Angle of Attack indicator

Steve Job

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
221
Location
Lexington, Illinois
Display Name

Display name:
Steve Job
My partner and I bought one of these http://www.alphasystemsaoa.com/ at Oshkosh this year. We haven't had it installed yet, but was wondering if anyone in this esteemed audience had any experience with AOA indicators. I know they're common in the military and jets.

According to the guy at the booth, this is essentially the same unit Bendix King started selling (they're BK's "Technology Partner").
 
In theory they're great and technology has driven the cost down to the point I old see them becoming standard equipment. I see the most benefit when transitioning to a new aircraft and learning the "feel" of it. That said, you can learn that "feel" the old fashioned way with slow flight and stalls.

I was flying with a former private student that bought an RV-9 with an AOA. I commented that I thought it was useful info to have. His response was, "I thought so, too, but the reality is after the first few hours I've never looked at it again. I now know how the airplane feels and really don't need it." I guess I can see his point.
 
They're dog-simple to install and work as advertised. Tubing connections are snap-in, instructions are straight-forward.


My partner and I bought one of these http://www.alphasystemsaoa.com/ at Oshkosh this year. We haven't had it installed yet, but was wondering if anyone in this esteemed audience had any experience with AOA indicators. I know they're common in the military and jets.

According to the guy at the booth, this is essentially the same unit Bendix King started selling (they're BK's "Technology Partner").
 
Should the AOA indication remain accurate even in a slip, unlike indicated airspeed? I was reading the "Slips on Final - A Question" thread, and thought this post was interesting:


Quote:
Originally Posted by VWGhiaBob
Still, I'm curious. In full slip mode, if a pilot fails to control airspeed (which tends to decrease rapidly in a hard slip), don't we have a serious problem?

Thanks for any advice!
Well...Actually, your "real" airspeed doesn't really decrease rapidly, only your indicated airspeed. If you remember how the airspeed indicator works, it's just a gauge that displays a pressure differential between the static port and the pitot tube. Since many GA planes have the static port on the pilot's side of the fuselage, and since we primarily point the nose to the right on our slips (to see better from the pilot's side), when we slip the plane we are now ramming air into the static port. This creates a smaller pressure differential and the AS indicator now shows a slower "indicated" airspeed -- even though you will still be moving through the air at about the same speed you were before.

This is why, when many of us (well...at least me) are learning slips, when we roll back to normal attitude we are suddenly carrying a LOT more speed than we thought and tend to float hundreds of feet down the runway. I was always amazed that my airspeed would increase at least 10kts when I came out of my slip. I always though it was because I wasn't bringing the nose up enough enough until a wise instructor reminded me of how the AS indicator works. Even now, though, it still freaks me out to see my AS needle dipping really close to the bottom of the white arc when I'm low & slow.
 
My partner and I bought one of these http://www.alphasystemsaoa.com/ at Oshkosh this year. We haven't had it installed yet, but was wondering if anyone in this esteemed audience had any experience with AOA indicators. I know they're common in the military and jets.

When calibrated correctly, it works like a charm. Our AoA indicator in the jet is calibrated to display accurately in any flap configuration, displaying 1.3 Vso (also known as Vref) at 0.6 units AoA. It also displays a green donut on the airspeed tape at this value which moves as your AoA and flap configuration changes. Real time approach speed reference given actual weight and density altitude. It's cool stuff.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2013-08-10 at 8.42.02 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2013-08-10 at 8.42.02 AM.png
    37.5 KB · Views: 201
Many GA planes have static ports on both sides, like the Mooney and others. So any ram air on one side would be for the most part be equalized by a lower pressure on the other side.
 
Did you get one that ties into the audio panel? That's what we're going to get for the 310. I think that provides the most benefit - not only providing the visual indication, but also an audio warning if you mistakenly get too slow.

I would suspect that most of the stall/spin crashes that occur are probably with pilots who do have "the feel" but get distracted and then don't notice it. It's harder to ignore a verbal warning, although it is possible.
 
They work as advertised when installed right.

As for their value, there is another thread on that on here if you search
 
It will be connected to the audio panel, and we get several choices of aural warnings. I think we may use the "doorbell", followed by a female voice telling us we're "Too Slow!" Nothing like sitting up and taking notice when there's a woman admonishing you.:yes:
 
You don't need that crap... When you feel the buffet push down... We all know that every flying aircraft works off the idea of the AoA, you don't need a needle to tell you what the airplane is doing... you can just do it... don't become a button pushing USAF pilot who doesn't know what a stall feels like
 
NTSB reports have shown that many pilots needed that crap... When you feel the buffet push down... When you miss it one day, just crash and become another statistic. We all know that every flying aircraft works off the idea of the AoA, you don't need a needle to tell you what the airplane is doing... you can just do it... until you miss it or get distracted one day. don't become a button pushing USAF pilot who doesn't know what a stall feels like, but also make sure you know how to use the tool and don't become a statistic.

FTFY. :D
 
You don't need that crap... When you feel the buffet push down... We all know that every flying aircraft works off the idea of the AoA, you don't need a needle to tell you what the airplane is doing... you can just do it... don't become a button pushing USAF pilot who doesn't know what a stall feels like

I'm not afraid of stalls (they're fun to practice - at altitude). I view this device as a way to increase the safety margin mostly during the landing phase. I know that "real" pilots never get distracted, but I allow for that possibility for myself. Plus, this seems like a sweet way to quantify that "gut feeling", and safely and consistently land at the lowest safe airspeed.
 
I'm not afraid of stalls (they're fun to practice - at altitude). I view this device as a way to increase the safety margin mostly during the landing phase. I know that "real" pilots never get distracted, but I allow for that possibility for myself. Plus, this seems like a sweet way to quantify that "gut feeling", and safely and consistently land at the lowest safe airspeed.

:thumbsup:

Right attitude!
 
Never had the opportunity to fly a plane with one installed but wouldn't mind the chance. No such thing as bad information if it's accurate.
 
In theory they're great and technology has driven the cost down to the point I old see them becoming standard equipment. I see the most benefit when transitioning to a new aircraft and learning the "feel" of it. That said, you can learn that "feel" the old fashioned way with slow flight and stalls.

I was flying with a former private student that bought an RV-9 with an AOA. I commented that I thought it was useful info to have. His response was, "I thought so, too, but the reality is after the first few hours I've never looked at it again. I now know how the airplane feels and really don't need it." I guess I can see his point.

I don't know if you have read it, but Fred Scott on BT talks a lot about the benefits of an AOA system for high time pilots. He got involved with Alpha Systems after losing a couple of very experienced friends. He also talks a lot about "feel". I would be interested in your thoughts on his perspective.
 
I don't know if you have read it, but Fred Scott on BT talks a lot about the benefits of an AOA system for high time pilots. He got involved with Alpha Systems after losing a couple of very experienced friends. He also talks a lot about "feel". I would be interested in your thoughts on his perspective.

Sounds very interesting, but I'm not a member of Beechtalk. I registered, but it may be 24 hours before I'm activated. Hope they let me join, since I told them I fly a Piper product. :wink2:

Seriously, everything I've read about AOA indicators has been very positive. The theme for us this Oshkosh season was safety, and we justified our purchases based on that criterion. "The life you save may be your own" :yes:
 
In theory they're great and technology has driven the cost down to the point I old see them becoming standard equipment. I see the most benefit when transitioning to a new aircraft and learning the "feel" of it. That said, you can learn that "feel" the old fashioned way with slow flight and stalls.

I was flying with a former private student that bought an RV-9 with an AOA. I commented that I thought it was useful info to have. His response was, "I thought so, too, but the reality is after the first few hours I've never looked at it again. I now know how the airplane feels and really don't need it." I guess I can see his point.
I've gotten so used to using my AoA (Alpha Systems mechanical version) instead of the ASI that when I had a problem with it I found I was ill prepared to land the plane without it. Perhaps the difference between my experience an your RV pilot is that I mounted the indicator on the glareshield where it's in my line of vision when looking ahead, and to save wear and tear on brakes and tires I prefer to make "minimum energy" landings most of the time. The AoA indicator reliably (until it broke) allowed me to comfortably come over the fence at lower speeds than I would without it, especially at lighter weights where my stall speed has dropped 10 Kt or more.

And other than landing I think it's useful when maneuvering at low altitude such as when turning over some point that a passenger want's to view with the wing out of the way or even when dealing with an overshoot on the turn to final.
 
Should the AOA indication remain accurate even in a slip, unlike indicated airspeed? I was reading the "Slips on Final - A Question" thread, and thought this post was interesting:


Quote:
Originally Posted by VWGhiaBob
Still, I'm curious. In full slip mode, if a pilot fails to control airspeed (which tends to decrease rapidly in a hard slip), don't we have a serious problem?

Thanks for any advice!
Well...Actually, your "real" airspeed doesn't really decrease rapidly, only your indicated airspeed. If you remember how the airspeed indicator works, it's just a gauge that displays a pressure differential between the static port and the pitot tube. Since many GA planes have the static port on the pilot's side of the fuselage, and since we primarily point the nose to the right on our slips (to see better from the pilot's side), when we slip the plane we are now ramming air into the static port. This creates a smaller pressure differential and the AS indicator now shows a slower "indicated" airspeed -- even though you will still be moving through the air at about the same speed you were before.

This is why, when many of us (well...at least me) are learning slips, when we roll back to normal attitude we are suddenly carrying a LOT more speed than we thought and tend to float hundreds of feet down the runway. I was always amazed that my airspeed would increase at least 10kts when I came out of my slip. I always though it was because I wasn't bringing the nose up enough enough until a wise instructor reminded me of how the AS indicator works. Even now, though, it still freaks me out to see my AS needle dipping really close to the bottom of the white arc when I'm low & slow.
A bit of thread drift but if you maintain the same pitch attitude (e.g. pick a spot on the windshield directly in front of you that's on the horizon and hold it there) when you enter and exit a slip you're actual airspeed won't change much.

I should also point out that the AoA probe currently used by Alpha Systems will cause the AoA indication to drop rapidly towards the stall indication in a very aggressive slip. I know this is something that Mark is looking to improve.
 
A bit of thread drift but if you maintain the same pitch attitude (e.g. pick a spot on the windshield directly in front of you that's on the horizon and hold it there) when you enter and exit a slip you're actual airspeed won't change much.

I should also point out that the AoA probe currently used by Alpha Systems will cause the AoA indication to drop rapidly towards the stall indication in a very aggressive slip. I know this is something that Mark is looking to improve.

I've gotten so used to using my AoA (Alpha Systems mechanical version) instead of the ASI that when I had a problem with it I found I was ill prepared to land the plane without it. Perhaps the difference between my experience an your RV pilot is that I mounted the indicator on the glareshield where it's in my line of vision when looking ahead, and to save wear and tear on brakes and tires I prefer to make "minimum energy" landings most of the time. The AoA indicator reliably (until it broke) allowed me to comfortably come over the fence at lower speeds than I would without it, especially at lighter weights where my stall speed has dropped 10 Kt or more.

And other than landing I think it's useful when maneuvering at low altitude such as when turning over some point that a passenger want's to view with the wing out of the way or even when dealing with an overshoot on the turn to final.

Thanks!! That's exactly the type of small GA personal experience I was looking for!
 
I don't know if you have read it, but Fred Scott on BT talks a lot about the benefits of an AOA system for high time pilots. He got involved with Alpha Systems after losing a couple of very experienced friends. He also talks a lot about "feel". I would be interested in your thoughts on his perspective.

I see the benefits and am supportive of the technology. Anything that improves safety in any way is a good thing.
 
I don't know if you have read it, but Fred Scott on BT talks a lot about the benefits of an AOA system for high time pilots. He got involved with Alpha Systems after losing a couple of very experienced friends. He also talks a lot about "feel". I would be interested in your thoughts on his perspective.
Fred and I both believe the combination of a visual display in the pilot's field of vision (e.g. on the glareshield) and verbal announcements of increasing urgency as you approach the critical AoA are far more likely to prevent an inadvertent stall at low altitude. The visual aspect lets you make the right correction immediately when a distraction gets you in trouble and IME verbal callouts are much harder to ignore than a beep or light.
 
Sounds very interesting, but I'm not a member of Beechtalk. I registered, but it may be 24 hours before I'm activated. Hope they let me join, since I told them I fly a Piper product. :wink2:

Seriously, everything I've read about AOA indicators has been very positive. The theme for us this Oshkosh season was safety, and we justified our purchases based on that criterion. "The life you save may be your own" :yes:

Here is a link (you may have already seen it) where you can read more about the background, Fred, Tom, etc.

http://www.ballyshannon.com/aoa.html
 

Interesting, and dare I say a tad presumptuous about the skills the average GA pilot has. Sure, a well trained, proficient, pilot can land a 172 without an AOA indicator, happens everyday. BUT, what about an engine out emergency at night into a canopy of pine trees? Or a real short field landing? Or a rusty pilot slow on approach that overshoots final? Or maybe an experienced, current, pilot that just gets distracted?

We're talking a couple of grand, it's pennies in aviation terms.

Would it save as many as a ballistic chute does in a year at a much higher cost? That should be the kind of questions we're asking.
 
Over the past few years several pilots have stalled on final to 27 at OSH and died as a result. I assumed that distraction played a role in these seemingly avoidable crashes, but now I know how it could happen. From a close-in downwind leg at the higher speed and altitude required for faster planes while trying to turn at the gravel pit and land on the first dot, a M/E pilot who's not accustomed to the drill has both hands full and his britches to hold up when trying to get everything done. I heard enough stall horn on the turn to final to last for at least a couple of years. I was in the back, but the horn sounds the same no matter which seat you use. An AOA would have been a wonderful tool.
 

Looks to me this article is from John Zimmerman, not Dick Collins.

"John Zimmerman said:
I think that’s hopelessly naive.
Given all the hype, a casual observer might think the concept was just discovered. But as any pilot with even a basic knowledge of history knows, it’s been a hot topic numerous times over the years, as far back as Wolfgang Langewiesche’s classic book Stick and Rudder. Today, almost every turbine airplane has an AoA instrument. It’s hardly a new idea.
The latest push has centered on bringing this technology to piston airplanes. It started with the FAA, who declared affordable AoA instruments one of its most-wanted safety improvements. AOPA’s Air Safety Institute has enthusiastically supported the cause, too.
I don't think most AoA proponents are saying this is a new concept, although getting the FAA on board with allowing installation in certified aircraft without a STC might be. And given that Stick and Rudder tried to teach us to visualize AoA and how it affects a wing, doesn't a nearly direct display of same seem like something Wolfgang would have supported wholeheartedly?

But the most newsworthy AoA story to come out recently was courtesy of ICON Aircraft, the designer of the yet-to-be-delivered amphibian LSA. They recently released a video touting the AoA instrument that will be front and center in their A5 cockpit. The glitzy video presents AoA as if it’s a major breakthrough in aviation and ICON is the first airplane ever to offer it.
I don’t blame ICON. This is the type of thing startups have to do to get attention and keep customers excited during the long march from concept to shipping a product. And their AoA design does look appealingly simple. But the media who accept this at face value and the “safety experts” who think it’s a revolution should know better. AoA is an instrument, nothing more, nothing less.
Most of the above is likely true, at least the part about ICON thinking this offering might be a valuable differentiator.

Some AoA advocates point to the Asiana 214 crash in San Francisco as an example of the type of accident that could be prevented with such an instrument. To me, it shows exactly why AoA won’t do much. Most importantly, the pilots have to look at the instrument for it to be of any use. In the Asiana case, the crew managed to ignore the airspeed indicator for a long time, even as it eventually showed them being almost 30 knots slow. Another instrument wouldn’t have prevented this disaster.
Besides looking at the instrument, pilots have to know how to react to its indications. For the GA pilot struggling to log 25 hours in a year, the physical stick and rudder skills may be more important than the recognition skills.
John shows his own lack of experience with the many AoA systems that provide verbal warnings which pretty much negates his claim that you have to look at the instrument for it to be of any value.



An AoA instrument also won’t help the idiot who buzzes his girlfriend’s house at 20 ft and pulls up at 3 Gs. Neither will it prevent the over-gross takeoff on a hot day that eventually results in a stall. These scenarios are both depressingly common, and get grouped under the “loss of control” heading.
Wrong again John, for two reasons. One is that had that idiot learned to fly in an airplane with an AoA indicator he'd probably have a better grasp of how pulling up abruptly increases AoA dramatically and the other is that verbal warning would likely have convinced him to ease off on the pullup before he got into stall territory. Also this particular example pretty clearly emphasizes the reason an airspeed indicator is a poor substitute for AoA. The idiot pilot probably thought he was perfectly safe because his airspeed was well above the normal "stall speed".

Ex-military pilots (like some on the ICON team) love AoA because it’s religion in the military. To them, it seems shocking that GA pilots are still flying based solely on airspeed. I’ll admit that, when landing on the pitching deck of an aircraft carrier at night, AoA is probably a great tool. But for the average Cherokee pilot landing on a 5000 ft. runway, the situation is quite different.
No kidding. A Cherokee could probably land, take off, climb a few hundred feet and land again on a 5000 ft runway. But put that same Cherokee pilot on short final for a <1500 ft grass runway with trees on each end and AoA becomes far more useful.


Airspeed control on final approach matters a lot more than a new instrument in the panel. Here’s the simple fact that most AoA proponents know, but don’t like to admit: airspeed is a great proxy for AoA most of the time. General aviation pilots fly in a very small envelope: +/- 10 degrees in pitch and 30 degrees of bank in most cases. Within those boundaries, monitoring airspeed is a perfectly good way to keep from stalling.
Now John is either being deliberately obtuse or he has far less understanding of AoA vs airspeed. Pitch attitude means nothing, you can achieve any flyable AoA at least briefly at any pitch attitude. And while a 30 degree bank only raises the "stall speed" about 7.5% or about 3 Kt with flaps extended, that's only true if the pilot doesn't try to arrest an excessive descent rate by pulling up. I'd be willing to be that the vast majority of pilots have at one time or another exceeded 2 g briefly in a 30° bank for one reason or another and in that case the "stall speed" has gone up over 40%.



If you’re doing aerobatics or flying a jet at FL410, an AoA instrument may be essential; in the pattern in a 172 it’s not going to tell you much more than the airspeed indicator.
It might not tell John much more than the airspeed indicator but it sure does for me. And BTW, since one of John's major (incorrect) objections was that an AoA system won't help because the pilot has to look at it, doesn't it seem like calling an ASI a perfectly good substitute is a bit hypocritical since an ASI doesn't provide any useful info unless you look at it. And given the typical ASI location under the glareshield vs many AoA indicators mounted on top of the glareshield coupled with the fact that an AoA indictor reacts about 10 times more quickly to pitch and bank changes than the ASI I'd say it's a no brainer that AoA can indeed provide more and better information about what the wing is about to do.



Yes, I know that “a wing can stall at any airspeed,” but how often do you read about a stall/spin accident that occurred at 150 knots? Most of the base-to-final stall/spin scenarios happen because the pilot got too slow, plain and simple. That suggests good airspeed control would improve safety more than a new instrument in the cockpit.
You won't see many 150 Kt stalls in a Cherokee given that the wings would come off first. And while I agree that low airspeed is a major factor in most any stall/spin accident in the pattern, exactly how slow is too slow is far more obvious on an AoA indicator than an ASI and mounted on the glareshield in the pilot's field of vision when looking outside (as he should be in the pattern) with a much quicker response to pilot input an AoA could well be responsible for a significant reduction in these accidents even without the added benefit of verbal announcements.

But here’s where the breakdown is. Ask most flight instructors and they’ll tell you that new students and licensed pilots alike are dreadful at airspeed control. If the common standard of staying within +5 and -0 knots of Vref were enforced, thousands of pilots would have to surrender their certificates.
Be that as it may, I think it's likely that pilots trained to monitor AoA in the pattern would do a better job of maintaining the correct airspeed and be more aware of the margin they have above stall.



We don’t have an instrument problem, we have a stick and rudder skills problem. Instead of spending a lot of money on new instruments, let’s teach pilots how to maintain the proper airspeed on final. That would be revolutionary.
Revolutionary? You mean that CFIs haven't been trying to do exactly that for the last century? Do you think it might just be possible that an AoA indicator on the glareshield might be a useful tool for training better pilots, albeit ones that are somewhat dependent on AoA?
 
I put one in my T206H a few months ago and am learning all sorts of new stuff about my airplane. For example: The stall speeds are exactly what the book says. Big surprise!

The only downside to the less expensive (and only ones available) for light GA is that they only calibrate for a single flap configuration. Alpha Systems instructs you to calibrate clean (no flaps).

PS - I notice that it seems to be pretty accurate in all configurations. Maybe a 'feature' of Cessna's fowler flaps.
 
I don't know if you have read it, but Fred Scott on BT talks a lot about the benefits of an AOA system for high time pilots. He got involved with Alpha Systems after losing a couple of very experienced friends. He also talks a lot about "feel". I would be interested in your thoughts on his perspective.

I never thought this would be a controversial subject. Why would anyone think it was a bad idea to know quantifiably how close you are to stalling? Fred talks passionitely about VERY seasoned aviators who fell into the stall/spin trap. But the airfactsjournal.com article seems to poo poo the need of supplementing the indicated airspeed proxy wrt AOA. I know "experts" can disagree, but it sure seems to me that this line of thinking is similar to the old school idea of never using a GPS for navigation (with the subsequent TFR busts). Real pilots dont need that stuff! Technology is great, if it enhances your situational awareness. Both WRT navigation and aviation!
 
I never thought this would be a controversial subject. Why would anyone think it was a bad idea to know quantifiably how close you are to stalling? Fred talks passionitely about VERY seasoned aviators who fell into the stall/spin trap. But the airfactsjournal.com article seems to poo poo the need of supplementing the indicated airspeed proxy wrt AOA. I know "experts" can disagree, but it sure seems to me that this line of thinking is similar to the old school idea of never using a GPS for navigation (with the subsequent TFR busts). Real pilots dont need that stuff! Technology is great, if it enhances your situational awareness. Both WRT navigation and aviation!

Hang around enough and you'll learn that there are generally two groups here:

Real pilots:
Hand prop whenever possible
Use only needle, ball, and airspeed in hard IFR
Nav. by dead reckoning (even in hard IFR)
Fly at least 100 hours a month and never miss a chance to say so
Spend less to operate a 50 year old radial twin than a housewife spends at Starbucks in a month
Are convinced (or strongly wish) the world stopped spinning around 1946

Airplane drivers:
They like Cirrus aircraft
They know someone with a Cirrus aircraft
They believe a Cirrus won't instantly explode in any off airport landing
They anything Cirrus...
They like new avionics (GPS, nav. heads, Loran, all the fancy new stuff)
Think parachutes, AOA indicators, seat belts, and all that "crap" increase safety
They "think" they can safely fly an aircraft out of the pattern with less than 10,000 hours and a DC3 type rating
Use any device with an "i" in front of it

Now you see how why we have so much controversy.:)
 
I never thought this would be a controversial subject. Why would anyone think it was a bad idea to know quantifiably how close you are to stalling? Fred talks passionitely about VERY seasoned aviators who fell into the stall/spin trap. But the airfactsjournal.com article seems to poo poo the need of supplementing the indicated airspeed proxy wrt AOA. I know "experts" can disagree, but it sure seems to me that this line of thinking is similar to the old school idea of never using a GPS for navigation (with the subsequent TFR busts). Real pilots dont need that stuff! Technology is great, if it enhances your situational awareness. Both WRT navigation and aviation!

Alex got more or less of the two sorts that cause problems around here. Then there are the rest of us that have brains, but there's a saying somewhere about people who lack intelligence speak louder to make up for it.
 
Hang around enough and you'll learn that there are generally two groups here:

Real pilots:
[...]
Airplane drivers:
[...]

I had the lasagna. I'm a real airplane pilot driver.

An AoA indicator sounds like it would definitely be handy during short field takeoffs and in the event of an engine failure during takeoff climb.
 
I believe using an airspeed as a stall speed indicator is fine when aircraft weight doesn't vary too much.

I do always wonder about how you calibrate AOA indication systems for use on different GA aircraft.

How about when flaps are extended, are they accurate then?

I assume they are setup to be most accurate at stall and who knows what it means through the rest of it's indication range?

Did the manufacturer develop test data for each aircraft type using a flight test nose boom with AOA?

See http://www.aero-inst.com/pdf/Aero-Instruments Flight Test Air Data Solution Guide.pdf

What kind of indication do you get for best glide?

I apologize for updating this post a couple times since posting.

I just got to thinking, I'd almost rather have something that tells me best glide if the engine quits. I know my stall speeds.

When slipping the rental arrow down in a turn on the precision 180, I'm taking it on faith that 80 kts is the right magic number to be at.
 
Last edited:
The calibration must be performed on each installation by flying specific flight profiles, and "pushing buttons" on the controller when the specified flight regime is acquired. However, the flap actuator isn't taken into consideration, so you will always error on the side of safety when making an approach using flaps.
 
The calibration must be performed on each installation by flying specific flight profiles, and "pushing buttons" on the controller when the specified flight regime is acquired. However, the flap actuator isn't taken into consideration, so you will always error on the side of safety when making an approach using flaps.
My mechanical system is "calibrated" by adjusting the angle of the probe relative to the longitudinal axis of the airplane. I have it set so it stalls with flaps and gear extended when the needle is one "tick mark" up from the red end of the scale. With flaps up stall occurs close to the top of the red arc.
 
Back
Top