None of the aircraft mentioned so far as "wing droppers" drop a wing in a power off stall when coordinated. I have noticed with each of them that just before the stall, almost no right rudder is necessary to keep the "ball" centered, except, if you look at the ball trying to do this you'll never react fast enough and the will will drop because you had too much right rudder in or in rarer circumstances, not enough. This is only just slightly before the moment of stall, after lots of p-factor at the high AOA, but it's allowed me to bring the yoke back to the stop while in a power on stall with the wings level while the nose drops down. It doesn't like to stay like this though and IMO you have to look at the horizon and see the yaw, rather than the ball.

I think AOA would be extremely useful, and the whole point is we don't know what joe Cherokee will do, loan his plane to a new pilot, lease it, etc. I don't have much to add here, except that teaching the concepts in this thread is much easier said than done. The AOA would help immensely. We could probably get by with far less stuff in the cockpit if the training was adequate.

Really? I never really used it for landing and came down fine every time. Still nice to have though

JNB and wing-droppers
 

I think what most people (including me) mean is if you do nothing when the plane stalls it will roll off on one wing, keeping coordinated requires very active rudder input which is part of the coordination exercise, which as you said is changing due to rapidly diminishing AOA and p factor effect. If you remain coordinated it will keep nice straight and level, and even if one does nothing and it rolls off through the stall break it won't continue to spin.

In a 172 though you could have your feet on the floor through the power on stall and it won't be that bad, NOT true with the 182 which will have a very asymmetric stall and come out significantly off heading with a kind of quarter to half-turn incipient spin.

I have done quite a few stalls under the hood but never any intentional spin under hood. Agree with stalls ball still works but it is really hard to be perfect. All aircraft I've ever spun have had no AI as they would likely tumble anyway.

As many other people noted though there is a difference between people that think about this sort of thing and those that don't, or perhaps those that feel that AOA is an advanced concept that needs to be "taught". Also the ones that are most at risk probably are not spending their free time talking about nuances of aviation. :o

You have clearly never had a good AOA system in a light aircraft. The modern systems are tremendous safety aids. That is why the FAA has recently dropped the normal onerous certification rules. They want them out there and installed. There are far to many GA loss of control accidents. The new systems are simple to use and don't require much training. At a minimum almost any pilot can understand what "angle! angle push push means" and take action. He can also instantly establish proper approach speed and best glide speeds regardless of AC weight.

Disagree in theory at least, which is a good thing, because what starts in the abstract quickly becomes first nature if you use it a lot. To ride a bicycle you might first see somebody ride one then you talk to them about what to do when you get on a bike, take some coaching with training wheels installed for a while, remove the wheels so all the physics are in play and then after a few days of crashing and experimenting you get the hang of it and ride it until the day you get epilepsy. There are so many tasks that private pilots do that can use this approach. A few off the top of my head-

• choosing an approach speed precisely suitable for the type of approach you're doing, whether short field, soft, IFR etc.
• steep turns, tweaking of pitch inputs
• varying Va according to weight
• varying best endurance and best range speeds to actual conditions
• seeing stalls coming before they happen, and insuring adequate recovery
• adjusting speed for icing effects
• choosing correct pitch attitude to ace a long list of commercial and ground reference maneuvers
• choosing best rate of climb and best angle of climb attitudes
• making safe base to final turns in crosswinds
• making safe evasive maneuvers at low altitude
• making smooth landing stalls

The list goes on and on. AoA is essential in flying accurately and safely.

Exactly my point too, and the value would be felt in just about every aspect of primary training up to CFI levels and might even be useful in airline flying. I think you could possibly dispose of many v-speeds and substitute AoA targets instead which would be far better than the former, because AoA is what v speeds try and accomplish in most cases.

I would change this to read regardless of AC or weight. The beauty of AOA is every aircraft has an appropriate one and you don't have to remember what it is.

Again AOA is simply a way to display "feel". Were you taught feel? Perhaps the fact that they aren't spending free time talking about nuances is a good reason to include a "quit pulling idiot" guage.

I'd hope so. Was I taught feel? What else are you taught when learning to fly? I'd guess that over 50% of the flight PPL training is / should be learning the feel of the plane. Only when I started IFR training was it more procedural training. Being and getting that ATP is more about mastering procedures, but maintain that mastering that "feel" of those pulleys and cable driven flight control surfaces is ultimately one of the most important aspects of flight.

A little thread bump with an interesting article:
Loss of Control Tops NTSB 'Most Wanted' Safety List | Flying Magazine

What jumps out here: "What can be done to reduce the risk of loss of control for GA pilots? Installing safety gear such as an angle-of-attack indicator is a good first step, the Board said."

What it should read is "installing AOA indicator and training pilots on how to use it."