flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Why is there no published power-on stall speed?
I'll leave it at that for now, and leave my speculation out of it.
I'll leave it at that for now, and leave my speculation out of it.
POH/Aerodyamics question
- Thread starter flyingcheesehead
- Start date
Greg Bockelman
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,091
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
Because there are too many variables?
nosehair
Cleared for Takeoff
I'm guessing because there is no FAA requirement to establish and publish it. The only reason a power-off stall speed is published is FAA mandate and to be able to calculate an approach to landing speed.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Are you sure about that? Isn't a stall speed is stall speed regardless of whether you have power in or not. It's an AoA thing, not an RPM thing.
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
It is an AoA thing, but it is NOT a speed thing. In our 182, power off stall = Vx. You get a lot of lift from the prop wash apparently! And if the engine fails, ya better nose over NOW.
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Okay, so then... Why doesn't the FAA have such a requirement?
tonycondon
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
not just lift due to prop wash, but also the vertical component of thrust.
too many variables? prop/engine combination, engine age/condition
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
But... Aren't there quite a few variables anyway (power off)? And doesn't the existence of a "stall speed" promote the idea among students that stalls are based on speed and not angle of attack?
tonycondon
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
power off would eliminate engine/prop and engine age/condition variables. perhaps you would still have issues with wing contamination or something like that.
"stall speed" can promote that idea if you dont qualify it with a flight condition disclaimer
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Vx = Vs1?
That doesn't sound right.
23.65
(a)(4) A climb speed not less than the greater of 1.1 VMC and 1.2 VS1 for multiengine airplanes and not less than 1.2 VS1 for single—engine airplanes.
and 23.69
(a)(4) A climb speed not less than 1.3 VS1.
That doesn't sound right.
23.65
(a)(4) A climb speed not less than the greater of 1.1 VMC and 1.2 VS1 for multiengine airplanes and not less than 1.2 VS1 for single—engine airplanes.
and 23.69
(a)(4) A climb speed not less than 1.3 VS1.
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
Require AoA indicators in every airplane and get rid of Vs0. Problem solved. Until that happens students are going to want some type of number. Hell--I like to look at Vs0 for an airplane before I fly it. Not because I expect the airplane to only stall at this airspeed and exactly at this airspeed everytime. I do it because it gives me an idea with regards to the flight characteristics of the airplane.
My preferred technique for teaching myself how to fly an airplane is to take off and climb to a safe altitude away from the airport. Do some stalls followed by slow flight as slow as I possibly can get it combined with turns. After I do this the level of control that I have over the airplane during the landing phase is way higher. Sometimes I will go ahead and do a simulated landing in the air by putting it in the landing configuration at the airspeed that I have deemed appropriate based on the above flying. I'll fly it down to whatever the predetermined altitude is and pull back to flare. At that point I can see how long I float above this altitude before I finally stall. The secret to this is that you need to do it first in an airplane you're familiar with at a landing speed you're familiar with. You'll get an idea of what it should look and feel like in other airplanes since it's obviously not the same without the runway a foot below you combined with the increased lift due to ground effect.
nosehair
Cleared for Takeoff
Good. That is a good description of the way we are all supposed to teach power off stalls. That is the main purpose of stall practice - to be in control during the landing flare, which is a stall onto the runway.
AoA indicators would be so much better, but, you know, they're way too expensive, or so I've been told.
Airplane manufacturers don't make POH's for student pilots. They are written to pilot knowledge level. We are supposed to know that this published speed is in a specific condition: Gross weight, standard day, power off, and at an AoA rate increase of 1 degree per second.
Power on could be full power-some power - a little power- a lotta power, etc. Even if you go with full power, that changes with altitude, engine condition, angle of engine thrust, etc. Think of a helicopter. That has vertical thrust enough to not stall at all. Same with a big engine, you will get way, way below power off stall speed, because you don't reach stall AoA at the same speed as when power off.
Asking why the FAA dosn't mandate power on stall speeds is like asking why our government doesn't provide that our children get good medical care and good education.
The government isn't in the business of looking out for our welfare. They are in the business of looking out for their own welfare.
Steve
En-Route
http://www.hciaviation.com/prod-aoa-a.shtml
Oh, you chose not to go with experimental category?...sorry...my bad
Oh, you chose not to go with experimental category?...sorry...my bad
tonycondon
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
heh heh, nice steve. the Dynon 10A also has provisions for an AoA indicator. Very handy.
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Vs1=63 mph
Vx=63 mph
Vy=90 mph
I'll show you the POH if you want.
EdFred said:
Not applicable. You missed a very important part of the reg:
14 CFR 23.65 said:
They have to show a climb gradient with that speed. So, the 182 must have a climb gradient of 8.3 percent or more, at a speed faster than Vx. (I can vouch for that, the climb gradient at Vx is pretty insane.)
EdFred said:
Again, you're missing an important part of the reg:
14 CFR 23.69 said:
Similar to above. They're not saying that "climb speed" must be above 1.3VS1, they're saying that they need to demonstrate certain climbing abilities above that speed.
Were it as you stated, they also do not define "climb speed." If the limits were as you posted, I'm sure they could simply use Vy which is 1.43Vs1.
CJones
Final Approach
Yep.. There are a lot of AoA indicators flying in RV's today. #1 reason being that there is no 'stall warning horn' built into the RV's. We've considered adding the AoA to 7DL, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well, I also saw the "outstanding" Vx performance in that aircraft at a certain fly-in last summer.
Classic
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
The bonus is I'm assuming that you have flaps out when you are climbing at Vx. What is Vs0?
Greg Bockelman
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,091
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
How much warning do you get out of the airframe in a Stall, Chris? In other words, does it buffet much before the break? Does it give you any warning?
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well, I also saw the "outstanding" Vx performance in that aircraft at a certain fly-in last summer.
That wasn't Vx. That was Vx minus 15!
flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
In a single the main difference comes from the vertical component of the thrust vector providing some of the "lift". In a twin the difference is far more significant because idling engines and windmilling props really mess up the airflow over a substantial portion of the wing. That increases the load on the remainder of the wing and that requires more IAS at the critical AOA. Conversely running high power blows a lot of air across the top and bottom of the middle part of the wings and this generates more lift at the same AOA and IAS or the same lift at the critical AOA and less IAS. In my airplane the difference in stall speed between both engines at idle and both at full power is close to 10 KIAS. In the Bonanza I used to have (same wings) the difference was 2-3 KCAS
CJones
Final Approach
Nope.. Not much buffet at all. Still pretty responsive at severely slow speeds and a pretty clean break to recovery. I'll show you at Gaston's.
Greg Bockelman
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 11,091
- Location
- Lone Jack, MO
- Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
PHXAvi8tor
Pre-takeoff checklist
I gotta demonstrate power-on stalls this afternoon, so I'll check the following:
If my memory is correct, you'll feel the buffet and be hearing the stall warning horn at the bottom of the white arc on the airspeed indicator -- the same place as in a power-off stall.
Reason? Angle of attack, primarily. You just happen to have a lot of thrust going, and with a high pitch attitude (simulated takeoff configuration in training), things look different. But, the wing's still at the same old critical angle of attack.
In any case, I'll make a note this afternoon to try to remember to check that and report back.
If my memory is correct, you'll feel the buffet and be hearing the stall warning horn at the bottom of the white arc on the airspeed indicator -- the same place as in a power-off stall.
Reason? Angle of attack, primarily. You just happen to have a lot of thrust going, and with a high pitch attitude (simulated takeoff configuration in training), things look different. But, the wing's still at the same old critical angle of attack.
In any case, I'll make a note this afternoon to try to remember to check that and report back.
Bill
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 15,104
- Location
- Southeast Tennessee
- Display Name
Display name:
This page intentionally left blank
If you're in takeoff configuration (partial flaps), would the stall still be at the bottom of white arc, or somewhere between bottom of the green and bottom of the white?
jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
Let the airspeed decay some into the lower range. Give it power and get aggressive with it. If you load the wings up by pulling you'll be able to get it to stall at a higher speed due to the loading. Of course you can also get it to stall at a lower speed if you are more gentle and don't load it up since you'll have thrust on your side. This will vary airplane to airplane. The more thrust and the lighter the airplane the more the rules start to change. I'm willing to bet Chip can stall his Extra 300L at a MUCH lower airspeed power on than off.
Last edited:
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
In most cases, the power-on stall when performed per the PTS occurs at an IAS well below the bottom of the white arc (power-off landing configuration max gross weight 1g stalling IAS, aka Vs0).
nosehair
Cleared for Takeoff
No. It won't be. Check it out. The airspeed color markings are for power off stall. The green arc should stop at the published power off no flaps staal speed, and the white arc stops at the published power off full flaps speed. The power on will get a bit lower before stall.
Full stall that is - don't know where the horn and buffet may start.
Correct, but most small planes have no way to determine the AOA simply since it is dependant on relative wind so you have to calculate your pitch angle with your rate of decent/climb. Due to varying levels of power caused by condition of the engine and altitude, the pitch angle and the speed of stall will vary from situation to situation so publishing either is pointless, you just feel for stall.
For power off, your big variable is accounted for by conditioning the number "at max gross". Altitude is compensated automatically by using IAS. We use airspeed to teach it because most planes a student trains in aren't equiped with an AOA instrument, so airspeed is the most consistent thing to use, and it is also an indicator of kinetic energy carried.
cwyckham
Line Up and Wait
There are two factors that I can see that would decrease the stall speed for a power on stall. First, because some of the thrust is directed downwards, the amount of lift required from the wings is reduced. The effect is identical to reducing the weight of the aircraft. Since less lift is required, the airspeed at the critical angle of attack is reduced.
Second, the wing is broken into two bits, the part with propwash and the part without. The part with prop wash has a high velocity and a lower angle of attack. It will contribute more lift than you would expect based purely on the area (ie. if 1/4 of the wing area is influenced by the propwash, it might be producing 1/3 of the total lift). This again reduces the amount of lift effective lift required of the portion of wing which isn't influenced by the propwash, reducing the airspeed at which the critical angle of attack is reached still further.
Chris
Second, the wing is broken into two bits, the part with propwash and the part without. The part with prop wash has a high velocity and a lower angle of attack. It will contribute more lift than you would expect based purely on the area (ie. if 1/4 of the wing area is influenced by the propwash, it might be producing 1/3 of the total lift). This again reduces the amount of lift effective lift required of the portion of wing which isn't influenced by the propwash, reducing the airspeed at which the critical angle of attack is reached still further.
Chris