Originally Posted by
KC10 FATboy
This is just so weird, never in my training, military or civilian, was I taught to minimize altitude loss. It was always about gaining speed to get the wing flying again. So this is a big surprise to me that the FAA was mandating people minimize altitude loss and thus pulling back which would/could prevent you from fixing the problem ... lack of airspeed.
KC10:
I think in the big-jet world (mil and civilian), it is stressed more as a 'lack of airspeed' issue.
But one of the finest aspects of training in the T-38, I think, is the contrast between "high-speed stall" and "low-speed stability demo." (I'm guessing you did these, back in the day, unless you are a post single-track UPT guy).
In the High-speed stall, we go into a level turn at 350-400 kts....and pull until the jet says "I've had enough." It starts rocking and rolling, and is difficult---but not impossible---to control. To recover? Pull just a little
less....NOT "Don't Pull At All."
The stab-demo is a 60-degrees nose-up climb until 175 kts. Then, you bunt (unload to 0.5 to 0.0 g) and let the nose fall. Usually see about 80-100 kts as the nose hits the horizon. This is WELL below 1-g level flight speed. However, the jet has no buffet or stall---you just can't ask the wing for more than about 0.5 g. Stay less than that, and you can still maneuver. (Just can't hold level flight).
Both maneuvers teach that stall isn't about airspeed...it's how how hard you are pulling on the stick/wheel. And NONE of the stalls are treated as precision-altitude-control maneuvers.
Plus-1 on the "everyone should learn to fly aerobatics" bandwagon!