Slow Flight

On Sep 9, 6:03 am, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
There is little doubt in my mind that the ability to do slow flight at
the very edge of stall speed will do more to prevent accidents than
1000 hours of cruise speed flight. Is there anyone here who is
proficient that lands their aircraft more than 10kts above stall
speed?
I teach all my students to slow fly with the entire range of
configurations for the particular aircraft they are flying. Gear up/
down, flaps up/down/in-between. I want them to be comfortable flying
at the very edge of the stall speeds and spend a lot of time
maneuvering right on the edge of a stall "nibble". It does more for
pilot confidence and ability than anything else I can think of. They
learn proper control useage and how their particular aircraft responds
while in the low speed areas. Playing with different angles of bank
while at low speeds and flying with a modicum of accuracy does a lot
for proper control use.
If you think about it, how many accidents occur in the low speed
spectrum? Either from a stall, or from a high sink rate on approach,
or poor control use during an emergency or off airport landing, or
something similar?
In my opinion, the pilot who is comfortable throughout the entire
speed range of their aircraft is a properly trained pilot and one who
will not get into an inadvertant stall, or spin.
What are your thoughts?

I think exposure to stalls is appropriate and you can get enough
practice keeping the wings level (with rudder) on the approach to the
stall during stall training. BUT why would you ever want to _fly_ so
close to stall? It's really dangerous to be just 10k above stall speed
in any part of the circuit and that speed is not good for anything in
real flight (terrible lift:drag and poor control response)... So
what's the point? Do you not worry about wind gusts/lulls at that
speed? I'd put this general idea in the fuel cut pull at takeoff bin
Perhaps a pilot who likes to fly at 10k above stall is an accident
waiting to happen? I don't see how extensive training at such low
speed can help you fly safely -quite the reverse. My natural mental
ASI is set to 65k!

An analogy would be the utility in driving a car on flat tyres... Yes
it can be controlled but watch out (you _will_ eventually spin out)!

My 2c

Cheers MC

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:56:14 -0000, wrote:

BUT why would you ever want to _fly_ so
close to stall?

You actually don't. Flying the airplane over the entire performance
range allows you to have "been there before" in case you NEED to
recover from or fly in those ranges.

It's really dangerous to be just 10k above stall speed
in any part of the circuit

It can be, so this is practiced at altitude, not in the traffic
pattern.

So
what's the point? Do you not worry about wind gusts/lulls at that
speed?

That's one of the goals. G

You're mushing the plane along, moving the controls to full
deflection, and the wind makes the plane fly in different manners as
the wind changes. My instructor had me flying square patterns and
figure 8's near stall speed in Warriors and my Sundowner. If the
plane stalls, and sometimes it will, you're the pilot and you recover
it!

Sometimes, you leave slow flight by reducing the power and purposely
stalling. Other times, you recover by going full power and gradually
cleaning up the airplane, (Hint - think "go around at the last
moment")

I'd put this general idea in the fuel cut pull at takeoff bin

THAT'S dangerous, and really dumb. Personally, I put proficiency over
the entire flight envelope in the bin with upset recovery training in
a properly certified aerobatic craft.

Perhaps a pilot who likes to fly at 10k above stall is an accident
waiting to happen?

I had an instructor that not only had me do LOTS of slow flight
(including under the hood), but he also had me do emergency spiral
decents near the top of the yellow arc, during PP training. Both are
actually in the Jeppesen PP-ASEL syllabus. He instructs because he
likes to teach, not to build time for another job.

During instrument training, the same guy had me doing tons of slow
flight under the hood, but added a full and imminent stall series with
no external reference. We also did instrument cross countries and
holding patterns in actual IFR.

wrote in message...
.... BUT why would you ever want to _fly_ so close
to stall? It's really dangerous to be just 10k above stall speed
in any part of the circuit and that speed is not good for anything
in real flight (terrible lift:drag and poor control response)... So
what's the point?

Quite a few years back I flew with CAP where we did endless training of
ground ref manouvers at slow flight. One of the greatest concerns of the IPs
was to lose a search plane because the pilot got distracted when
investigating an item of interest while he was low and slow.

If you think about it, how many accidents occur in the low speed
spectrum? Either from a stall, or from a high sink rate on approach,
or poor control use during an emergency or off airport landing, or
something similar?
In my opinion, the pilot who is comfortable throughout the entire
speed range of their aircraft is a properly trained pilot and one who
will not get into an inadvertant stall, or spin.
What are your thoughts?

I have a slightly different take on this. I am not an instructor but I
feel that slow flight is very easy to practice or teach compared to
some of the other areas of flight because it requires nothing more
than an airplane and an instructor. However some of the other aspects
of flying related to weather are the most difficult to learn or teach
(in my opinion). Learning to avoid rotors or learning to judge the
airplane's limits on a hot day at a higher elevation could very well
be more challenging because some of those aspects of flying involve
learning to avoid something which is harder to teach. Truth be told, I
have often wondered what the fuss is all about when it comes to slow
flight. After enough practice, its a piece of cake. In the last few
hrs leading to my PPL, I had no trouble flying very high nose up with
the stall horn blaring and the power up very high and not losing an
inch of altitude. The C-150 actually showed something like 35 knots
IAS if I remember right (although the TAS is much higher). My
instructor actually thought I was doing well enough that he didn't
want to spend time on slow flight on the day before the checkride
because he thought I was better off doing turns around a point which I
had trouble with. On the checkride, slow flight was something I was
eagerly waiting for to impress the DE.

On Sep 9, 12:19 pm, wrote:

In the last few
hrs leading to my PPL, I had no trouble flying very high nose up with
the stall horn blaring and the power up very high and not losing an
inch of altitude.

Did you pull the nose up a little more to get the stall in that
situation? That's where it can get interesting. Departure stall. A 150
does it real well. Better be prepared for spin recovery.

Dan

Did you pull the nose up a little more to get the stall in that
situation? That's where it can get interesting. Departure stall. A 150
does it real well. Better be prepared for spin recovery.

Yes, as part of stall practice I did a few different types including
the departure stall and the approach to landing stall which I found to
be more instructive because the nose is pointed down or level with the
horizon when it happens.But on many occasions the exercise was just to
fly at minimum controllable airspeed and turn using very shallow banks
which I find to be just as instructive as doing stalls.
I don't think of stalls as being difficult or dangerous as I once used
to when I first started training.

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:24:20 -0700, wrote:

Did you pull the nose up a little more to get the stall in that
situation? That's where it can get interesting. Departure stall. A 150
does it real well. Better be prepared for spin recovery.

Seen a Private Pilot PTS lately? As interesting as it is, shouldn't
a pilot be able to fly to at least PTS (the minimum) standards?

"C. TASK: POWER-ON STALLS (ASEL and ASES)

NOTE: In some high performance airplanes, the power setting may have
to
be reduced below the practical test standards guideline power setting
to
prevent excessively high pitch attitudes (greater than 30° nose up).

REFERENCES: FAA-H-8083-3, AC 61-67; POH/AFM.

Objective. To determine that the applicant:
1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to power-on stalls.
2. Selects an entry altitude that allows the task to be completed no
lower than 1,500 feet (460 meters) AGL.
3. Establishes the takeoff or departure configuration. Sets power to
no
less than 65 percent available power.
4. Transitions smoothly from the takeoff or departure attitude to the
pitch attitude that will induce a stall.
5. Maintains a specified heading, ±10°, in straight flight; maintains
a
specified angle of bank not to exceed 20°, ±10°, in turning flight,
while inducing the stall.
6. Recognizes and recovers promptly after the stall occurs by
simultaneously reducing the angle of attack, increasing power as
appropriate, and leveling the wings to return to a straight-and-level
flight attitude with a minimum loss of altitude appropriate for the
airplane.
7. Retracts the flaps to the recommended setting; retracts the landing
gear if retractable, after a positive rate of climb is established.
8. Accelerates to VX or VY speed before the final flap retraction;
returns
to the altitude, heading, and airspeed specified by the examiner."

The whole shebag is he
http://www.faa.gov/education_research/testing/airmen/test_standards/pilot/media/FAA-S-8081-14A.pdf

On Sep 8, 2:03 pm, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
There is little doubt in my mind that the ability to do slow flight at
the very edge of stall speed will do more to prevent accidents than
1000 hours of cruise speed flight. Is there anyone here who is
proficient that lands their aircraft more than 10kts above stall
speed?
...

In my opinion, the pilot who is comfortable throughout the entire
speed range of their aircraft is a properly trained pilot and one who
will not get into an inadvertant stall, or spin.
What are your thoughts?

Other then the obvious objections (expressed here by many others)
regarding navigation skills ,and calm, ordered responses to
emergencies, as well as interpreting and dealing with weather both
before and during flight, I think you have identified a skill that
needs to be driven home and repeated again and again with ab initio
students until they are comfortable handling the aircraft in any
configuration in the slow-flight regime, and, indeed, transitioning
between different configurations while in slow flight, as well as
handling turns, climbs descents, and simulated "approaches" while in
slow flight. (They should get to enjoy it so much that they get in
the habit of practicing it themselves as often as possible after
certification!)

It is such an important concept (the backside of the power curve and
what it really means ... try explaining this only once or twice to a
typical driver of a car ... I usually only get confused looks even
after sketching it out on paper) that no student (no doubt most used
to driving a car where one power equals one speed on a flat driving
surface) should be considered proficient at slow flight until they can
not only DO it but also sketch their aircrafts power curve and explain
it to their instructor, identifying all the important point, as well
as explaining how it is that a range of power settings correspond to
more than one airspeed on the curve.

Anyway ... one small thing that relates to slow flight that I found
improved my approaches in early training immediately and considerably
was the realization that for a given power setting and rate of descent
(in feet per minute ), the airspeed would be the same every single
time. This allowed me to have a stable approach set up very quickly
after turning base and resulted in instantly noticeably better
approaches and landings on the next lesson after I learned this (my
instructor at the time noticed the improvement immediately,
unfortunately it wasn't him that taught me this fact ... I found it on
a website produced by another flight instructor ... it was a great
site, can't remember its URL now). The airspeed that I aimed for was
usually a few knots above slow flight (I aimed for approach speed for
short field landing, plus a few knots if it was a little windy or
gusty) and of course there was descent involved (about 500 fpm in the
172SP was typical).

Long story short ... slow flight training made me comfortable with
reducing the power considerably, accurately, and consistently and
confidently (to about 1000 - 1300 RPM initially depending on the
headwind, again 172SP) when turning base (not just slowly stepping the
power and speed down, which consumed too much time on base), quickly
and confidently aiming for an approach speed close to a "performance"
landing approach speed every time, and with the speed (172 SP - about
61 - 65 KIAS) and descent rate (initially aiming for 500 fpm) stable
and trimmed out, all that was required to attend to was the drift, any
shear on descent, and staying on a good approach slope visually, while
occasionally glancing at the airspeed to ensure it wasn't bleeding
off. This usually only required small power adjustments to keep on a
proper the approach slope, and of course with more headwind, more
power on final.

While many other skills (especially navigation, emergency procedures,
and weather assessment) are required to become (and remain) a safe,
confident but circumspect pilot, with respect to consistent and
confident aircraft control, there's nothing like slow flight to hone
one's skills and feel like you are flying the aircraft, and not the
other way around.

JAI PPL-A(SEL)
Canada

On Sep 10, 10:24 am, "PPL-A (Canada)" wrote:
On Sep 8, 2:03 pm, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:

There is little doubt in my mind that the ability to do slow flight at
the very edge of stall speed will do more to prevent accidents than
1000 hours of cruise speed flight. Is there anyone here who is
proficient that lands their aircraft more than 10kts above stall
speed?
...
In my opinion, the pilot who is comfortable throughout the entire
speed range of their aircraft is a properly trained pilot and one who
will not get into an inadvertant stall, or spin.
What are your thoughts?

Other then the obvious objections (expressed here by many others)
regarding navigation skills ,and calm, ordered responses to
emergencies, as well as interpreting and dealing with weather both
before and during flight, I think you have identified a skill that
needs to be driven home and repeated again and again with ab initio
students until they are comfortable handling the aircraft in any
configuration in the slow-flight regime, and, indeed, transitioning
between different configurations while in slow flight, as well as
handling turns, climbs descents, and simulated "approaches" while in
slow flight. (They should get to enjoy it so much that they get in
the habit of practicing it themselves as often as possible after
certification!)

It is such an important concept (the backside of the power curve and
what it really means ... try explaining this only once or twice to a
typical driver of a car ... I usually only get confused looks even
after sketching it out on paper) that no student (no doubt most used
to driving a car where one power equals one speed on a flat driving
surface) should be considered proficient at slow flight until they can
not only DO it but also sketch their aircrafts power curve and explain
it to their instructor, identifying all the important point, as well
as explaining how it is that a range of power settings correspond to
more than one airspeed on the curve.

Anyway ... one small thing that relates to slow flight that I found
improved my approaches in early training immediately and considerably
was the realization that for a given power setting and rate of descent
(in feet per minute ), the airspeed would be the same every single
time. This allowed me to have a stable approach set up very quickly
after turning base and resulted in instantly noticeably better
approaches and landings on the next lesson after I learned this (my
instructor at the time noticed the improvement immediately,
unfortunately it wasn't him that taught me this fact ... I found it on
a website produced by another flight instructor ... it was a great
site, can't remember its URL now). The airspeed that I aimed for was
usually a few knots above slow flight (I aimed for approach speed for
short field landing, plus a few knots if it was a little windy or
gusty) and of course there was descent involved (about 500 fpm in the
172SP was typical).

Long story short ... slow flight training made me comfortable with
reducing the power considerably, accurately, and consistently and
confidently (to about 1000 - 1300 RPM initially depending on the
headwind, again 172SP) when turning base (not just slowly stepping the
power and speed down, which consumed too much time on base), quickly
and confidently aiming for an approach speed close to a "performance"
landing approach speed every time, and with the speed (172 SP - about
61 - 65 KIAS) and descent rate (initially aiming for 500 fpm) stable
and trimmed out, all that was required to attend to was the drift, any
shear on descent, and staying on a good approach slope visually, while
occasionally glancing at the airspeed to ensure it wasn't bleeding
off. This usually only required small power adjustments to keep on a
proper the approach slope, and of course with more headwind, more
power on final.

While many other skills (especially navigation, emergency procedures,
and weather assessment) are required to become (and remain) a safe,
confident but circumspect pilot, with respect to consistent and
confident aircraft control, there's nothing like slow flight to hone
one's skills and feel like you are flying the aircraft, and not the
other way around.

JAI PPL-A(SEL)
Canada

JAI
Well written reply. Thanks
Ol S&B Canada Commercial #408XXX USA #1550XXX

On Sep 8, 11:03 am, Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
There is little doubt in my mind that the ability to do slow flight at
the very edge of stall speed will do more to prevent accidents than
1000 hours of cruise speed flight. Is there anyone here who is
proficient that lands their aircraft more than 10kts above stall
speed?
I teach all my students to slow fly with the entire range of
configurations for the particular aircraft they are flying. Gear up/
down, flaps up/down/in-between. I want them to be comfortable flying
at the very edge of the stall speeds and spend a lot of time
maneuvering right on the edge of a stall "nibble". It does more for
pilot confidence and ability than anything else I can think of. They
learn proper control useage and how their particular aircraft responds
while in the low speed areas. Playing with different angles of bank
while at low speeds and flying with a modicum of accuracy does a lot
for proper control use.
If you think about it, how many accidents occur in the low speed
spectrum? Either from a stall, or from a high sink rate on approach,
or poor control use during an emergency or off airport landing, or
something similar?
In my opinion, the pilot who is comfortable throughout the entire
speed range of their aircraft is a properly trained pilot and one who
will not get into an inadvertant stall, or spin.
What are your thoughts?

I agree with you on the importance of slow flight but for a slightly
different reason. I think slow flight and stalls end up being seen by
student's as more of a rite-of-passage more than anything else. My
approach is to place an intense concentration on the indicators of
stall in their aircraft (stall horn, sloppy ailerons, buffeting, nose
drop, more buffet, then break). Therefore, I see slow flight more as a
way to ensure that students have enough experience with these
sensations to recognize them when they need to. In addition, I think
most CFI's teach slow flight at WAY to high of a speed. If the student
doesn't accidently stall on occasion its almost guaranteed that their
slow flight is too fast. In your standard Cessna/Piper type products
the plane should be bucking like a wild horse during slow flight.