Full Flap Full Power Stall

That explains it. Lightly loaded my 180 is at full nose-up trim and I still have to pull to slow it down. Letting my yoke go would make an automatic recovery.

It sounds like the OP is pretty self-critical. If a pilot is uncomfortable with intentional stalls he needs to find an instructor to help him understand stalls and become comfortable with them. In real flying you don't need to be good at stalls, just good at recognizing and avoiding them. Some guys will never fly slow enough for that to be very important. Some guys will fly that slow regularly. A controlled stall is just an exercise. That's my perspective, anyway. Mastery of the airplane requires understanding the airplane.
 
bartmc said:
I did 1 (ONE) in my bo with the gear down :nono: Never seen an instructor turn white like that before....or again.
Click to expand...
The big problem with doing a full-power stall in a high performance/complex airplane like a Bonanza with only trainee and instructor aboard is that it will probably go well past 30 nose-up before it stalls. Keep in mind too that a full-power stall like that is beyond what was tested in the aircraft's certification tests:
(5) Power:
... (ii) For reciprocating engine powered airplanes: 75 percent of maximum continuous power. However, if the power-to-weight ratio at 75 percent of maximum continuous power results in nose-high attitudes exceeding 30 degrees, the test may be carried out with the power required for level flight in the landing configuration at maximum landing weight and a speed of 1.4 VSO, except that the power may not be less than 50 percent of maximum continuous power;
Click to expand...
See 14 CFR 23.201 for details.
 
Ron Levy said:
The big problem with doing a full-power stall in a high performance/complex airplane like a Bonanza with only trainee and instructor aboard is that it will probably go well past 30 nose-up before it stalls. Keep in mind too that a full-power stall like that is beyond what was tested in the aircraft's certification tests:
See 14 CFR 23.201 for details.
Click to expand...

Ron,

Would you agree that when doing Chandelles for Commercial we take it close to the stall for the reasons you mentioned? I know only to take it near the stall but no one ever told me why not to stall it other than it would bust the maneuver. Thinking Piper Arrow here.

David
 
Go full power, full flaps, full rear trim. Stall the sh#t out of it. Then hit full left rudder and go into an accelerated spin. Then say "YOUR AIRPLANE!".
 
coloradobluesky said:
Go full power, full flaps, full rear trim. Stall the sh#t out of it. Then hit full left rudder and go into an accelerated spin. Then say "YOUR AIRPLANE!".
Click to expand...

I will make sure I am wearing my skydiving rig just in case. LOL

David
 
Ron Levy said:
The FAA isn't going to give anyone a free pass on whatever items they didn't get to before the failure was issued, and I don't think that's an illogical or nonsensical position to take.
Click to expand...


Won't the DPE ask the student if he wants to continue the test, even though the DPE has failed him for something? If they continue, then the next time the student and DPE go up, they only need to go over the failed item. Right?
 
This "legal" back-and-forth about what can be tested is why our training process has become "teach to the test", and the test does not, and never has been meant to include all pilot operations.
When the instructor signs the recommendation for the checkride, the statement he signs says he has instructed and observed you in all pilot operations and considers you competent in all pilot operations.
Not just competent in PTS, but ALL pilot operations.
Which means being in control of the airplane in all possible configurations.
And the DPE must agree.
The maneuvers listed in the PTS give specific standards, such as heading/altitude control, but any possible situation is testable, but with no specific standards, other than the basic aircraft control question. Are you in control or not?
The flight instructor is the one who has trained and observed the applicant in daily operations outlined in the FTH and POH and many many other publications.
Each maneuver/procedure in the PTS references other pubs for which the CFI and applicant are responsible to know.and have knowledge and skill.
The test is a sampling of the total required knowledge and skill in the references.
Teaching and expecting to be competent at PTS maneuvers only was never meant to produce a safe.competent pilot.
If it is possible to stall with full power and full flaps, you should be able to handle.it, don'cha think?
 
Rigged4Flight said:
Won't the DPE ask the student if he wants to continue the test, even though the DPE has failed him for something? If they continue, then the next time the student and DPE go up, they only need to go over the failed item. Right?
Click to expand...

He said FAA not DPE. My advice stands to not take the freebie with the FSDO.
 
Ron Levy said:
The big problem with doing a full-power stall in a high performance/complex airplane like a Bonanza with only trainee and instructor aboard is that it will probably go well past 30 nose-up before it stalls. Keep in mind too that a full-power stall like that is beyond what was tested in the aircraft's certification tests:
See 14 CFR 23.201 for details.
Click to expand...

That was in the Rocky mountains and we were above 8500' and it was his idea. We were nose high no doubt, but I don't think it was 30 degrees. Really wish we hadn't done it, now I hate stalling my plane.
 
flhrci said:
Would you agree that when doing Chandelles for Commercial we take it close to the stall for the reasons you mentioned?
Click to expand...
Not that close, and not with full flaps. Or are you asking if that's the reason we don't take it all the way to the stall rather than to the point where climb stops? If the latter, it's because you start descending due to the giant drag rise past CLmax before you reach the stall break, and the idea of a Chandelle is maximum altitude gain -- going past CLmax would result in losing altitude past the peak point.
 
Rigged4Flight said:
Won't the DPE ask the student if he wants to continue the test, even though the DPE has failed him for something? If they continue, then the next time the student and DPE go up, they only need to go over the failed item. Right?
Click to expand...
The DPE has the option of asking the applicant whether s/he wants to continue, but it's not a requirement, and it's an option which for a variety of reasons DPE's usually do not exercise.
 
nosehair said:
This "legal" back-and-forth about what can be tested is why our training process has become "teach to the test", and the test does not, and never has been meant to include all pilot operations.
When the instructor signs the recommendation for the checkride, the statement he signs says he has instructed and observed you in all pilot operations and considers you competent in all pilot operations.
Not just competent in PTS, but ALL pilot operations.
Click to expand...
Can you quote the regulation which says that? I can't find it in Part 61 or the recommended endorsements in AC 61-65E.
 
bartmc said:
That was in the Rocky mountains and we were above 8500' and it was his idea. We were nose high no doubt, but I don't think it was 30 degrees. Really wish we hadn't done it, now I hate stalling my plane.
Click to expand...
Even if it didn't violate 91.307(c)(2), a full power/full flap stall/recovery is still not a Task in the PP-Airplane PTS, and thus is not fair game for the test or a legal reason to bust someone on that test.
 
bartmc said:
He said FAA not DPE. My advice stands to not take the freebie with the FSDO.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter whether it's a DPE or an FAA Inspector -- when the applicant busts a Task, the examiner has the option to terminate the ride at that point, and cannot continue the ride without the applicant's concurrence. And on the "freebie" with the FSDO after a successful appeal, the Inspector does the entire ride as though the original ride with the DPE had never happened. That said, if the applicant chooses not to appeal but rather retest with a DPE, the DPE for the retest need not retest any Tasks successfully completed on the failed ride and listed as such on the Notice of Disapproval.
 
Ron Levy said:
Nothing gray about it. Either the POH includes full-flap takeoffs or it doesn't, and I don't know of any light single POH which does.
Click to expand...

I know of one: the 1948 Cessna 170 short field technique described in the owner's manual calls for full flaps...but the flaps on the '48 are pretty small and nothing like the flaps on later Cessnas.
 
Ron Levy said:
Not that close, and not with full flaps. Or are you asking if that's the reason we don't take it all the way to the stall rather than to the point where climb stops? If the latter, it's because you start descending due to the giant drag rise past CLmax before you reach the stall break, and the idea of a Chandelle is maximum altitude gain -- going past CLmax would result in losing altitude past the peak point.
Click to expand...

The latter.
 
Ron Levy said:
. And on the "freebie" with the FSDO after a successful appeal, the Inspector does the entire ride as though the original ride with the DPE had never happened. That said, if the applicant chooses not to appeal but rather retest with a DPE, the DPE for the retest need not retest any Tasks successfully completed on the failed ride and listed as such on the Notice of Disapproval.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this from?
 
Ron Levy said:
FAA Orders 8900.1 and 8900.2, and 14 CFR.61.43.
Click to expand...

Yes, where in those orders? References?

Nevermind, found it:

8900.2

29. Review of an Examiner’s Decision. An applicant who is not satisfied with an examiner’s decision may obtain another practical test or appropriate reevaluation from an ASI without prejudice. In such cases, the applicant must be given the complete test, including any Areas of Operation already approved by the examiner. The applicant must prepare a new FAA Form 8710-1 or FAA Form 8710-11, as appropriate, and the ASI must complete a new certification file. Following the test, both the examiner’s and the ASI’s certification files are forwarded to AFS-760. The ASI’s report determines if a certificate is issued. The ASI should discuss the test results with the examiner.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Can you quote the regulation which says that? I can't find it in Part 61 or the recommended endorsements in AC 61-65E.
Click to expand...

Well, shut my mouth! I just looked up the 8710 (pilot applicant form) to quote it word for word in the box where the instructor signs, but now it just says "...consider this person ready to take the test."

So that gives me much insight into why/how we have sorta lost the big picture of competent pilot training and focusing on the canned maneuvers.

So, does anyone think we should have pilots who can only perform PTS maneuvers?
Anyone ?
 
Ron Levy said:
Doesn't matter whether it's a DPE or an FAA Inspector -- when the applicant busts a Task, the examiner has the option to terminate the ride at that point, and cannot continue the ride without the applicant's concurrence. And on the "freebie" with the FSDO after a successful appeal, the Inspector does the entire ride as though the original ride with the DPE had never happened. That said, if the applicant chooses not to appeal but rather retest with a DPE, the DPE for the retest need not retest any Tasks successfully completed on the failed ride and listed as such on the Notice of Disapproval.
Click to expand...

Isn't the option the candidate's? I thought the DE has to inform you you busted the ride. At that point the DPE can offer the option to continue (or not) but unless the candidate at that time decides to continue, it's over.
 
nosehair said:
Well, shut my mouth! I just looked up the 8710 (pilot applicant form) to quote it word for word in the box where the instructor signs, but now it just says "...consider this person ready to take the test."

So that gives me much insight into why/how we have sorta lost the big picture of competent pilot training and focusing on the canned maneuvers.

So, does anyone think we should have pilots who can only perform PTS maneuvers?
Click to expand...
The FAA seems to think that's OK.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Isn't the option the candidate's?
Click to expand...
Both must agree to continue. See FAA Orders 8900.1 for Inspectors and 8900.2 for DPE's.

I thought the DE has to inform you you busted the ride.
Click to expand...
That is correct.

At that point the DPE can offer the option to continue (or not) but unless the candidate at that time decides to continue, it's over.
Click to expand...
Correct -- the DPE is permitted offer that option, but does not have to. Likewise, if the DPE offers the option, the applicant can decline. So, as I said, once a Task is failed, the ride is over unless both applicant and examiner agree to continue.
 
nosehair said:
Well, shut my mouth! I just looked up the 8710 (pilot applicant form) to quote it word for word in the box where the instructor signs, but now it just says "...consider this person ready to take the test."

So that gives me much insight into why/how we have sorta lost the big picture of competent pilot training and focusing on the canned maneuvers.

So, does anyone think we should have pilots who can only perform PTS maneuvers?
Anyone ?
Click to expand...

IMHO the OP's certificate should include this proviso: "Holder may execute only those procedures/maneuvers demonstrated to DE Joe Blow. Other privileges may be added through endorsements."


Bob Gardner
 
Stewartb said:
I must be out of the loop. What's a trim stall?

STOL operators are always looking for the slowest way to operate. The slowest way I know is to use full flaps and enough power to maintain altitude. Cross the line and it stalls. No big deal. Lower the nose a little or add more power and it's flying. I don't understand the problem.
Click to expand...

They are talking about full power with full flaps and full nose up trim which is what you would have if you did a panic go around. I've never really understood why some people think you need to do that when there is no obstacle. Just ease the power back on, re trim and raise the flaps after gaining some speed and altitude. You don't have to shoot for the moon.
 
Early in my 180 ownership my transition instructor had me do normal short field landings to an actual short-ish field. Without back taxiing, re-trimming, or re-setting flaps (40*) he had me do take-offs from a standing start. There were obstacles at the departure end. The point of the drill was to understand the forces I'd encounter in a full flap go-around. Not a big deal. In fact it was fun. To take one to a stall break? Not necessary. The stall in that configuration is very easy to recognize and avoidance is as simple as lowering the nose just a little bit. That may be a valuable exercise but taking it through the buffet to a stall break is a waste of time.
 
Last edited:
Silvaire said:
They are talking about full power with full flaps and full nose up trim which is what you would have if you did a panic go around. I've never really understood why some people think you need to do that when there is no obstacle. Just ease the power back on, re trim and raise the flaps after gaining some speed and altitude. You don't have to shoot for the moon.
Click to expand...


+1

Same as every instructor I've ever had when you roll out on the runway they want you to firewall the throttle.

I ease into it up to full power if it's a 5000' runway.
 
nosehair said:
Yeah, I have no response to that, except that the FAA is not in the pilot training business.
Click to expand...
State MVA/DMV's are not in the driver training business, state labor departments are not in the barber training business, etc., etc., but they all set the rules on who is permitted to exercise those privileges. That's the way it is.

BTW, 50 years ago, the FAA did not say exactly which tasks would/would not be included on pilot/flight instructor practical tests. Nobody liked that system because there were too many surprises -- which is why we have the PTS structure we have today, including the prohibition on examiners inventing their own requirements.
 
Silvaire said:
They are talking about full power with full flaps and full nose up trim which is what you would have if you did a panic go around. I've never really understood why some people think you need to do that when there is no obstacle. Just ease the power back on, re trim and raise the flaps after gaining some speed and altitude. You don't have to shoot for the moon.
Click to expand...

I still don't know how you do a trim stall when the trim won't take you down to stall speed.:dunno:
 
Silvaire said:
They are talking about full power with full flaps and full nose up trim which is what you would have if you did a panic go around. I've never really understood why some people think you need to do that when there is no obstacle. Just ease the power back on, re trim and raise the flaps after gaining some speed and altitude. You don't have to shoot for the moon.
Click to expand...
I think the keyword is panic. When a go around begins with "oh crap", it's pretty easy to screw some aspect of it up. Throttle, carb heat, incremental flaps, heading, vertical rate, altitude, obstacles, radio, other traffic, etc. It's admittedly something I should spend more time practicing too.
 
Henning said:
I still don't know how you do a trim stall when the trim won't take you down to stall speed.:dunno:
Click to expand...

At idle power it won't, but flaps and full power in some airplanes (172s, e.g.) gives you a lot of nose up moment. It also gives you opportunity for sudden uncoordinated flight if you use the rudders as footrests.

Part 23 requires trim stability at takeoff configuration, climb configuration, and approach configuration. None of these include full flaps and full power.

You also stall at critical AoA. This is only equivalent to a stall speed if that speed is steady. Lots of AoA fun can happen if you change attitude very suddenly.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
I still don't know how you do a trim stall when the trim won't take you down to stall speed.:dunno:
Click to expand...

Yep. More like a trim-induced climb followed by a slow pitch oscillation.

MAKG1 said:
At idle power it won't, but flaps and full power in some airplanes (172s, e.g.) gives you a lot of nose up moment. It also gives you opportunity for sudden uncoordinated flight if you use the rudders as footrests.
Click to expand...

Pitching even steeply nose up doesn't necessarily mean you will stall. It means you may fly a tight parabolic arc into a pitch oscillation. I would like to ride through an actual trim stall in a 172.

It's similar to the folks who claim that if your engine quits on climb-out that you must quickly pitch the nose down to avoid a stall. Well, if you don't pitch the nose down, your airspeed will diminish, but you will not stall unless you are dumb enough to yank the yoke into your lap. You will not stall, but fly a parabolic arc over the top. But in a real engine out situation, you might as well pitch the nose over, maintain airspeed, and get on with the landing.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
At idle power it won't, but flaps and full power in some airplanes (172s, e.g.) gives you a lot of nose up moment. It also gives you opportunity for sudden uncoordinated flight if you use the rudders as footrests.

Part 23 requires trim stability at takeoff configuration, climb configuration, and approach configuration. None of these include full flaps and full power.

You also stall at critical AoA. This is only equivalent to a stall speed if that speed is steady. Lots of AoA fun can happen if you change attitude very suddenly.
Click to expand...

Critical AoA is compared to relative wind. If you are trimmed for a flying speed and go from idle power to full power, the AoA will remain constant and the relative wind changes as the excess power is turned into climb. That is what trim does. The transitory torque and prop forces will cause a bauble, not a stall.
 
Ok, whatever. Maybe someone wants to come take me for a demo ride and show me how to do one, because in over 2500 hrs including several instances of bailing out of an approach full flaps and full throttle, I have never come close to producing one. :dunno:
 
RoscoeT said:
Pitching even steeply nose up doesn't necessarily mean you will stall. It means you may fly a tight parabolic arc into a pitch oscillation. I would like to ride through an actual trim stall in a 172..
Click to expand...

This does not occur behind the power curve. The additional power slows you down at constant trim unless you also pitch down. Surely, you've tried an approach at altitude at 50 knots in a 172? If not, you should.

And the assumption that AoA is constant throughout is wrong. It's the steady-state solution. The transient "bauble" will stall if it exceeds the critical AoA even momentarily.
 
Henning,

Apparently you've got little or no time in a Cessna. If I'm trimmed for 65-70mph with full flaps at typical approach power and rate of descent and apply full power? The nose will rise and airspeed will decay very rapidly unless I apply forward pressure to the yoke. It will require a surprising amount of forward pressure t maintain flying speed, too, and I suspect that's what the OP was supposed to be learning. There is nothing dangerous about it but until you've experienced the aircraft's response to power, the required control pressure to counter the pitch-up, and the view of your airplane climbing at a very high rate with a nearly flat attitude? You probably shouldn't counsel others about it.

Just sayin'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top