Thanks again everyone. James, thanks for expounding on your previous post. JNB, The scenarios you describe are, of course, common. Negative issues associated with these flights you describe, to include accident, injury and or death..., IMO are primarily due to lack of or insufficient understanding and or basic flying skills. What is the cause of this? It would be easy to blame the pilot, though how can you place blame on a person who was not trained sufficiently. Should we blame the instructors, maybe? Though I believe, as the problem is so widespread, the common denominator and root cause is that the system is failing these folks. We need to stop training folks just to pass an exam or teaching the test... I know I'm preaching to the choir; though many pilots can not sufficiently explain, or more importantly understand, simple dynamic stability, the area of reverse command, the difference between a slip and a skid, the list goes on. I recently encountered a new ATP. They could not, for their life, explain the purpose of a stall strip... This is what's out there, as you know, and it is essentially horrifying! BTW, I am now onboard with the use of AOA indicators in light aircraft, though I believe their use would be most beneficial, in those aircraft, as an additional training tool. It will be interesting to see how this pans out, once they are in widespread use.
|
Easy on RickAir there JJ! Obviously one can get along all day long without AoA instruments in airliners or GA both, it's a nice-to-have item and not a necessity. I suspect the reason they do not have them now has more to do with cost than anything else, but that may change soon.
|
Originally Posted by JetJocF14
(Post 1764596)
Those are two of the stupidest sentences I've ever read. You really have no idea how AOA works or what it is trying to tell you. To you it's just a gauge with some pretty colors attached to it. Like USMC says, " I'd take a AOA gauge in every airplane that I've ever flown. In fact I plan on installing one in my personal Comanche at my next annual. I'm an engineer, of course I know what it does. I think all airliners should have them, even all turbine aircraft...for the icing benefit if nothing else. So far the fighter pilots are all in on AoA...not surprising, you cut your teeth on it and lived and died by it. But the goodness of AoA isn't realized for free...it costs money to install, and casual training after-the-fact will NOT allow the typical GA or recreational pilot to gain the benefit of an AoA gauge. They'll need what YOU had, which is to grow up with the thing. In GA (and airlines) if I fly the profile, AoA will simply tell me what I already know...where I am within the envelope. It's utility is when you're in the envelope but there's something wrong with the airplane which is affecting it's aerodynamic performance, 99.99% of the time this would be ice. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 1765010)
I'm an engineer, of course I know what it does. I think all airliners should have them, even all turbine aircraft...for the icing benefit if nothing else.
So far the fighter pilots are all in on AoA...not surprising, you cut your teeth on it and lived and died by it. But the goodness of AoA isn't realized for free...it costs money to install, and casual training after-the-fact will NOT allow the typical GA or recreational pilot to gain the benefit of an AoA gauge. They'll need what YOU had, which is to grow up with the thing. In GA (and airlines) if I fly the profile, AoA will simply tell me what I already know...where I am within the envelope. It's utility is when you're in the envelope but there's something wrong with the airplane which is affecting it's aerodynamic performance, 99.99% of the time this would be ice. If you had - then you would heard what most of the GA pilots were saying about the utility of the AoA instruments currently available at a relatively low cost to the GA community. You don't have to have "grown up with it" to appreciate the benefits. That is a gross overstatement to the training required to effectively utilize it. We're not asking the recreational pilot to use it to the extent, or for the purposes, that the fighter pilots used it on a routine basis. Btw - I was flying before the military so I wasn't initially trained AT ALL on its use or benefits. It wasn't until T-34C training that I was introduced to it and I could still see the benefits of such information. When I got back into civilian (professional) flying did I find to my surprise that the turbine equipment I was then training on did not have any AoA information available. |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1764712)
Here's one for you guys with light airplanes:
Advanced Flight Systems The airplane had one of those little vanes on the strut called a "Bacon Saver" which was nothing more than a 2" wedge on a card with some red paint in the 'no go' zone. Because it was mounted on the left strut, it was right in line with my sight as I turned final. I found I looked at that more than the airspeed indicator in the pattern, and certainly while doing the steep turns taking pictures. But like someone said above, you can't fix stupid. Putting an AOA vane on all airplanes won't stop idiots from killing themselves in airplanes, especially light airplanes, if they try hard enough, they will always find a way! I tried to find a link for the Bacon Saver, but can't, maybe they are out of business? It was a really low tech, cheap AOA with no electronics required, just bolt it on the strut, but it wouldn't have a place to mount on a low wing airplane, you need the wing strut to mount it on. |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1763641)
Actually AoA come into play on your airliner with most things that you are doing I would guess - it is just behind the scenes and since you fly how much of every flight in the heart of the envelope I'm not surprised that you don't value what the instrument can provide in the area of safety of flight.
Here is a short thread on it. But for explanation, the first post is really what you are looking for. BeechTalk - Login You could search for Fred Scott's posts on the subject though and read a lot more on the subject. BeechTalk - Information Continue reading through the various posts if you want to get a good idea of what GA pilots are feeling about the opportunity to install AoAs and the usefulness of such instruments. And fear not! You'll find some of your opinion in there too. Can't please everyone ;) E2CMaster on this forum can give you some more information as well. Probably my best argument is in the thread there on BeechTalk. I'm in Afghanistan at the moment so posting on the phone kind of sucks. My user name on BT should be pretty obvious. |
Originally Posted by E2CMaster
(Post 1766454)
I was summoned?
Probably my best argument is in the thread there on BeechTalk. I'm in Afghanistan at the moment so posting on the phone kind of sucks. My user name on BT should be pretty obvious. One of the arguments being used here was that AoA was useless to GA pilots. I knew that you were involved in the BT thread with some GA insights I thought - so I threw you out there as a source too (but I don't think any of the information pathways provided were used ;)) |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 1765010)
You're pretty quick to belittle people whom you don't know anything about.
I'm an engineer, of course I know what it does. I think all airliners should have them, even all turbine aircraft...for the icing benefit if nothing else. So far the fighter pilots are all in on AoA...not surprising, you cut your teeth on it and lived and died by it. But the goodness of AoA isn't realized for free...it costs money to install, and casual training after-the-fact will NOT allow the typical GA or recreational pilot to gain the benefit of an AoA gauge. They'll need what YOU had, which is to grow up with the thing. In GA (and airlines) if I fly the profile, AoA will simply tell me what I already know...where I am within the envelope. It's utility is when you're in the envelope but there's something wrong with the airplane which is affecting it's aerodynamic performance, 99.99% of the time this would be ice.
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1765011)
You didn't read a single link I suggested or any of the series of posts by Fred Scott did you?
If you had - then you would heard what most of the GA pilots were saying about the utility of the AoA instruments currently available at a relatively low cost to the GA community. You don't have to have "grown up with it" to appreciate the benefits. That is a gross overstatement to the training required to effectively utilize it. We're not asking the recreational pilot to use it to the extent, or for the purposes, that the fighter pilots used it on a routine basis. Btw - I was flying before the military so I wasn't initially trained AT ALL on its use or benefits. It wasn't until T-34C training that I was introduced to it and I could still see the benefits of such information. When I got back into civilian (professional) flying did I find to my surprise that the turbine equipment I was then training on did not have any AoA information available. What do you feel it would add to routine flights by GA pilots? Do you view it as a safety device or an additive device for routine scanning? |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1767557)
Excellent post, agree 100%, I said similar above myself. Most of us are not fighter pilots, and when I'm doing spins my head is outside the aircraft.
I am both confused and intrigued by your constant evangelism for this unnecessary but potentially useful device. What do you feel it would add to routine flights by GA pilots? Do you view it as a safety device or an additive device for routine scanning? Otherwise - I will gladly agree to disagree with you on this issue and we'll go our own ways. |
Everybody irked => thread complete! :)
Seriously, flying has a thinking side to it that AoA represents an essential part of and as a subject matter it is both fascinating and rewarding. The theory runs deep on this, well into high college level courses like low and high speed aerodynamics, aeroelasticity, aircraft design and optimization, hydrodynamics, flight dynamics, simulator design, computer flight modeling, model aircraft, glider and helicopter design, engine design, aerobatic and military flight, so many high level topics. To put one small instrument in the cockpit is not asking much if you are aware of how many things are dependent on it. It may not be required to watch AoA in some aircraft, but it matters in all aircraft whether the pilot thinks about what's going on or doesn't. |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1767572)
:) Well this is a clear indication that you don't understand AOA. It wouldn't be useful IN THE SPIN, it would be useful on RECOVERY.
Perhaps if one wants to pull out on the verge of an accelerated stall, but airspeed + G meter would be more tight on the scan plus looking outside. Most aerobats know about it, could use it, and the planes I've flown are still not retrofit. Maybe I could put a bit of yarn on the side of the fuselage, glider-style. :p
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1767572)
And I am the same on you constant negativism about a system that you clearly don't seem to understand.
Ronald Reagan:There You Go Again - YouTube Stop with the "you just don't understand" and provide a convincing scenario or argument for the implentation. I'm not negative about AOA at all, and I understand it well. I'm just not a fanatic about proselytizing its use for all GA aircraft. It is bordering on crazytown.
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1767572)
Otherwise - I will gladly agree to disagree with you on this issue and we'll go our own ways.
We are not fighter pilots on verge of accelerated stalls, nor airliners near the coffin corner. I get the feeling you're arguing something just because you feel you have to be on "team AOA!!!" and hence your repeated misrepresentation of my position. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1767602)
Oooh-kay.
Perhaps if one wants to pull out on the verge of an accelerated stall, but airspeed + G meter would be more tight on the scan plus looking outside.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1767602)
I still don't see exactly how you will think it is used on a routine GA flight, or how you estimate the advantages outweigh the costs of install that others have pointed out. The last thing a pilot needs is another gauge that sits there in the green arc, as rickair and I pointed out, I already know I'm within the envelope.
In the training environment, it's likely that it wouldn't just "sit there in the green arc". Don't you think it would be a great training aid to provide new pilots a better understanding of the whole concept? (especially an accelerated stall) |
If I remember my spin training AOA breaking would be the first indication that you have broken the stall, isn't that a good thing? The AOA guage is simply a visual cue to confirm your tactile feel.
What cardio is arguing is a chicken and the egg, he doesn't think they are useful because no one is trained on them. No one is trained on them because they aren't widely available. I am sure Wilbur and Orville had a similar discussion on the benefit of a slip indictor. What do I need that string for? That is essentially what AOA is is a slip indicator in another axis. |
Originally Posted by Cubdriver
(Post 1767597)
Everybody irked => thread complete! :) LOL! That is the standard SOP.
Seriously, flying has a thinking side to it that AoA represents an essential part of and as a subject matter it is both fascinating and rewarding. The theory runs deep on this, well into high college level courses like low and high speed aerodynamics, aeroelasticity, aircraft design and optimization, hydrodynamics, flight dynamics, simulator design, computer flight modeling, model aircraft, glider and helicopter design, engine design, aerobatic and military flight, so many high level topics. To put one small instrument in the cockpit is not asking much if you are aware of how many things are dependent on it. It may not be required to watch AoA in some aircraft, but it matters in all aircraft whether the pilot thinks about what's going on or doesn't. |
As all 4 of my children have proven many times, any 6 year old can fly an airplane straight and level at cruise. It's when you slow down and start turning that it gets interesting.
That happens mostly on approach and landing, but also on a turning departure, which is also where most accidents happen. That's exactly where I've found the AOA most useful. In a light airplane that has an AOA, I almost never even look at the airspeed when turning base and final, I'm looking at my aim point on the runway, looking for traffic on long final (uncontrolled airport) and I'm cross checking the AOA as I slow and configure. In a light G/A aircraft (any single engine prop) you can pretty much feel when you are getting too slow/too high AOA, as the elevator gets heavier in the turn. I once delivered a Piper Cub from PA to FL with no airspeed indicator, due to water in the system. 6 landings with no airspeed indication, but in a Cub, the AOA indicator is the open door, when it lifts up, you need to unload it! It's the larger/heavier jets with no real feedback through the flight control system that can benefit most with an AOA. I don't know how you guys were first taught to fly, but my IP never mentioned airspeed in my early lessons, he mentioned "Feel", as in, "Feel that? It's sinking!" When I go out in a new (to me) airplane, one that I've never flown before, usually solo, I fist go out and practice slow flight. Not all the way to a full stall, but just close enough to get the feel of it when it's slow. Once you develop the feel, you really don't need an airspeed indicator for pattern work. You'd be much better off to keep your eyes outside, looking for traffic if you are at an uncontrolled field on any weekend! |
I agree with your post Timbo. I learned to fly the same way. I have also flown/delivered a few airplanes without airspeed indication. Unfortunately not enough folks learn to fly that way anymore. I FEEL... this might be a sizeable component of the current LOC issue. I am now in favor of the AOA use in general aviation and especially as a training aid. Though it will also better prepare those who go forth to fly aircraft where it's use would be more beneficial or even considered imperative.
|
Having a good feel for the plane prevents you from doing all sorts of horrible things and is essential for good VFR flying. In fact I would say that is the one thing that makes you from a standard pilot to a great, safe pilot.
How is AOA better than ASI for routine non-accelerated/non-high G and non high-altitude flight? It's not. Essentially same information. Everybody wants to have the next whiz-bang stall/spin protection device. In a few years some will say synthetic vision is required to prevent CFIT. I understand and recognize its use but I don't need it now. Here is a typical stall/spin accident from a few months ago, unfortunately fatal. Look at the attitude, power, airspeed (AOA surrogate) during the entire event. PLANE CRASH FROM INSIDE COCKPIT Money retrofitting planes with AOA trinkets would be better spent on instilling better basic airmanship for most GA guys. The two pilots did a lot of obvious things wrong, and having yet another gauge screaming at them would be unlikely to prevent the incident. |
You win we are all idiots and bow to your superior knowledge about airmanship and training.
No one is saying make it mandatory, they are saying it is a very useful instrument and can help train ham fists to recognize when the wing is operating efficiently and when it is not. When operating a high performance aircraft on the edge of its performance envelope you do not look at the AOA indicator. You do however spend time before that training to know what the aircraft feels like at particular AOA settings. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768466)
How is AOA better than ASI for routine non-accelerated/non-high G and non high-altitude flight? It's not. Essentially same information.
|
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 1768485)
You win we are all idiots and bow to your superior knowledge about airmanship and training.
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 1768485)
No one is saying make it mandatory
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1763194)
I can tell you though that I wish I had an AoA gauge in every aircraft I fly - and if I owned (especially at today's costs) it would be one of the first things I'd have in my plane - - sort of like that tornado shelter I put in my house! :D
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 1768485)
they are saying it is a very useful instrument and can help train ham fists to recognize when the wing is operating efficiently and when it is not.
http://turbineair.com/wp-content/upl...speed-2013.pdf I don't care, if any of you want to spend the money and put in an AOA gauge in your plane go right ahead. I'm just trying to have a civil discussion to make sure that you and I are making good decisions.
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 1768485)
When operating a high performance aircraft on the edge of its performance envelope you do not look at the AOA indicator. You do however spend time before that training to know what the aircraft feels like at particular AOA settings.
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
(Post 1768540)
Turns are accelerations.
Would AOA gauge be a useful addition for training? Sure. Understanding AOA can be accomplished without this and these are pretty fundamental concepts. |
Originally Posted by Yoda2
(Post 1768056)
I agree with your post Timbo. I learned to fly the same way. I have also flown/delivered a few airplanes without airspeed indication. Unfortunately not enough folks learn to fly that way anymore. I FEEL... this might be a sizeable component of the current LOC issue. I am now in favor of the AOA use in general aviation and especially as a training aid. Though it will also better prepare those who go forth to fly aircraft where it's use would be more beneficial or even considered imperative.
If one looks at it from that perspective then AOA would be more useful. For instance a direct display to the pilots may have prevented AF447, or in GA pitot icing (as long as no AOA icing) you would not be at risk of losing control. I can't imagine Joe Six-pack in his piper gaining any significant utility on routine flights. |
You say you are trying understand why. Let me spell it out for you. There is no better device for training the "feel" of an aircraft than an AOA indicator. It works in all attitudes and all power settings.
Hold 20 units AOA in a level turn, feel that lite tickle great. Now hold 22 units, feel the ailerons hitting the buffet, great. Now hold 26 units, see how the nose is starting to wander, feel the elephants on the wing, look how much power you have in and we are still bleeding airspeed. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768466)
Having a good feel for the plane prevents you from doing all sorts of horrible things and is essential for good VFR flying. In fact I would say that is the one thing that makes you from a standard pilot to a great, safe pilot.
How is AOA better than ASI for routine non-accelerated/non-high G and non high-altitude flight? It's not. Essentially same information. Everybody wants to have the next whiz-bang stall/spin protection device. In a few years some will say synthetic vision is required to prevent CFIT. I understand and recognize its use but I don't need it now. Here is a typical stall/spin accident from a few months ago, unfortunately fatal. Look at the attitude, power, airspeed (AOA surrogate) during the entire event. PLANE CRASH FROM INSIDE COCKPIT Money retrofitting planes with AOA trinkets would be better spent on instilling better basic airmanship for most GA guys. The two pilots did a lot of obvious things wrong, and having yet another gauge screaming at them would be unlikely to prevent the incident. First not enough rudder when the power was applied, to stay over the runway and climb. Then it seemed like the guy in the right seat (an IP?) took the airplane and rather than climb, he decided to do a very low altitude, low speed, hard left turn. :rolleyes: If they'd had some type of aural warning, either stall or AOA, the guy flying might have eased off the back pressure. I know I always do, when I hear the stall warning in a hard turn down low! Airspeed is life. Altitude is life insurance! ;) |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1768641)
I had to watch that video 3 times and I'm still not sure I understand what they were trying to do. Seems the violated a lot of basics after the touch and go.
First not enough rudder when the power was applied, to stay over the runway and climb. Then it seemed like the guy in the right seat (an IP?) took the airplane and rather than climb, he decided to do a very low altitude, low speed, hard left turn. :rolleyes: If they'd had some type of aural warning, either stall or AOA, the guy flying might have eased off the back pressure. I know I always do, when I hear the stall warning in a hard turn down low! Airspeed is life. Altitude is life insurance! ;) I'm pretty careful to never load the wing heavily in the pattern, as that is where an accelerated stall can more easily take place. These guys just seemed clueless as to the impending danger. Terrible instructor, and depending on his experience level, clueless student. If I ever become CFI, perhaps in my golden years, I'd have students practice accelerated stalls, or at least stalls in a banked turn. One has to be prepared to exit a spin though so I can understand why it is not taught with non-utility aircraft; I only did it in context of spinning the craft. Important to see how the stall will occur at higher airspeed. Yep, AOA would show this directly, but 99%+ of all GA aircraft don't have one so it is better IMO to learn this relationship without additional gizmos and actually "internalize" the relationship from experience. |
I think a large scale shift in flight training over to using AoA concepts would be appropriate. In my ten years of flying I've been impressed how efficiently procedural most pilots are in their flying habits while at the same time they often display a weak feel for the airplane and an even weaker knowledge of applied flying concepts. I know why- the GA primary flight training culture from the FAA on up has a serious weakness in terms of its basic approach to flying. Can we fly safely without AoA being a serious part of our flying consciousness? Sure. Would making AoA a large part of our flying consciousness improve us by making us more aware of what is going on physically around us, and as a result make for safer pilots? I have no doubt that it would.
In the 1950s the FAA in conjunction with GA industry, took a strong turn toward dumbing down GA so that a wider cohort of average persons would be able to adopt and use aviation on the personal level and buy airplanes. They stripped out the more challenging flight training tasks and dumbed down flight concepts in such way the average person could understand it. They separated cause from practical solution, and supplied rote flying methods. They removed spin training for example while industry supplied nosewheel airplanes with spin resistant designs, reed type stall horns and automatic instruments like the self righting attitude indicator, directional gyro and turn and bank indicator. All that helped. But the unfortunate side effect is that entire generations of GA pilots fly by rote procedure and have a weak feeling for the airplane with an even weaker appreciation of flight science. What I would like to see is a return to an emphasis on thinking about flying "while" flying. It's a rich, sophisticated discipline that deserves a higher level of academic awareness and the technology to add things like AoA, g-loading, tail plane performance, n number, and so on is cheap enough now to justify having it. We can get these things on a cell phone for heaven sake, why not have them in a configurable screen on a glass cockpit display and implement training from the FAA on up how to use them. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1763420)
I agree, if somebody is going to stall/spin then they probably should not be flying.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1763420)
You are far from the only person that has this opinion and I'm always somewhat surprised by it. I learned steam+G430 and upgraded to glass G1000 and it took all of an hour to become extremely comfortable.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1763420)
Obviously I was an engineer and am comfortable with technical stuff, and did have some sim experience, but I can not conceive how it could take almost "all of 25 hours" to get somebody up to basics with those avionics!
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1764238)
The average pilot, who finds the G1000 exceedingly complex, would simply ignore it.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1764632)
If grandpa can't even figure out how to lean an engine for altitude takeoff, taking off a full 3,000 feet DA above performance limit at max gross weight, and not aborting after the multiple opportunities he had, he's sure as hell not going to learn how to interpret an AOA gauge.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1764695)
An AOA gauge won't fix stupid.
I think one of the main reasons we (collectively) continue to avoid meeting on common ground regarding this issue is your perspective (or lack thereof) on the instructional benefits. Considering that viewpoint is not in your tool bag, I really think you’re coming at this discussion at a bit of a disadvantage. Based on comments you’ve made here and in other threads, you clearly are sporting an above average ego. As an accomplished professional at the top of his game, I don’t doubt that it’s deserved. As a pilot, it sounds like you’ve got experience and the ratings to go with it – so I take your viewpoints and opinions with respect. However, being able to put yourself in the shoes of the student or even just the less experienced pilot still learning what you already know does not appear to be one of your strong points. Whether learning to use a G1000 or lacking empathy for the hamfist who stall/spins his aircraft, you seem to come at this discussion assuming everyone will (or should) bring the same level of capability as you. A civilian student pilot who has been taught to fly “procedurally” via accepted airspeeds/bank angles isn’t necessarily going to come away from that instruction with a complete working knowledge of stalls. In spite of further flying instruction and book knowledge some may never progress past their procedural capability. That is a fact. Expecting someone to study and digest all the subtle nuances that lay within that diagram you posted is not realistic either. Being able to combine the two into a working knowledge of flight envelope limitations while actually operating the aircraft is just not going to be within every new pilot’s ability. They'll just fly the speeds they've been taught and most will stay out of trouble. Most will “get it” as you did, but some will not. That should be fairly clear based on the continuing occurrence of traffic pattern stall/spin accidents in the GA world. We could collectively scoff at their ineptness, call them stupid and submit them for a Darwin or acknowledge the possibility that they may have benefitted from another layer of knowledge provided via daily use of an AOA gauge. Considering the procedural speeds are usually a worse case estimate, personally I'd rather know a little more accurately where I really sit in the envelope. Perhaps you could just defer to the thousands of hours instructing many of the AOA proponents in this discussion bring to it and simply trust them on this. Adding this tool to mix has a significant potential to allow those with less inherent or natural ability and less technical savvy as you to tie the concepts involved here into a practical understanding of how to apply them. Beyond the instructional benefits there are others which would be less used on a routine basis but greatly appreciated if they were needed. Icing, L/D max events, pitot static failures, max gw situations to name a few. Put all that together and it really seems like a no brainer, IMO.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768466)
If somebody feels like they need it, sure. However, rather than trying to retrofit the 1980's trainers that most people still learn to fly on, studying a diagram and understanding the concepts of AOA, wing loading, relation to speeds, etc would likely yield better results.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768466)
Would AOA gauge be a useful addition for training? Sure. Understanding AOA can be accomplished without this and these are pretty fundamental concepts. .
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768466)
Money retrofitting planes with AOA trinkets would be better spent on instilling better basic airmanship for most GA guys. The two pilots did a lot of obvious things wrong, and having yet another gauge screaming at them would be unlikely to prevent the incident.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768613)
I can't imagine Joe Six-pack in his piper gaining any significant utility on routine flights.
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768677)
Important to see how the stall will occur at higher airspeed. Yep, AOA would show this directly, but 99%+ of all GA aircraft don't have one so it is better IMO to learn this relationship without additional gizmos and actually "internalize" the relationship from experience.
|
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1768613)
I also agree. Perhaps this is a less appropriate forum for this, as from my understanding transport pilots don't fly by feel as much, and fly procedurally (unless flying their piston single on the weekend.) Most of even basic IFR training was undoing the "feel" concept for me and flying procedurally.
If one looks at it from that perspective then AOA would be more useful. For instance a direct display to the pilots may have prevented AF447, or in GA pitot icing (as long as no AOA icing) you would not be at risk of losing control. I can't imagine Joe Six-pack in his piper gaining any significant utility on routine flights. I grew up flying Piper Cubs, then Cessnas, then multi engine Pipers, then multi engine turbo props, then Lear Jets. Not one of those airplanes had an AOA indicator. I'd never even seen one, and I survived. I was taught to fly by feel, and I flew a lot, so I learned what it feels like to get on the backside of the power curve. Then at age 23, with over 4,500 hours of non-AOA flying, I joined the Air Guard and went through Air Force pilot training, where we flew the T38 and it had an AOA indicator. First time I'd ever seen one. I quickly became addicted to it! It is SO EASY to fly AOA in the traffic pattern vs. looking in for your airspeed, looking out, looking in for your airspeed, looing out for your aim point, looking in, looking out, etc. Angle of Attack is such an easy concept to grasp, I wish someone had told me about it when I was flying Cubs! I understood stalls, and I understood accelerated stalls, but we had no indication of how hard you could pull before things went to crap. All an AOA does is make it EASIER to understand, and SEE, how much more you can (or cannot) pull. You don't need to do the math on what your airspeed and bank is. Once you get into the yellow, you'd better back off, or else. In the GA world, without AOA, you have to fly a lot in the same airplane to develop the feel for where that fine line is, at different airspeeds, bank and configurations. With an AOA indicator, you don't. It is a really simple way to quickly gain some situational awareness about how much reserve lift you have available. How do you think the military can take a 23yr. old kid with zero time, and a year later turn him loose in a F16? Because they teach him how to fly the AOA. Could Joe Sixpack benefit from this kind of simplicity?? Yeah, you betcha! Watch the first 2 minutes of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6ClleBncI |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1769027)
Watch the first 2 minutes of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6ClleBncI
|
Originally Posted by Fluglehrer
(Post 1769160)
I like the gradation on that Bendix-King AOA indicator. The T-38 only had green donut and red and yellow chevron. That Bendix-King looks like it would be almost as good as a round dial, and maybe easier to read.
|
I believe the model on Fred Scott's deal featured aural tones and female voice. I think its canned phrases should be expanded to also say things like "Nice landing" "You're an awesome pilot" and "Sorry, you're screwed!"
|
Thanks Adler for the post. I really don't mean to come across as a jerk and sorry for appearing dismissive. And again for the record I would like to fly in a plane with direct AOA readout as I said, would be fun and heck I always like to get as much experiences in flying as possible.
I'm also not "negative" about AOA. I see the utility, but a few on here had an almost religious fanaticism about it that I usually only see people get when talking about the latest Apple product. ;) If somebody wants/needs it in their craft go right ahead. I see a lot of disrespect for the skills of the GA pilot which is very confusing to me then I talk or fly with few of them and am positively blown away by the lack of skills or knowledge base often present. There is a wide range of academic and aeronautical ability and physical hand-eye type lacking that is (hopefully) not present in the pro community where everybody is held to recurrent training and higher standards. Again I will have to watch for this in myself (as you guys will too after you retire from pro duties) as we age and we all fly less than we used to. Ego should not enter in to the equation. The conversation seems to have shifted to AOA as a "training aid" and again that would be potentially useful in GA planes for somebody who perhaps does not really have a good understanding about flying, how lift is generated, induced drag curves, etc. I still have difficulty seeing the day to day use for the average GA pilot who should not get anywhere near an accelerated stall regime but I do agree it would be interesting and useful in training. I upgraded to glass and feel it has HUGE advantages, and makes IFR simpler, and is a fantastic thing. I don't argue that everybody should do so. |
BTW if any of you are interested here is a fantastic AVWeb describing another fatal stall/spin in the modern-day doctor killer, Cirrus SR22.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm_hoHhbFo Would an AOA gauge help? Well certainly an understanding of aerodynamics would have avoiding high load high-G maneuvers close to ground resulting in high AOA and a spin when trying to "make" a runway. |
Originally Posted by Yoda2
(Post 1769217)
I believe the model on Fred Scott's deal featured aural tones and female voice. I think its canned phrases should be expanded to also say things like "Nice landing" "You're an awesome pilot" and "Sorry, you're screwed!"
Approaching stall AOA??? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ox0Ehq-FRQ |
Beeeeee---beep-beep-beep-beep---Beeeeeeeee
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1769205)
I'd like it more if it had an aural tone too! :D
Arnold would be a good choice for the aural: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AQPMu0kpM0 |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 1769218)
I still have difficulty seeing the day to day use for the average GA pilot |
There is a great deal of info out there for anyone who would like to learn more about the usefulness of AOA. Here are a few I like:
Angle of Attack by a pilot named Eddie Haskel. He has a good explanation of the usefulness of an AOA gauge from his personal experience in corporate aviation and as a USAF pilot Everybody Has an Angle (of Attack) His website is a great source of info. Another is Noel Kruse’s “Fly Better” books, especially his “Book One, Aerodynamics” (a free download from http://www.flybetter.co.uk/) He is excellent at making important connections, such as: “The angle of attack of the wing is caused by the angle of deflection of the elevator, independent of the airspeed. If we pull the stick back too far and deflect the elevator too far we will increase the angle of attack of the wing beyond the critical angle and stall it.” So even if you don’t have an AOA gauge, you do have a knowledge of what stick position will cause a stall. That stick/yoke position will cause a stall at any attitude and airspeed (well, if you’re fast enough above Va you will break your plane before you are able to pull back far enough to reach a stall). Here is a NASA study on AOA effectiveness: http://www.scribd.com/doc/242221338/...-Effectiveness JNB and Adlerdriver had a discussion about whether it would be worse to have high AOA in a level or descending turn. I think most military guys would say a descending turn is worse, and Adlerdriver says this is because you not only have to break the stall, you have to stop the sink. JNB, I think you also agree based on this quote of yours, which describes the problem of a descending high AOA turn well: “Again, when they get slow, they can get into a regime where they are not at an excessive pitch attitude, so not stalled or stalling, but where they are sinking and the AOA is way high due to the combination of slow speed, induced drag, etc.” The T-38 had a large number of fatal final turn stalls, and the addition of the AOA gauge and especially the “AOA Indexer” at the top of the glare shield was intended to help stop this. Most of these accidents were high sink rate mishaps with high AOA. After the addition of AOA the USAF increased the speed of no-flap approaches and probably (my surmise based on memery from talking to graybeards when I was young) changed their way of flying final turns from tight, high sink rate, high AOA (probably .7 to .8) final turns to a more relaxed .6 AOA turn. Here is the study that put AOA into the T-38: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...80185997,d.cGE I do remember my first night flight with another T-38 instructor as I was a 2nd Lt. Instead of an overhead he flew more of a sliceback to the runway, with .8 or higher AOA the whole turn and stroking burners during the rollout to final to kill the sink rate (VSI was pegged at 6000 fpm plus). Kept me awake.:eek: Not sure if anyone already posted this link to the FAA recommendation for AOA: http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviat.../InFO14010.pdf |
Originally Posted by Yoda2
(Post 1769217)
I believe the model on Fred Scott's deal featured aural tones and female voice. I think its canned phrases should be expanded to also say things like "Nice landing" "You're an awesome pilot" and "Sorry, you're screwed!"
"Is your wife home? Yes? We could go to a motel..." Just a little incentive to make a better landing! :D The MD88 does have a b!tching Betty voice that says all kinds of things like; Flllaaps, and Overpseed. And the Airbuses will call you a Retard, twice! The 777 has an AOA indication in the upper right corner of the ADI but it's small and we were never taught to use it properly. The airplane has other low speed warnings before you get into the red on the AOA, right on the airspeed tape and will yell "Stall Stall" at you too. Still, the Asiana guys managed to get way behind the power curve on a clear day in SFO.:rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1765011)
You didn't read a single link I suggested or any of the series of posts by Fred Scott did you?
If you had - then you would heard what most of the GA pilots were saying about the utility of the AoA instruments currently available at a relatively low cost to the GA community. You don't have to have "grown up with it" to appreciate the benefits. That is a gross overstatement to the training required to effectively utilize it. We're not asking the recreational pilot to use it to the extent, or for the purposes, that the fighter pilots used it on a routine basis. Btw - I was flying before the military so I wasn't initially trained AT ALL on its use or benefits. It wasn't until T-34C training that I was introduced to it and I could still see the benefits of such information. When I got back into civilian (professional) flying did I find to my surprise that the turbine equipment I was then training on did not have any AoA information available. But if this is going to be the next great leap in GA safety, as some folks advocate, then it will need to be incorporated into early training. I'm not giving you grief on this; it was jetjoc who was a bit caustic. |
Originally Posted by Cubdriver
(Post 1768746)
I think a large scale shift in flight training over to using AoA concepts would be appropriate.
I agree, it would be good. But it's a big, big step...the FAA would have to mandate this, adjust FAR 61, and educate the CFI population. Then primary trainers would all need AoA gauges...along with their ADS-B out. None of the big flight schools are going to do it unless it's mandated...it would drive their costs above their competitors in the short term. I'm not sure I can envision a practical roadmap to get there...AOPA and the FAA (and maybe the NBAA) would have to agree, and the RAA would fight it tooth-and-nail since it would increase the cost of fresh seat-meat ever so slightly, and would impact their training programs. |
When I started this thread I wasn't sure what to expect; probably some yes, no or maybe so's... Instead it has turned into a great and fruitful conversation and thank you everyone, even Cardio! Anything new, or new to a person, often gets met with resistance, skepticism and misunderstanding. It's natural and generally a good thing; part of the vetting process. It would be interesting to put Orville and Wilbur in the cockpit of a modern jetliner or even a well equipped GA aircraft. I'm not sure if they would be full of amazement, wonder and approval, or their heads would explode!
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:02 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands