thoughts on stalls
#12
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
I'm not a fan of the engineering behind the stick shaker activation. I would much rather have something along the lines of the Q-Alpha energy state indicator or similar. https://www.kansas.com/news/business...132377769.html
It also indicates how much float you will have at round out, possibly preventing runway overruns.
It also indicates how much float you will have at round out, possibly preventing runway overruns.
Simple airmanship.
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,224
It’s very aircraft dependent. In many if not a majority of aircraft ailerons introduce adverse yaw when deflected at high AOA. The quickest way to end up on your back in many high performance aircraft was using aileron to try and pick up a wing at high AOA.
#14
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
That comes down to simple airmanship. You don't need anything to tell you about energy state when landing to prevent an overrun. Fly the appropriate speed and AoA, and land, don't hold it off until midfield, and calculate the landing performance in advance. Now you know, before you go.
Simple airmanship.
Simple airmanship.
#15
That comes down to simple airmanship. You don't need anything to tell you about energy state when landing to prevent an overrun. Fly the appropriate speed and AoA, and land, don't hold it off until midfield, and calculate the landing performance in advance. Now you know, before you go.
Simple airmanship.
Simple airmanship.
#16
Like JB said, it's simple airmanship. The ones who truly "need" such a warning system to be safe are probably in the wrong line of work.
#17
True. I was specifically thinking of my former aircraft where at HIGH AOA (30+) you intentionally used the rudders for control. Influence with a tad of aileron; but control the turn/bank with the rudders. Once you were actually out-of-control then the second step of the immediate action was 'feet off the rudders'
https://youtu.be/335GdTqtyLs?t=59
#18
Because the warning system was used and heeded so effectively by the Colgan Captain? I have no problem with a stall warning system, but it's presence in no way guarantees a positive outcome as evidenced by the very accident you cite. A stall warning system doesn't do much good if the user ignores it and pulls harder.
Like JB said, it's simple airmanship. The ones who truly "need" such a warning system to be safe are probably in the wrong line of work.
Like JB said, it's simple airmanship. The ones who truly "need" such a warning system to be safe are probably in the wrong line of work.
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,649
Because the warning system was used and heeded so effectively by the Colgan Captain? I have no problem with a stall warning system, but it's presence in no way guarantees a positive outcome as evidenced by the very accident you cite. A stall warning system doesn't do much good if the user ignores it and pulls harder.
Like JB said, it's simple airmanship. The ones who truly "need" such a warning system to be safe are probably in the wrong line of work.
Like JB said, it's simple airmanship. The ones who truly "need" such a warning system to be safe are probably in the wrong line of work.
#20
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
For starters, that mishap had nothing to do with landing long or an overshoot, so the original assertion that additional displays indicating potential float at roundout" and overshoots, is irrelevant.
The colgan mishap had ample warning information, none of which was needed, and the reaction to that warning information was incorrect...all the way to impact.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post