical power to
operate one. We are talking about "stick vibrators" using tiny cell
phone vibrator motors. These are carefully designed to get your
attention so you answer a call.

Second, if you routinely thermal in the AoA range where they would
activate, you're flying way too slow. There is a fairly large AoA
range between minimum sink and stall so the warning should not
activate in smooth air and rarely in rough air. If it activates
often, you could climb better by lowering the nose and flying a little
faster. For performance, there is no reason to operate in the
airspeed/AoA range between min sink and stall.

Third, I have no doubt Jim can detect an impending stall by feel and
aircraft behavior as he says. Most of us can do that, but we're not
the ones involved in stall/spin accidents - yet. As has been pointed
out, distractions can interfere with our perceptions of impending
stall. Who would say there could not be a situation where they might
benefit from a "buzz in the hand" reminder to lower the nose.

I spent the weekend instructing in an ASK 21 - arguably one of the
most docile gliders ever built. Not one pilot could detect an
impending stall unless I carefully pointed out the glider's
symptomatic pre-stall behavior - it's very subtle and requires some
mental concentration to detect it. It's so docile, a few couldn't
even detect a stall even as it was happening.

For those objecting to a AoA/stall warner, carefully read this story:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0903142411.htm

Not all objections are based on logic.

Bill Daniels


On Sep 6, 9:11*am, Jim White wrote:
I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit, dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21 shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another mechanical
gadget to go wrong.

At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:







Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is counterproductive). *Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware of it. *Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66

Jim,

This is spooky. For once, I find myself agreeing with you.

Stall and spin awareness and stall and spin handling is a vital
part of a glider pilot's training. We routinely operate only a few
knots above the stall and this is one of the reasons why we add
a few more knots for the wife and kids when below around 500
feet.

The DG1000 has a stall warner and it is bloody annoying when it
keeps going off. It's a real distraction, it reacts to gusts and
doesn't really work. It is totally counterproductive.

In my view, those who cannot recognise the fact that their glider
is near the stall or is about to spin are not yet adequately
trained or lack adequate currency to be able to fly safely.

The remedy is in training, not in unreliable extra gadgets. My
sympathies go out to the unfortunate people who lost their lives
in spinning accidents as well as their families. There was a spate
of spinning accidents around twenty five years ago in the UK.
The BGA training syllabus got changed at that time and
thankfully- touch wood, we have far fewer spinning accidents
now.

Mike


At 15:11 06 September 2011, Jim White wrote:
I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern
gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead
of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit,
dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21
shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of
pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered
straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the
stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually
happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if
the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also
be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as
possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are
not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient
speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This
all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another
mechanical
gadget to go wrong.


At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:
Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another
reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is
counterproductive). Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the
cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware
of it. Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66

Comments interspersed below.

On Sep 6, 10:46*am, Mike Philpott @ wrote:
Jim,


Stall and spin awareness and stall and spin handling is a vital
part of a glider pilot's training. We routinely operate only a few
knots above the stall and this is one of the reasons why we add
a few more knots for the wife and kids when below around 500
feet.

True - but also a good reason to have a stall warning device.

The DG1000 has a stall warner and it is bloody annoying when it
keeps going off. It's a real distraction, it reacts to gusts and
doesn't really work. It is totally counterproductive.

Only one example and generalizing it to all stall warning devices in
inappropriate and inaccurate. It's also possible, even likely,
you're just flying the DG1000 too slow.


In my view, those who cannot recognise the fact that their glider
is near the stall or is about to spin are not yet adequately
trained or lack adequate currency to be able to fly safely.

'Trained to recognize' and 'will recognize' in a stressful situation
are two different things.


The remedy is in training, not in unreliable extra gadgets.

Training is good but why should stall warnings be unreliable? Every
aircraft has a stall warning system except gliders. Complaints of
unreliability with these systems are essentially zero.

Bill Daniels

On Sep 6, 8:11*am, Jim White wrote:
I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit, dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21 shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another mechanical
gadget to go wrong.

At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:



Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is counterproductive). *Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware of it. *Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is the point that puzzles me the most. I am sure that many of us
had never accidentally stalled/spinned a glider even in rough
thermals, due to the ample warnings. Incipient spin is the closest to
accidental spin I ever got, and this is only when grossly skidding in
rough thermal at safe altitude. Yet the majority of glider accidents
are attributed to stall/spin, and usually very experienced pilots, and
if my assumption above is correct, it was probably their first
accidental stall/spin. Which leads me to conclude that those stall/
spin happened without warning from one reason or another.
I think it will be very helpful to hear stories from pilots who
survived a stall/spin accident, and why they think it happened.
Anyone on RAS who survived such an accident care to share their story?

Ramy

On Sep 6, 1:35*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Sep 6, 8:11*am, Jim White wrote:









I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit, dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21 shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another mechanical
gadget to go wrong.

At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:

Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is counterproductive). *Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware of it. *Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is the point that puzzles me the most. I am sure that many of us
had never accidentally stalled/spinned a glider even in rough
thermals, due to the ample warnings. Incipient spin is the closest to
accidental spin I ever got, and this is only when grossly skidding in
rough thermal at safe altitude. Yet the majority of glider accidents
are attributed to stall/spin, and usually very experienced pilots, and
if my assumption above is correct, it was probably their first
accidental stall/spin. Which leads me to conclude that those stall/
spin happened without warning from one reason or another.
I think it will be very helpful to hear stories from pilots who
survived a stall/spin accident, and why they think it happened.
Anyone on RAS who survived such an accident care to share their story?

Ramy

First, i don't think stall/spins represent the majority of accidents
or even fatalities. Over the years, we've found other ways to kill
ourselves.

As for how the stall/spin actually happens, I think training may be at
fault in at least two areas. Many instructors insist on teaching
stalls as a very nose high attitude followed by a nose drop - this
rarely, if ever, happens in normal operations. Almost all accidental
stalls happen from slow flight carried too far. The most instructive
stalls are approached slowly from prolonged flight in the near-stall
environment. If the glider is allowed to enter a high-sink "mush"
before a skidding turn is initiated, you'll see a more convincing spin
departure. I always teach stalls entered from slow-flight.

Gliders entering service in the last 30 years or so are very resistant
to spins if loaded within the allowable CG range. They will only spin
if the controls are held in the full pro-spin position - full back
stick and pro-spin rudder. This is an unlikely scenario in an
accidental stall/spin. If the controls are elsewhere, the glider will
drop a wing in the stall break and then enter a mild spiral dive. If
the pilot mis-identifies the spiral dive as a spin and applies spin
recovery control inputs, the result can be a rolling dive into the
ground. (If it happens in a very slippery, heavily ballasted open
class glider, it may break up as it exceeds redline.) Excluding those
accidents resulting from an aft of limit CG, I think many 'stall/spin'
accidents follow this scenario and are really spiral dives at impact.

On 9-6-2011 18:26, Bill D wrote:
Every
aircraft has a stall warning system except gliders. Complaints of
unreliability with these systems are essentially zero.

Bill Daniels



Untrue. My Corben Junior Ace (experimental) does not have any stall
warning device other than the nose of the aircraft. When it is pointing
straight at the ground, the aircraft has stalled at some time prior to
seeing the ground out in front. No buffet either. However, being open
cockpit, one generally notices the wind noise gets very low and not much
breeze on the face right before stall.

Ace

On 9/1/11 2:44 PM, Bill D wrote:
[snip]

This is yet another case where an angle of attack indicator with stall
warning stick vibrator would have saved a life. Tiny cellphone/pager
vibrator motors embedded in the stick grip would be an excellent stall
warning.

I have no idea how you know enough about what was going on with the
aircraft and its pilot (especially inside his head/his perception of the
aircraft situation and flight performance) to know he would have
responded to a stall warning device appropriately and in time to
prevented the crash.

I would like to think maybe there is a stall warning device that might
be developed but I am pessimistic about the effectiveness of these
devices and false alarms while thermalling. And I am a bit bemused by
the mention a small cellphone like shaker device to vibrate the control
stick. Many of our gliders give us some pretty good signals about an
impending stall. And in situations like where people are being killed in
pull-up/turn or flat over-rudder turns to base etc. I expect these
accident pilots are so far behind their aircraft that a subtle warnings
(e.g. vibrating the stick with a small shaker) would not be noticed. A
loud alarm or voice alert might at least have a chance of registering at
all with the pilot but whether the warning can be issued to allow them
enough time to react and whether the pilot will react correctly who
knows... (e.g. in a heading towards the dirt "ground rush" situations
the pilot has to sort out an audible stall alert vs. a pretty strong
visual cue that causes them to likely want to pull back and its not
clear what they will do).

I suspect something that is going to help the pilot who is well behind
their glider will require fairly loud/very obvious warning with a decent
pre-stall margin and that risks being annoying when thermalling slow.
e.g. its unclear if a system would be airspeed or AoA based, but
spoilers open often increase stall speeds by a few knots so does the
stall warning need to know the spoiler position and factor this or do
you just pad the stall warning by a few more knots and further increase
false alarms/disturbances when thermalling? Flap position needs to be
factored as well on flapped gliders. If somebody is far enough behind
the glider and doing something that is about to bite them then how much
warning margin before the stall is actually needed to give the pilot a
good chance of avoiding or recovering faster/more effectively from the
stall/spin? Will those warning margins added together cause lots of
false alerts when thermalling say 10 knots above the stall in a gusty
thermal? And although I want something really obvious like a loud beep
or similar for a stall warning I also don't want noises that might be
confused with a FLARM/PowerFLARM alert while in a thermal.

There are glider stall warning systems available today, so the the
question may really be how do these systems work in practice and why are
there not more of them in use. DG built a visual and audible stall
warning system in the DG-600 and they have a stall warning in the DEI-NT
(and DEI??).

Safe Flight have their vane driven AoA meter which has an audible alarm
but besides seeing one installed in a glider at the SSA show in
Albuquerque a few years ago I have never hear of one of these installed
in the wild, or of a glider manufacturer offering these as options.
Anybody know any different? Or know what these cost? I believe the
fairly large vane is removable but how easy is it to damage e.g. on
ground handling?

The Cambridge 302 has a stall warning based on pitot airspeed, wing
loading (it knows the % ballast) and G-meter (but it does not take into
effect flap or spoiler position). I used a C302 in my DG-303 and ASH-26E
and in both cases turned down the warning airspeed because it produced
too many false alarms while thermalling, based on my own use I don't
think its a useful tool for real stall/spin avoidance. Other pilot's
have experiences/opinions with the C302 stall warning?

So who has actually flies with any of these or other stall warning
indicators today and how useful have they found them? And do you think
they will be useful for preventing some of the
behind-the-aircraft/confused pilot stall/spin accidents we've seen?

I know there are these videos on YouTube at
http://www.youtube.com/user/DT38000?blend=23&ob=5 , I assume showing the
DG DEI system alerting but without more information like the airspeeds
and seeing the glider thermalling I can't really draw any conclusion at
all from the videos.

In the meantime, looks like instructors doing BFRs and spring checkouts
next year have lots and lots of stuff to go through that may save
lives... from tow-signals to stall/spin aerodynamics, recognition and
recovery.


Darryl

On Sep 7, 12:46*am, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On 9/1/11 2:44 PM, Bill D wrote:
[snip]

This is yet another case where an angle of attack indicator with stall
warning stick vibrator would have saved a life. *Tiny cellphone/pager
vibrator motors embedded in the stick grip would be an excellent stall
warning.

I have no idea how you know enough about what was going on with the
aircraft and its pilot (especially inside his head/his perception of the
aircraft situation and flight performance) to know he would have
responded to a stall warning device appropriately and in time to
prevented the crash.

I would like to think maybe there is a stall warning device that might
be developed but I am pessimistic about the effectiveness of these
devices and false alarms while thermalling. And I am a bit bemused by
the mention a *small cellphone like shaker device to vibrate the control
stick. Many of our gliders give us some pretty good signals about an
impending stall. And in situations like where people are being killed in
pull-up/turn or flat over-rudder turns to base etc. I expect these
accident pilots are so far behind their aircraft that a subtle warnings
(e.g. vibrating the stick with a small shaker) would not be noticed. A
loud alarm or voice alert might at least have a chance of registering at
all with the pilot but whether the warning can be issued to allow them
enough time to react and whether the pilot will react correctly who
knows... (e.g. in a heading towards the dirt "ground rush" situations
the pilot has to sort out an audible stall alert vs. a pretty strong
visual cue that causes them to likely want to pull back and its not
clear what they will do).

I suspect something that is going to help the pilot who is well behind
their glider will require fairly loud/very obvious warning with a decent
pre-stall margin and that risks being annoying when thermalling slow.
e.g. its unclear if a system would be airspeed or AoA based, but
spoilers open often increase stall speeds *by a few knots so does the
stall warning need to know the spoiler position and factor this or do
you just pad the stall warning by a few more knots and further increase
false alarms/disturbances when thermalling? Flap position needs to be
factored as well on flapped gliders. If somebody is far enough behind
the glider and doing something that is about to bite them then how much
warning margin before the stall is actually needed to give the pilot a
good chance of avoiding or recovering faster/more effectively from the
stall/spin? Will those warning margins added together cause lots of
false alerts when thermalling say 10 knots above the stall in a gusty
thermal? And although I want something really obvious like a loud beep
or similar for a stall warning I also don't want noises that might be
confused with a FLARM/PowerFLARM alert while in a thermal.

There are glider stall warning systems available today, so the the
question may really be how do these systems work in practice and why are
there not more of them in use. DG built a visual and audible stall
warning system in the DG-600 and they have a stall warning in the DEI-NT
(and DEI??).

Safe Flight have their vane driven AoA meter which has an audible alarm
but besides seeing one installed in a glider at the SSA show in
Albuquerque a few years ago I have never hear of one of these installed
in the wild, or of a glider manufacturer offering these as options.
Anybody know any different? Or know what these cost? I believe the
fairly large vane is removable but how easy is it to damage e.g. on
ground handling?

The Cambridge 302 *has a stall warning based on pitot airspeed, wing
loading (it knows the % ballast) and G-meter (but it does not take into
effect flap or spoiler position). I used a C302 in my DG-303 and ASH-26E
and in both cases turned down the warning airspeed because it produced
too many false alarms while thermalling, based on my own use I don't
think its a useful tool for real stall/spin avoidance. Other pilot's
have experiences/opinions with the C302 stall warning?

So who has actually flies with any of these or other stall warning
indicators today and how useful have they found them? And do you think
they will be useful for preventing some of the
behind-the-aircraft/confused pilot stall/spin accidents we've seen?

I know there are these videos on YouTube athttp://www.youtube.com/user/DT38000?blend=23&ob=5, I assume showing the
DG DEI system alerting but without more information like the airspeeds
and seeing the glider thermalling I can't really draw any conclusion at
all from the videos.

In the meantime, looks like instructors doing BFRs and spring checkouts
next year have lots and lots of stuff to go through that may save
lives... from tow-signals to stall/spin aerodynamics, recognition and
recovery.

Darryl

I came to the exact same conclusion regarding the 302 stall warning
and turned it down after flying with it few times. For such devices to
be effective at all they should have zero false alarm, otherwise the
pilot will learn to ignore them.

Ramy

On Sep 6, 3:35*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Sep 6, 8:11*am, Jim White wrote:





I have changed the subject as we are well passed Idaho now.

I am having trouble with this stall warning stuff. I fly modern gliders:
ASW27, Duo Discus, ASK21 etc. All give clear warnings ahead of a stall.
When they do stall the nose drops, stick forward a bit, dada...stall
recovered. If they were to start into a spin (and the 21 shouldn't with
normal C of G positions), stick forward a bit, maybe a bit of pedal, and
dada...recovered.
None would lose significant amounts of height if recovered straight away.

I compete in the 27 and regularly fly it in thermals near the stall. You
feel for the break in laminar flow on the wings. This actually happens well
before the stall. It would be impossible to climb effectively if the stick
kept shaking!

And what would happen in a fully held off landing? I would also be a bit
****ed if the shaker went off when I was landing as slow as possible into a
very tight field in a light head wind!

This has to be about training and currency in gliders. We are not flying
747s with passengers down the back.

Final turns should be made at a sensible height with sufficient speed and
well banked so that they cannot be ruddered into a spin. This all should be
natural and obvious to a well trained pilot. No need for another mechanical
gadget to go wrong.

At 13:00 06 September 2011, kirk.stant wrote:

Modern gliders give very little indications of a stall (another reason
why training in old clunkers like the 2-33 is counterproductive). *Add
a little distraction or a higher priority task (Bee in the cockpit!)
and you can be in a high-AOA situation without being aware of it. *Add
to that a pilot who flies infrequently, and the benefit of a stall
warning system becomes even more clear.

Kirk
66- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is the point that puzzles me the most. I am sure that many of us
had never accidentally stalled/spinned a glider even in rough
thermals, due to the ample warnings. Incipient spin is the closest to
accidental spin I ever got, and this is only when grossly skidding in
rough thermal at safe altitude. Yet the majority of glider accidents
are attributed to stall/spin, and usually very experienced pilots, and
if my assumption above is correct, it was probably their first
accidental stall/spin. Which leads me to conclude that those stall/
spin happened without warning from one reason or another.
I think it will be very helpful to hear stories from pilots who
survived a stall/spin accident, and why they think it happened.
Anyone on RAS who survived such an accident care to share their story?

Ramy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm going out on a limb here and somebody out there will get the saw
out.
A stall does not happen without some warning.
The important element in training is understanding the warning signs.
I teach 6 signs and require all pilots I oversee to be able to
verbalize and demonstrate them.
#1- Reduced control effectiveness sensed by lower resistance to forces
applied by the pilot and reduced response of the glider.
#2- Nose high attitude. Yes we can stall at any attitude, but nose
high is almost always there in critical stalls.
#3- Reduced cockpit noise- Less noticable in modern gliders but still
evident.
#4- Stick pressure is back and likely significant- Exception is aft CG
or improperly trimmed glider.
#5- Low indicated air speed
#6- Buffet indicating flow separation preceding a stall.
It is worth noting that pilots previously trained in airplanes will
commonly mention #6 first , but almost none have been trained on the
other warnings.
I also note that the majority of pilots I check that have been trained
by others have a few (maybe a half dozen or so) log book entries
noting stalls. This, in my view, is completely inadequate. Recognition
and response must be automatic and instinctive, and this needs much
more emphasis and practice.
Off soap box
UH