Originally Posted by
owequitit
I see what you are saying, but I also don't agree.
The problem with airspeed as a proxy versus an actual AOA gauge is that it doesn't give you any information about load factor.
Good post, and I'm not saying much different. My load factor is approximately 1.0 on final approach. Accelerated stall delta is within the measurement error of the ASI.
Originally Posted by
owequitit
I have done low angle fixed wing stuff and aerobatics, and you can make due without an AOA IF you understand the relationships and are paying attention to the "feel" of the airplane. Of course, feel is subjective and even from one airplane to another, the warning indications may be different. I have flown fleets of older airplanes where the stall speeds could vary by +- 5 knots on the same exact airframe design.
I also agree. This is why Cirruses are so dangerous and have the stall/spin rates to back it up. We briefly discusse this in another thread. They have spring-loaded controls that push you toward neutral, which eliminates the "feel" of the plane. If they had airbus-style fully electronic fly-by-wire without force-feedback it would be a similar issue; Cirrus has actually installed a somewhat stick-pusher envelope protection on the latest models. I'd prefer to "be one with the plane" Yoda-style.
Not just fly, feel you must.
Originally Posted by
owequitit
From a safety standpoint, it is a nice tool for backup guidance on the single most important performance aspect of an airplane at those time when you are distracted, maneuvering, looking or traffic, at the end of the day when performance is waning. Some airplane will have little to no warning approaching the stall in an uncoordinated banked turn, and by the time the pilot figures it out by "feel" it is too late.
If you can ever back this up with well-designed study data I will be readily convinced, but I feel that adding yet ANOTHER instrument to look at "when you are distracted" is not a good idea, when you already have a great proxy for AOA. If he is pulling 3G's at that time without understanding what an accelerated stall is, then well, the pilot might have bigger problems, and likely wouldn't understand yet another idiot-gauge.
Originally Posted by
owequitit
If there was no benefit to these devices there simply wouldn't be any stall/spin accidents at low level (or any level for that matter) and loss of control wouldn't be a primary cause of GA accidents.
That statement is a logical fallacy.