Falling leaf stall?

Diana

Diana

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
6,163
Location
Southwest MO
Display Name
Display name:
Diana
How do you all do the falling leaf stall? Do you use partial power, or do you use power at idle?
 
Diana said:
How do you all do the falling leaf stall? Do you use partial power, or do you use power at idle?
Click to expand...

Well, I go out in the Fall and find a good Maple tree. Then I need a rake so I can get a really good pile of leaves going... :D
 
Diana said:
How do you all do the falling leaf stall? Do you use partial power, or do you use power at idle?
Click to expand...
I do it at idle. But I suppose different airplanes might require different technique.
 
qbynewbie said:
Well, I go out in the Fall and find a good Maple tree. Then I need a rake so I can get a really good pile of leaves going... :D
Click to expand...
Brian, you really need to come to the midwest. :yes: And then we could do a falling leaf stall. :D
 
jesse said:
I do it at idle. But I suppose different airplanes might require different technique.
Click to expand...
That's how I was taught to do it in the Citabria. Seems like Chip and I did it at idle in the Extra. But that was awhile back, so I'm not sure now.
 
Only did it once, in a J3... idle all the way, but I can't recall if we cleared the engine or not.
 
Idle is fairly standard for the stall - the falling leaf is a power-off stall variation. All it really is (in the variation I use; there may be others although I haven't heard of them) is a power-off stall from which you delay the recovery (power remains off, stick remains back) while maintaining coordination (no spin).

Clearing the engine in extended idle power operations is fairly standard in pistons, although I tend not to be in a falling leaf long enough for it to be an issue
 
I've actually had students recover from a power-off stall and immediately enter into a second stall but never described it as more than a secondary stall.
 
The falling leaf stall that I've done is a stall where you dip the wings to each side while stalled and it looks like a falling leaf.
 
Hmm. Sounds like we might not all be on the same page. I was referring to trimming the nose up a bit, pulling the power off, and then sit back and let the plane do its thing. Great for pilots who are not IFR capable that get into IFR conditions. You bend the plane, but usually walk away.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Idle is fairly standard for the stall - the falling leaf is a power-off stall variation. All it really is (in the variation I use; there may be others although I haven't heard of them) is a power-off stall from which you delay the recovery (power remains off, stick remains back) while maintaining coordination (no spin).
Click to expand...
Yes to the above but you keep the wings level with rudder. As you are deep into a stall, the control response is mushy and it typically rolls both left and right as you try to keep it level. Just as a falling leaf might roll from side to side - and hence the name.

So your coordinated flight is not so great, but for sure, no spin!

-Skip
 
KennyFlys said:
I've actually had students recover from a power-off stall and immediately enter into a second stall but never described it as more than a secondary stall.
Click to expand...

IMHO what has been described is not a stall recovery followed by a secondary, but a stick-all-the-way-back continuous stall...no relaxation of back pressure thus no recovery. It is the gold-plated way to teach a student the importance of the rudder at high angles of attack/low airspeed, because every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder, and that it is not the throttle that breaks the stall.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
IMHO what has been described is not a stall recovery followed by a secondary, but a stick-all-the-way-back continuous stall...no relaxation of back pressure thus no recovery. It is the gold-plated way to teach a student the importance of the rudder at high angles of attack/low airspeed, because every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder, and that it is not the throttle that breaks the stall.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Interesting. Thinking ahead to the day I get the CFI ticket -- do/would you use this as a continuous process?: Power off stall -> stay coordinated throughout stall, but don't recover (falling leaf) -> Recover from stall without using power -> Move directly into secondary power-off stall -> Lather, rinse, repeat until you reach safe altitude threshold.

Seems like it would be a GREAT exercise for a student with lazy feet and overactive hands.
 
KennyFlys said:
I've actually had students recover from a power-off stall and immediately enter into a second stall but never described it as more than a secondary stall.
Click to expand...
A secondary stall is due to a poorly executed recovery. A "falling leaf" stall is an intentional maneuver in which you purposely delay recovery.
 
Skip Miller said:
Yes to the above but you keep the wings level with rudder. As you are deep into a stall, the control response is mushy and it typically rolls both left and right as you try to keep it level. Just as a falling leaf might roll from side to side - and hence the name.

So your coordinated flight is not so great, but for sure, no spin!

-Skip
Click to expand...
No spin is the result of coordinated flight.
 
The Airplane Flying Handbook has a good overview of stalls in Chapter 4. Although it does not discuss the falling leaf specifically, the chapter does talk about secondary stalls (see p. 4-9).

The AFH also makes a good point about introducing stalls to new students. (Too often, we teach only what I call "PTS stalls"; i.e., the stall-related tasks on the Practical Test Standards.)


Usually, the first few practices should include only approaches to stalls, with recovery initiated as soon as the first buffeting or partial loss of control is noted. In this way, the pilot can become familiar with the indications of an approaching stall without actually stalling the airplane. Once the pilot becomes comfortable with this procedure, the airplane should be slowed in such a manner that it stalls in as near a level pitch attitude as is possible. The student pilot must not be allowed to form the impression that in all circumstances, a high pitch attitude is necessary to exceed the critical angle of attack, or that in all circumstances, a level or near level pitch attitude is indicative of a low angle of attack. Recovery should be practiced first without the addition of power, by merely relieving enough back-elevator pressure that the stall is broken and the airplane assumes a normal glide attitude. The instructor should also introduce the student to a secondary stall at this point. Stall recoveries should then be practiced with the addition of power to determine how effective power will be in executing a safe recovery and minimizing altitude loss. (p. 4-5)
Click to expand...

You can find more information on the Stalls, Slips, Skids, and Incipient Spins page at my Web site.
 
Hmm... I had assumed that a falling-leaf is not really a full stall. Ive only done it in a J3 with no warning horn... it seemed more like we just got it mushing to the point where it began to sink, and it was close enough to a full stall that aileron control was not only ineffective, but likely to produce opposite-than-desired effect. The stick was almost all the way back, but not quite.

On the other hand, I also did full stalls in the J3, stick in my belly,and it definitely "broke" with full back stick and dropped the nose by itself.

On the other other hand, when I did induced secondary stalls in that C-140 a while back, what the instructor had me do was do a normal power-off stall, yoke back all the way, then let the nose drop, and simply hold the yoke back as it swooped into yet another stall, and another. A trainer-type airplane will do that. If you hold neutral elevator or simply let go, a well-behaved airplane will still do that, only it will use a lot more altitude doing it.
I think we did two sets of three, and at no point, until I applied power to recover finally, did I apply down elevator.
 
Greetings Pilots of America!

I had to get a Statement of Demonstrated Ability for my original class 3 medical (I walk with a limp) which involved a flight test. We did a few basic PTS manuevers and the examiner asked "have you ever done an "oscillatory stall?"

She had me pin the yoke all the way back in the Cessna 150 (power off) and apply the necessary rudder inputs while the airplane stalled and dipped in succession. After three or so nods, she announced that my rudder work was fine and she was late for dinner.

Thats my falling leaf story!
 
twdeckard said:
Greetings Pilots of America!

I had to get a Statement of Demonstrated Ability for my original class 3 medical (I walk with a limp) which involved a flight test. We did a few basic PTS manuevers and the examiner asked "have you ever done an "oscillatory stall?"

She had me pin the yoke all the way back in the Cessna 150 (power off) and apply the necessary rudder inputs while the airplane stalled and dipped in succession. After three or so nods, she announced that my rudder work was fine and she was late for dinner.

Thats my falling leaf story!
Click to expand...
Welcome to the board!
 
midlifeflyer said:
A secondary stall is due to a poorly executed recovery. A "falling leaf" stall is an intentional maneuver in which you purposely delay recovery.
Click to expand...
Agreed as I've heard multiple secondary stalls referred to as falling leaf stalls.
 
bobmrg said:
IMHO what has been described is not a stall recovery followed by a secondary, but a stick-all-the-way-back continuous stall...no relaxation of back pressure thus no recovery. It is the gold-plated way to teach a student the importance of the rudder at high angles of attack/low airspeed, because every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder, and that it is not the throttle that breaks the stall.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Bob, can you explain this a bit more, please? I'm sitting in my hotel in NYC and trying to envision this.

I'm very comfortable with power-off stalls and power-on stalls. I actually think they're kind of fun. And I want to try the kind of stall described in this thread with my CFI when I get back to Glens Falls later in the week.

But I'm not getting the "every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder" thing. I can understand why the ailerons are not likely to be effective (although I don't see how they can have the opposite effect unless using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall but I'm not quite picturing that right now) and I do understand why the rudder is still effective. But I don't get the "picking up a wing with the rudder thing", to the point that I'm not even sure if you use same-side or opposite rudder.

If I were sitting in the cockpit while this was going on, I'd be real tempted to look at the turn coordinator and use whichever rudder was indicated by that, with the obvious goal of keeping the ball centered. Short of that, my gut says opposite rudder because we want to essentially initiate a turn opposite the direction in which the wing is rolling and because PARE calls for opposite rudder in spin recovery -- but I don't understand exactly why it works.

My best guess is that we're turning the aircraft and speeding up the outside wing, which will tend to reduce or eliminate the stall on that side. But that's a WAG and I could believe that the relative wind and the dihedral are also coming into play. So please, someone, help this poor student understand. :p

Thanks!
 
qbynewbie said:
Bob, can you explain this a bit more, please? I'm sitting in my hotel in NYC and trying to envision this.

I'm very comfortable with power-off stalls and power-on stalls. I actually think they're kind of fun. And I want to try the kind of stall described in this thread with my CFI when I get back to Glens Falls later in the week.

But I'm not getting the "every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder" thing. I can understand why the ailerons are not likely to be effective (although I don't see how they can have the opposite effect unless using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall but I'm not quite picturing that right now) and I do understand why the rudder is still effective. But I don't get the "picking up a wing with the rudder thing", to the point that I'm not even sure if you use same-side or opposite rudder.

If I were sitting in the cockpit while this was going on, I'd be real tempted to look at the turn coordinator and use whichever rudder was indicated by that, with the obvious goal of keeping the ball centered. Short of that, my gut says opposite rudder because we want to essentially initiate a turn opposite the direction in which the wing is rolling and because PARE calls for opposite rudder in spin recovery -- but I don't understand exactly why it works.

My best guess is that we're turning the aircraft and speeding up the outside wing, which will tend to reduce or eliminate the stall on that side. But that's a WAG and I could believe that the relative wind and the dihedral are also coming into play. So please, someone, help this poor student understand. :p

Thanks!
Click to expand...

You're over complicating it. In a trainer like a 172 or 150 or something like a Citabria--if you keep the airplane in the stall it will mush towards the ground. It is likely that a wing will drop. For example the right wing may drop and the airplane will start to bank to the right. If you add left rudder you can "pick the wing back up" so you'll be wings level again. You try to keep wings level by "picking up the falling wing" with opposite rudder. Nothing complicated about it, right wing falls, add left rudder. Left wing falls, add right rudder.

It is a pretty simple thing to do. Just stall and keep the yoke/stick back. Don't let the airplane recover. Use the rudder to keep wings level. It's possible that you might need to relieve a little yoke pressure to stay in the falling leaf. If you hold them too heavily in the stall it is likely that you'll lose elevator authority and the airplane will recover on its own even with the yoke / stick held to the stops. (something like a 172 will do this depending on W&B).

I think people confuse this because they think well "HOLD THE STICK BACK TO THE STOPS" and that is how you do it. That might work sometimes and it might not work other times. Often you need to releive a little pressure so you can remain in the stall, otherwise the airplane will fall out when it loses elevator authority.

Try it someday in a typical trainer. Hold the yoke to the stops. Don't let it recover. Eventually it'll recover all by itself even with the yoke to the stops. The nose will fall, you'll gain airspeed, and then the nose will come back up..and stall again. I've seen 172s do this. When this occurs in order to do the falling leaf you need to enter the stall and relieve a *TINY* bit of pressure after a little bit of time. If you do it right and keep wings level with rudder you can stay in the stall all the way into the ground.

Blah. I just read what I wrote..and I'm mumbling. But it's late and I'm not going to fix it..so deal :)
 
Last edited:
bobmrg said:
IMHO what has been described is not a stall recovery followed by a secondary, but a stick-all-the-way-back continuous stall...no relaxation of back pressure thus no recovery. It is the gold-plated way to teach a student the importance of the rudder at high angles of attack/low airspeed, because every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder, and that it is not the throttle that breaks the stall.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Bob, some airplanes, depending on W&B, will recover from the stall even with the stick all the way back to the stops. In order to remain in the falling leaf you *MIGHT* need to enter the stall and relieve a little pressure a little while later to avoid the self-recovery caused by the stall deepening which may cause a loss of elevator authority. But for the most part, yes, you keep the yoke/stick back to the stops the entire time.
 
Last edited:
qbynewbie said:
But I'm not getting the "every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder" thing. I can understand why the ailerons are not likely to be effective (although I don't see how they can have the opposite effect unless using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall but I'm not quite picturing that right now) and I do understand why the rudder is still effective. But I don't get the "picking up a wing with the rudder thing", to the point that I'm not even sure if you use same-side or opposite rudder.

If I were sitting in the cockpit while this was going on, I'd be real tempted to look at the turn coordinator and use whichever rudder was indicated by that, with the obvious goal of keeping the ball centered. Short of that, my gut says opposite rudder because we want to essentially initiate a turn opposite the direction in which the wing is rolling and because PARE calls for opposite rudder in spin recovery -- but I don't understand exactly why it works.

My best guess is that we're turning the aircraft and speeding up the outside wing, which will tend to reduce or eliminate the stall on that side. But that's a WAG and I could believe that the relative wind and the dihedral are also coming into play. So please, someone, help this poor student understand. :p

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I think You're doing pretty good. Engineers who really understand aerodynamics will probbaly cringe but...

Yes, the ailerons can have the opposite effect because "using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall." Aileron increases AoA - that's how it increases lift to bank and turn the airplane. The stall happens when the critical AoA is exceeded and a cause of a wing drop is (in the vernacular) one wing being "more stalled" than the other. Increasing the AoA on the "more stalled" wing makes the situation worse.

As to the rudder, it's really the same as any other use of the rudder - to control yaw. In this case the yaw is in the direction of the dropped wing. To visualize, the dropped wing is not simply a bank with the nose straight ahead - it is a bank accompanied by yaw in the direction of the bank. Think of it as a pre-incipient spin. Lifting the wing with (opposite) rudder is essentially spin recovery technique - power idle (it is), ailerons neutral (aha!), rudder opposite to the direction of yaw (aha! aha!), and elevator to decrease AoA and recover from the stall.

So when we talk about using rudder to lift the wing instead of aileron, we're really just talking about understanding the connection between stalls and spins. It's (or at least it should be) part of out training in spin awareness and recovery (whether or not we do real spins.

(btw, not everyone talks about rudder only in the dipped wing situation. Folks do talk about using coordinated aileron and rudder, but given the effect of the two controls in the dripped wing situation, the net result isn't much different)
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
Bob, some airplanes, depending on W&B, will recover from the stall even with the stick all the way back to the stops. In order to remain in the falling leaf you *MIGHT* need to enter the stall and relieve a little pressure a little while later to avoid the self-recovery caused by the stall deepening which may cause a loss of elevator authority. But for the most part, yes, you keep the yoke/stick back to the stops the entire time.
Click to expand...
If the nose drops and the airplane recovers of it's own accord, I think that's okay. Someone mentioned the left-right-left banking as the picture of the "falling leaf." But maintaining wings level (using rudder to keep the wings from dropping left-right) with the nose bobbing up and down as the airplane stalls-unstalls-stalls, is the "falling leaf" goal I visualize when explaining the maneuver.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I think You're doing pretty good. Engineers who really understand aerodynamics will probbaly cringe but...

Yes, the ailerons can have the opposite effect because "using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall." Aileron increases AoA - that's how it increases lift to bank and turn the airplane. The stall happens when the critical AoA is exceeded and a cause of a wing drop is (in the vernacular) one wing being "more stalled" than the other. Increasing the AoA on the "more stalled" wing makes the situation worse.

As to the rudder, it's really the same as any other use of the rudder - to control yaw. In this case the yaw is in the direction of the dropped wing. To visualize, the dropped wing is not simply a bank with the nose straight ahead - it is a bank accompanied by yaw in the direction of the bank. Think of it as a pre-incipient spin. Lifting the wing with (opposite) rudder is essentially spin recovery technique - power idle (it is), ailerons neutral (aha!), rudder opposite to the direction of yaw (aha! aha!), and elevator to increae AoA and recover from the stall.

So when we talk about using rudder to lift the wing instead of aileron, we're really just talking about understanding the connection between stalls and spins. It's (or at least it should be) part of out training in spin awareness and recovery (whether or not we do real spins.

(btw, not everyone talks about rudder only in the dipped wing situation. Folks do talk about using coordinated aileron and rudder, but given the effect of the two controls in the dripped wing situation, the net result isn't much different)
Click to expand...

Mark,

Thank you!

Sometimes you have to hear something said in a particular way. This helped a lot! Thanks! :)
 
qbynewbie said:
Mark,

Thank you!

Sometimes you have to hear something said in a particular way. This helped a lot! Thanks! :)
Click to expand...
You are welcome.

btw, I just edited the earlier post to make a correction, just in case no one else noticed that my brain headed in the opposite direction of my fingers. :rofl:
 
midlifeflyer said:
If the nose drops and the airplane recovers of it's own accord, I think that's okay. Someone mentioned the left-right-left banking as the picture of the "falling leaf." But maintaining wings level (using rudder to keep the wings from dropping left-right) with the nose bobbing up and down as the airplane stalls-unstalls-stalls, is the "falling leaf" goal I visualize when explaining the maneuver.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, and that does make a little sense, but often when it falls out of the stall it's not that fun as it gains a nice amount of airspeed. Both are good tools though--and I think people confuse them--as there really is no way to source an official definition.
 
The Cessna series -- especially the C172, C205/206/210 (when fwd loaded, which is typical in training) have enough washout in the wing that when the wing root stalls the ailerons still have some effectiveness when stalling straight ahead or in a coordinated turn.

Once a wing drops, aileron use will most likely increase AOA beyond critical.

The Beech Skipper requires pro spin aileron in order to enter spin -- there is that much washout.
 
Anyway, as to the use of power...all stall practice should be 'in various configurations' of power.

The feeling and effect of the controls vary according to power set, most especially in a propeller thrusting airplane, which most of us learn in.

I like to intoduce the stall in it's initial simplicity with a little power on. Maybe about 1500 rpm or so. This gives the elevator and rudder a good bit of slipstream to be more effective and responsive, so that the initial student gets quicker feedback as to control forces and pitch/yaw movements. In most trainer aircraft the 'feeling' of the approach, the 'burble', 'the loosening of the controls', the slowing of the slipstram sound, all these indicators are at their peak and indicating the best and the controls are responding the best at arond 12-1500rpm and recovering only with flight controls and not power - just to get the feel.

Using some power also causes less loss of altitude as you 'fall', so I use that technique most. Then I proceed to full power-off and full power-on. There are big differences that every student needs to get full control of.
 
qbynewbie said:
Bob, can you explain this a bit more, please? I'm sitting in my hotel in NYC and trying to envision this.

I'm very comfortable with power-off stalls and power-on stalls. I actually think they're kind of fun. And I want to try the kind of stall described in this thread with my CFI when I get back to Glens Falls later in the week.

But I'm not getting the "every time a wing drops it is picked up with rudder" thing. I can understand why the ailerons are not likely to be effective (although I don't see how they can have the opposite effect unless using an aileron in a stall will increase the angle of attack and deepen the stall but I'm not quite picturing that right now) and I do understand why the rudder is still effective. But I don't get the "picking up a wing with the rudder thing", to the point that I'm not even sure if you use same-side or opposite rudder.

If I were sitting in the cockpit while this was going on, I'd be real tempted to look at the turn coordinator and use whichever rudder was indicated by that, with the obvious goal of keeping the ball centered. Short of that, my gut says opposite rudder because we want to essentially initiate a turn opposite the direction in which the wing is rolling and because PARE calls for opposite rudder in spin recovery -- but I don't understand exactly why it works.

My best guess is that we're turning the aircraft and speeding up the outside wing, which will tend to reduce or eliminate the stall on that side. But that's a WAG and I could believe that the relative wind and the dihedral are also coming into play. So please, someone, help this poor student understand. :p

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Using rudder to pick up a wing changes the AOA of the wings. As a wing drops we begin a descending turn, and in such a turn the inside wing has a higher AOA, even if the airplane is coordinated. Inducing a slip, which is basically what opposite rudder does, decreases the AOA difference between the wings, might even reverse it, and tends to lift the falling wing. It's the opposite of a skid, which increases the AOA of the inside wing and is pro-spin.
I built an AOA demonstration table here using 1/4" rod to represent relative wins. It has two tracks, one for each wing of a model airplane, and three sets of those tracks: one straight set with level and climb/descent grades, one representing a level turn and one representing a climbing or descending turn. It makes everything clear. I did this because students were having difficulty grasping the AOA changes in various phases, and did not understand the effects of accelerated stalls. I need to post pictures of this thing somewhere. I don't know why other schools don't do the same thing.

Dan
________
herbalaire vaporizer
 
Last edited:
Picking up the wing by using the rudder was one of the things my instructor taught in slow flight. It was a simple lesson: see that the ailerons don't produce a rapid response but this rudder thingy produces an immediate response in restoring level flight.

The real revelation came when the DPE showed the same trick in cruise and made it clear that it was a smoooooother way to fly on a bumpy day. Now I remind myself to use the rudder more but still fall back on aileron control in reflex response situations (gusting crosswind takeoffs/landings are just loverly aren't they?). Anyway, gotta keep working at it.
 
Clark1961 said:
The real revelation came when the DPE showed the same trick in cruise and made it clear that it was a smoooooother way to fly on a bumpy day. QUOTE]
My DPE called the rudder trick the poor man's wing leveler. When you need two hands to wrestle with a sectional just use the rudder to keep level.

-Skip
Click to expand...
 
Skip Miller said:
Clark1961 said:
The real revelation came when the DPE showed the same trick in cruise and made it clear that it was a smoooooother way to fly on a bumpy day.
Click to expand...
My DPE called the rudder trick the poor man's wing leveler. When you need two hands to wrestle with a sectional just use the rudder to keep level.

-Skip
Click to expand...
When letting a youngster take the controls of the plane, I "help" keep the wings level with the rudder.
 
qbynewbie said:
If I were sitting in the cockpit while this was going on, I'd be real tempted to look at the turn coordinator and use whichever rudder was indicated by that, with the obvious goal of keeping the ball centered.
Click to expand...

Others have already addressed most of this already I think, so let me zero in on the above temptation:

Don't do it!

This exercise, and the time period immediately surrounding any stall departure for that matter, is highly dynamic. And if you're VFR anyway (which is where most of us are most of the time), looking outside provides far more immediate and accurate information than those instruments, which are lagging more and more the more dynamic the scenario. Plus, you won't be as likely to get sick staring inside the cockpit with all of the sensory commotion going on outside.

The slip/skid ball is the least reliable at this point, too! In fact, the closer you get to an actual spin departure (the rudder stall exercise is a series of mini-spin departures rapidly corrected by the pilot), the less reliable the ball.

Moreover, once a true spin departure has occurred, the ball becomes a totally unreliable indicator of yaw/spin direction.

Whenever it's available, look outside for information.

BTW, power-idle rudder stalls tend to be quite benign in most airplanes, so I do them with students with the power set at around 1300-1500 rpm -- much more interesting and dynamic. Plus the little bit of engine effects contribute more to the mix.

Rich
www.richstowell.com
 
rstowell said:
Others have already addressed most of this already I think, so let me zero in on the above temptation:

Don't do it!

This exercise, and the time period immediately surrounding any stall departure for that matter, is highly dynamic. And if you're VFR anyway (which is where most of us are most of the time), looking outside provides far more immediate and accurate information than those instruments, which are lagging more and more the more dynamic the scenario. Plus, you won't be as likely to get sick staring inside the cockpit with all of the sensory commotion going on outside.

The slip/skid ball is the least reliable at this point, too! In fact, the closer you get to an actual spin departure (the rudder stall exercise is a series of mini-spin departures rapidly corrected by the pilot), the less reliable the ball.

Moreover, once a true spin departure has occurred, the ball becomes a totally unreliable indicator of yaw/spin direction.

Whenever it's available, look outside for information.

BTW, power-idle rudder stalls tend to be quite benign in most airplanes, so I do them with students with the power set at around 1300-1500 rpm -- much more interesting and dynamic. Plus the little bit of engine effects contribute more to the mix.

Rich
www.richstowell.com
Click to expand...

Rich,

Thanks! I appreciate the input very much; you've helped me learn something tonight.

I've already told my CFI that we're going to practice this the next time we get up, to which he quickly assented. Unfortunately, the weather prevented any flying last week. Hopefully, this week will be better.

As an aside, I'm still waiting to receive the copy of your book I ordered through Amazon. I've been told it was shipped, so I hope it will arrive soon. If Diana says that it is very good, well, that's high praised indeed! :yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top