Who here has accidentally stalled a plane?

[Seanaldinho]

I have little mini stalls while thermalling all the time. Its a nonevent but I start to notice the controls doing less and less and have to remember to keep the speed up. Its done subconciously now.

Now Ive done it on purposes dozens of time just for giggles.

 

[MAKG1]

Your pet peeve is legitimate, and I accept I was not correct in the use the word exponential. However, if we want to be correct, exponential does not mean something doubles every so and so. It means it increases by some power or exponent every so and so. That exponent can be many things besides 2. And to be further precise and specific banked flight is accelerated flight.

No, exponential is exponential. Whether you characterize that by a 1/e time or a doubling time or whatever base you want is immaterial; one may be readily converted into another.

 

[dmspilot]

Pet peeve here.

"Exponential" means something very specific. It means the stall speed doubles every so-many-degrees. It doesn't behave that way at all.

Vs' = Vs / cos(bank)

It's not that hard, and it's NOT exponential. That assumes coordinated, level flight. If you add in accelerations, all bets are off.

That formula is not correct.

Vs' = Vs * sqrt(load factor).

Load factor in a level turn is 1 / cos(bank), so stall speed in a level turn is:

Vs' = Vs * sqrt(1 / cos(bank))

And a turn is an "acceleration".

 

[MAKG1]

You're right on that square root. Still not exponential.

While a turn is indeed an acceleration, I don't think that helps the discussion much. The load factor thing goes out the window when one starts accelerating vertically (for instance), or goes out of coordination.

 

[dmspilot]

The load factor thing goes out the window when one starts accelerating vertically (for instance), or goes out of coordination.

No it doesn't. The relationship with load factor is still the same no matter what caused the load factor.

Pull 2g out of a dive on a constant heading, the stall speed still increases by a factor of ~ 1.41.

 

[Ken Ibold]

The one I think is somewhat meaningless, is power on stalls. I learn to climb based on airspeed, so I have no idea when I would ever get in a situation where a power on stall is even possible.

That kind of thinking leads to complacency, and complacency is the mortal enemy of every pilot.

I have four friends who no longer breathe because one of them did not think he would get into a situation where a power on stall was even possible.

 

[Velocity173]

Mafoo - I hate to say this but unless you are in "lessons learned" where people can post anon - I doubt you will get many to confess to making mistakes on a public forum. I have seen pilots do this before (and I've done it).... but then when even one reply rips the pilot a new one so to speak they end up keeping their mouth shut going forward.

If you want to ask and get honest answers, try going to local pilot meetings or taking the question offline and in person or via PMs.

Not many pilots who have made mistakes brag about them.... but most, in person anyway, when they see why you are asking the question.... will give you the answers you seek.

How can we be an authority in anything aviation if we ourselves make mistakes? This is an attitude I've experienced many times with fellow instructors. They believe they are infailable and when they do make a mistake they'll not admit it or deflect the issue to something else. You see a lot of instructors who feel the student believes the instructor knows everything. When confronted with a question that they don't know, they get defensive and say "well you don't need to know that anyway."
The instructor (well maybe not Ron) doesn't know everything but you know what, they know far more than the typical student and generally much more than a rated pilot.

Mafoo, we all have made mistakes. If you haven't, then you haven't been flying long enough or you don't do any challenging kind of flying. Admitting a mistake or fault isn't saying one is not capable of being a pilot either. I've instructed hundreds of students and even the best ones who thought they were know it alls, still made errors and they went on to become great pilots. Out of all the people I instructed, maybe 2 had no business in aviation. They made multiple mistakes and lacked even basic aviation knowledge. Flying isn't rocket science. It takes average intelligence, average hand to eye coordination and some common sense.

 

[MAKG1]

No it doesn't. The relationship with load factor is still the same no matter what caused the load factor.

Pull 2g out of a dive on a constant heading, the stall speed still increases by a factor of ~ 1.41.

Imprecise language on my part....

The problem becomes calculating that load factor when you start combining issues. I'm sure you and I can do the vector algebra at a desk, but I couldn't in the middle of a maneuver.

All I meant to say was that if you want to use bank angle to tell you stall speed, you had better have it coordinated and level.

 

[denverpilot]

For reference.....

My experimental is "extremely" overpowered and will go up with the airspeed indicator sitting on 0. I am not really flying, but just being pulling into the air by thrust... If the motor quits during this stunt I am toast.

The Robertson STOL on the 182 behaves somewhat similarly. It keeps the center section of the wing flying via the addition of stall fences. Lots of thrust and lots of drag. One hiccup you're going to be welcomed back to terra firma in spectacular fashion. The ailerons are also downright floppy at those speeds.

You have a lot more ponies than I do, though. I can't quite bring myself to do it anywhere near 0 indicated, but can get it down to 10-20 indicated out in the practice area where there's more room for mistakes.

To get back to the original question... I've had I guess two incipient stalls power-on.

One in the mountains at high altitude... but not particularly high AGL. It was due to a well-known low-performance problem in the high mountains. You have a tendency to set a deck angle and think the climb performance will continue to work, and if you don't watch the VSI, a downdraft will change your performance and you'll be climbing not only against gravity at some anemic rate, but also against the downdraft.

You don't feel any change at all, you're just not going up anymore, and the tendency is to pull back to restore the climb rate your brain thinks is possible from "prior experience" only ten seconds ago. Stall horn may have been chirping in turbulence already which will lower your alertness to it. It goes on steady and you think "just a bigger bump" and then you feel the shudder and realize its a LOT bigger bump. Push forward, now, dummy. (And in the rocks, decide if you need to take your "out" and keep pushing the nose down to start turning NOW.)

The other was a long straight climb from about 1500 MSL all the way up above 10,000 MSL. The airspeed just bleeds down and you're fat dumb and happy with the trim set ignoring it. Didn't really get to the stall, just the horn which apparently woke me up. Wish I had the pulse-ox on when that happened. Would have been interesting to see my heart rate jump.

Also have had one power-off stall horn that got my attention in the pattern on base once. Power up, wings gently back toward level... Pant a couple of times, thinking about what a dummy you just were, and continue the turn to final.

 

[rottydaddy]

many times

I'm guessing you're talking gliders, lol.

Really my only few times where I actually found myself in a stall before recognizing the signs have been flying gliders. The ones i fly usually give some warning, but its bound to happen when you are slow, steep bank, in turbulent air, eyes outside. You learn to just work the wing by feel and recover quickly.
Early this summer I was solo in the 2-33 on a day with strong thermals but gusty wind.... at one point I was right on the edge, working a tight thermal, and i either flew out or a gust cut through, but damned if that glider didn't just start dropping like a rock BEFORE giving the telltale tail-shudder warning. Yaw string went limp, the whole deal. But I had lots of altitude, nobody gaggling, and recovered without flying completely out of the thermal.

In power planes, ive done some pretty slow flying, but never came close to stalling without seeing it coming. You just have to pay attention, especially when turning low and slow.

 

[W. Stewart]

I have not, and share your belief that it would be hard to accidentally stall a plane if one operates in the usual non-extreme-manuevers type of flying that I do.

The only mode of operation that I think most conscientious pilots might be at risk of stalling is the loss of engine power shortly after takeoff. Go out with an instructor on a long runway and have him pull the power on you shortly after takeoff. You will be surprised at how quickly you must lower the nose to retain flying speed. In an actual loss-of-power situation, there would be a moment of disbelief/denial, and waiting too long to lower the nose could prove disastrous.

Wells

 

[jspilot]

Do you mean indicated airspeed, or airspeed? I thought if my plane stalled at say, 60 knots, and the indicated airspeed was at 65 knots, this meant the wind over my wings was traveling at 65 knots, so I will not stall.

If I am diving and the AOA is such that I am in a stall, the airspeed indicator would be less then 65 mph. (with me obviously traveling through the air faster then that)

Is that true?

Not to bring this back up again but I remember one flight in which my CFI showed me how easy it is for the indicated airspeed to be manipulated by angling the pitot tube excessively compared to the relative wind. He gave full right and left rudder input in a 172 and told me to watch the airspeed indicator. Based on the direction he kicked the nose the airspeed indicator started to drop simply because the pitot tube was no longer getting the correct airflow into it even though we never touched the throttle. It was one of those lessons I still rememeber.

 

[MAKG1]

Evading a midair has been mentioned earlier in this thread, and it seems to me to be a potential issue for any pilot. The WVI accident has also been mentioned, and that's hardly extreme flying.

You can get stalled by unexpected turbulence, particularly if you're maneuvering.

And a distraction in the pattern can lead to the base-to-final stall. So can overloading in the presence of obstructions.

None of this is "extreme" flying. And assuming it can never happen to you seems complacent. I suppose you could call taking off from a 5000 foot elevation runway in the summer "extreme," but you're missing out on a lot if you say that.

 

[MAKG1]

Not to bring this back up again but I remember one flight in which my CFI showed me how easy it is for the indicated airspeed to be manipulated by angling the pitot tube excessively compared to the relative wind. He gave full right and left rudder input in a 172 and told me to watch the airspeed indicator. Based on the direction he kicked the nose the airspeed indicator started to drop simply because the pitot tube was no longer getting the correct airflow into it even though we never touched the throttle. It was one of those lessons I still rememeber.

Was the error the same in both directions? The pitot tube would behave in that manner. The static port would have opposite-sign errors. And that's where I'd expect the error to lie. Certainly, airspeed in a slip behaves in that manner. Slips to the right read low airspeed, slips to the left read high (by about 10 knots at Vref) in a 172N.

 

[kgruber]

I was bored, use to ferry Super Cubs from Lock Haven to the west coast. I got so bored that I tried to do a loop, just to wake up. But somehow I kind of fell out of it in "something," but am quite sure it was stalled.

 

[jspilot]

Was the error the same in both directions? The pitot tube would behave in that manner. The static port would have opposite-sign errors. And that's where I'd expect the error to lie. Certainly, airspeed in a slip behaves in that manner. Slips to the right read low airspeed, slips to the left read high (by about 10 knots at Vref) in a 172N.

Yeah exactly as you described was what happened. What surprised me was how quickly the airspeed dropped. My CfI explained that this is one of the inaccuracies of the airspeed indicator.

 

[MAKG1]

Yeah exactly as you described was what happened. What surprised me was how quickly the airspeed dropped. My CfI explained that this is one of the inaccuracies of the airspeed indicator.

That's 'cause the airspeed isn't really dropping. The reading will drop just as fast as you establish the slip, but your real speed will change much more slowly.

A properly done slip will be at constant airspeed and constant course, with a large negative vertical speed.

[The type of slip you do for a crosswind landing is usually a much smaller effect -- if you need full rudder for that, a different landing site might be a good idea]

 

[LDJones]

Even good pilots can get bit by a stall when conditions are right and there's the least bit of inattention.

On a circle-to-land after a VOR approach last week, in gusty winds (17G29, if I recall correctly) I watched my instrument student let his airspeed begin to fall off as we turned onto final. We were high and slow when almost at the approach end of the 5,500' runway.

Just as I was reminding him to watch his speed the bottom fell out. It felt like we were going straight down while still in a level attitude. We had obviously been in a peak gust, then abruptly lost it.

I said, "Full power!" (probably a little louder than usual!) and pushed his hand on the throttle to the firewall while pushing the nose down steeply. We dove for the runway and regained flying speed just in time to flare and set her down.

We spent some time talking about what happened and why. I think he better understands the importance of speed and adding margins of safety in gusty conditions.

 

[bobmrg]

Do you mean indicated airspeed, or airspeed? I thought if my plane stalled at say, 60 knots, and the indicated airspeed was at 65 knots, this meant the wind over my wings was traveling at 65 knots, so I will not stall.

If I am diving and the AOA is such that I am in a stall, the airspeed indicator would be less then 65 mph. (with me obviously traveling through the air faster then that)

Is that true?

"Power + attitude = performance." You will hear this many times during your training. The airspeed indicator is not the gospel. I used to have my students fly at least one pattern without the airspeed indicator. Learn to fly by looking at the airplane's attitude relative to the horizon, not at the airspeed indicator. Orville and Wilbur did not have an airspeed indicator.

Bob Gardner

 

[Mafoo]

Mafoo, we all have made mistakes. If you haven't, then you haven't been flying long enough or you don't do any challenging kind of flying. Admitting a mistake or fault isn't saying one is not capable of being a pilot either. I've instructed hundreds of students and even the best ones who thought they were know it alls, still made errors and they went on to become great pilots. Out of all the people I instructed, maybe 2 had no business in aviation. They made multiple mistakes and lacked even basic aviation knowledge. Flying isn't rocket science. It takes average intelligence, average hand to eye coordination and some common sense.

Oh I have made a lot of mistakes. Remember "the good, bad, and ugly" post about my first cross country?

So far, pretty much all of my mistakes have been logistical. Like a navigation mistake, or saying something wrong on the radio. I don't think I have made a mistake controlling the aircraft yet, but the only thing I have done so far, is the basic things you learn in flight school, I have not done anything out of the ordinary.

I am sure I will make lots of flight mistakes. And even though I know it's not the prevailing opinion on this site, I am not one who thinks I know everything. Half my posts are like this one; Me asking questions so I can learn. I am very grateful people like you, especially you in particular, are here to help be become a better aviator.

If I was forced to pick the top 5 people on this site that have helped educate me, you would be among that list.

Ron would be #1, as I have yet to not learn something from him. He is great.

 

[douglas393]

"Power + attitude = performance." You will hear this many times during your training. The airspeed indicator is not the gospel. I used to have my students fly at least one pattern without the airspeed indicator. Learn to fly by looking at the airplane's attitude relative to the horizon, not at the airspeed indicator. Orville and Wilbur did not have an airspeed indicator.

Bob Gardner

And how many times did they crash?

Seriously, I was taught that stalling had everything to do with angle of attack, and that no matter what your velocity was you will ALWAYS stall if you exceed that angle of attack. It does not matter if you are banking, or straight and level, descending, or ascending exceed that angle of attack and you stall.

If you just think about it that way and forget about speed it seems a fairly simple thing. The solution then becomes just as simple; if you stall all you need to do is decrease your angle of attack.

When I first thought about it I had the similar confusion I thnk most of us have in that certain configurations give different stall speeds, but I was told that the reason we stall is that it is the increase in the angle of attack and when we get too slow the angle of attack to keep lift adequate to keep the plane flying is over the critical angle and thus we stall. By increasing power you decrease the angle of attack necessary to provide that lift and thus end the stall. However, at the end of the day it is still all about angle of attack. Am I missing something?

Doug

 

[wabower]

Last week I installed an Alpha AOA in the 180. Test/calibration flight scheduled this weekend, pirep to follow.

 

[genetk44]

And how many times did they crash?

Seriously, I was taught that stalling had everything to do with angle of attack, and that no matter what your velocity was you will ALWAYS stall if you exceed that angle of attack. It does not matter if you are banking, or straight and level, descending, or ascending exceed that angle of attack and you stall.

If you just thick about it that way and forget about speed it seems a fairly simple thing. The solution then becomes just as simple; if you stall all you need to do is decrease your angle of attack. Am I missing something?

Doug

This is what Langweische pounds on about at length in his book "Stick and Rudder" ......push the nose away from you...if I remember he even used a stall while inverted as an example of that among others.

 

[douglas393]

Last week I installed an Alpha AOA in the 180. Test/calibration flight scheduled this weekend, pirep to follow.

I have heard nothing but great things about the AOA indicators. Was it expensive to buy and install as I am strongly thinking about adding it to my plane. It seems ludicrous to me that the G1000 does not have one already. I would think it would have been something simple to add.

Doug

 

[wabower]

Dog simple. I did everything except fishing some display wires behind the panel.

PS: Cost is a couple tanks of gas.

I have heard nothing but great things about the AOA indicators. Was it expensive to buy and install as I am strongly thinking about adding it to my plane. It seems ludicrous to me that the G1000 does not have one already. I would think it would have been something simple to add.

Doug

 

[wanttaja]

let me ask it a different way....

If my plane stalls at 60 knots, doesn't that mean I need to keep the wind traveling over the wing above 60 knots?

Another way to look at it: It stalls at 60 knots at a given weight. If it's lighter, it'll stall at a slower speed. If it's heavier, it'll stall at a higher speed. Pull 2 Gs (e.g., coordinated 60 degree turn), and the plane thinks it's heavier and will stall at the higher speed.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Mafoo]

Another way to look at it: It stalls at 60 knots at a given weight. If it's lighter, it'll stall at a slower speed. If it's heavier, it'll stall at a higher speed. Pull 2 Gs (e.g., coordinated 60 degree turn), and the plane thinks it's heavier and will stall at the higher speed.

Ron Wanttaja

Thanks, that's simple, and extremely helpful.

 

[douglas393]

Another way to look at it: It stalls at 60 knots at a given weight. If it's lighter, it'll stall at a slower speed. If it's heavier, it'll stall at a higher speed. Pull 2 Gs (e.g., coordinated 60 degree turn), and the plane thinks it's heavier and will stall at the higher speed.

Ron Wanttaja

But the critical angle of attack at which the plane stalls does not change in any of these situations. It is the only constant.

Doug

 

[douglas393]

"Power + attitude = performance." You will hear this many times during your training. The airspeed indicator is not the gospel. I used to have my students fly at least one pattern without the airspeed indicator. Learn to fly by looking at the airplane's attitude relative to the horizon, not at the airspeed indicator. Orville and Wilbur did not have an airspeed indicator.

Bob Gardner

They however were quite familar with the concept of stalling and in fact used the concept to help design their planes in such a way that if to minimize the chance of stalling, and increase the easiness of getting out of a stall. Those bike makers were quite smart!

Doug

 

[bbchien]

So over in the pilot training forum, there are a few threads on stalls.

The one I think is somewhat meaningless, is power on stalls. I learn to climb based on airspeed, so I have no idea when I would ever get in a situation where a power on stall is even possible.

Power off stall I get, if for no other reason then to burn into my brain to constantly pay attention to my airspeed when landing.

It made we wonder, how often do people stall? I would suspect almost never, but thought it was worth asking.

I tried to ignore this string. Especially this attitude evident in this post.

The answer would be, a student of mine, while fumbling with his GPS, on his night dual XC. Of course, was paying attention, and let it happen to this cocky young man, and I recovered it. I then shut off his GPS and he reverted to his Dead-Reckoning waypoint plan, which he had complained about having to create for this lesson. It's been about seven years since. The 196 was brand new back then.

******

Are you happy now? The federal statistics and the Nall Statistics apply to you, too, Mafoo. You are not "super Mafoo" and immune from inclusion in the statistics. They INCLUDE you.

 

[jesse]

I can only think of one time that I got too slow in an airplane -- was distracted and just had a lot of drag out, not nearly enough power, and was maintaining altitude. I fixed it before the stall or the stall warning but I beat myself up over it for weeks.

 

[Mafoo]

I tried to ignore this string. Especially this attitude evident in this post.

The answer would be, a student of mine, while fumbling with his GPS, on his night dual XC. Of course, was paying attention, and let it happen to this cocky young man, and I recovered it. I then shut off his GPS and he reverted to his Dead-Reckoning waypoint plan, which he had complained about having to create for this lesson. It's been about seven years since. The 196 was brand new back then.

******

Are you happy now? The federal statistics and the Nall Statistics apply to you, too, Mafoo. You are not "super Mafoo" and immune from inclusion in the statistics. They INCLUDE you.

Oh I have made a lot of mistakes. Remember "the good, bad, and ugly" post about my first cross country?

So far, pretty much all of my mistakes have been logistical. Like a navigation mistake, or saying something wrong on the radio. I don't think I have made a mistake controlling the aircraft yet, but the only thing I have done so far, is the basic things you learn in flight school, I have not done anything out of the ordinary.

I am sure I will make lots of flight mistakes. And even though I know it's not the prevailing opinion on this site, I am not one who thinks I know everything. Half my posts are like this one; Me asking questions so I can learn. I am very grateful people like you, especially you in particular, are here to help be become a better aviator.

If I was forced to pick the top 5 people on this site that have helped educate me, you would be among that list.

Ron would be #1, as I have yet to not learn something from him. He is great.

How is my above post, a post from a man who as the attitude you think I have?

I am opinionated. Almost all pilots are. I posted this thread so someone could change my opinion, because I knew it didn't make sense for my opinion to be right, and CFI's still train to it.

But "everyone does it, so it must be right" is never good enough for me. I want to know why.

Sorry if that makes you think I think I know it all. You don't like me. I get it. But can you not start chasing me from thread to thread and insulting me? I think this is the third thread you have done it in.

 

[Sam D]

I believe Dr. Bruce is trying to be helpful to you. While he may come across as harsh, he's highlighting something the FAA sees as so important that they touch on it at all levels of pilot training and that is hazardous attitudes. When it appears (and this may not be what you feel or intended but it comes across this way) that someone believes they won't get lost because of all the GPS technology or encounter a power on stall, they are displaying the attitude of invulnerability. When this occurs even before the person is certificated, that probably raises an even bigger red flag for those that have been around the block like Doc and others.

You've clearly got a passion for this. And that is terrific! I'm sorry that the message that is intended to be helpful to you is getting lost in this crappy communication vehicle we call the Internet.

P.S. I will respond in advance to your next post about how I (and others) misunderstand what you have been saying: seek first to understand and then to be understood.

 

[Jeanie]

I almost did a moose turn stall once. Was flying for a guy taking pictures over a friends property. In a turn trying to stay in the area and avoid a tower with wires... I know I know. Anyway, the plane started to feel weird, I released the back pressure on the yoke added power and told the pax that we will come back around and set it up again. That was the first time I'd had a photographer in the right seat, I was a private pilot and I was glad that I knew the feel of being near a stall. If I had stalled and probably spun I wouldn't have been able to recover at that altitude.

I think one of the fallacies of the way we train stalls is that we set it up so that's it's straight or barely banked, nose high and slow airspeed. Most of the accidents, I believe-could be wrong, are at a nose lower attitude and higher than the published airspeed... The stalls that surprise you.

So, I suggest, mafoo, that the next time you go up you practice power off stalls looking at the wing and then looking out the window at a point on the ground to begin to develop the feel of I'm nearly stalled.

 

[MAKG1]

But the critical angle of attack at which the plane stalls does not change in any of these situations. It is the only constant.

Doug

Yes, absolutely.

But evaluating angle of attack can be tricky, as most of us don't have AoA gauges, and perceiving the relative wind accurately isn't something we're trained for. When you substitute the horizon for the relative wind, you end up with pitch angles and stall speeds.

The AoA is certainly more fundamental, and substituting other variables invariably makes it more complex. However, evaluating the pitch angle is much more precise (even without an AI -- you can use the real horizon in place of the artificial one).

It's best to consider AoA, but for certain limited and precise conditions, such as a normal approach to a landing, it may be safer to establish margins in terms of pitch and power, because they are much more accessible.

 

[bobmrg]

Oh I have made a lot of mistakes. Remember "the good, bad, and ugly" post about my first cross country?

So far, pretty much all of my mistakes have been logistical. Like a navigation mistake, or saying something wrong on the radio. I don't think I have made a mistake controlling the aircraft yet, but the only thing I have done so far, is the basic things you learn in flight school, I have not done anything out of the ordinary.

I am sure I will make lots of flight mistakes. And even though I know it's not the prevailing opinion on this site, I am not one who thinks I know everything. Half my posts are like this one; Me asking questions so I can learn. I am very grateful people like you, especially you in particular, are here to help be become a better aviator.

If I was forced to pick the top 5 people on this site that have helped educate me, you would be among that list.

Ron would be #1, as I have yet to not learn something from him. He is great.

There is no required phraseology, so you can't say something wrong.

Bob Gardner

 

[N801BH]

There is no required phraseology, so you can't say something wrong.

Bob Gardner

 

[MAKG1]

There is no required phraseology, so you can't say something wrong.

Sure you can. You just can't phrase it incorrectly.

Providing information that differs significantly from reality (like a wrong position or altitude report) is wrong. Transposing your tail number -- especially when there is another aircraft with a similar one nearby -- is wrong. And so on.

 

[denverpilot]

There is no required phraseology, so you can't say something wrong.

Technically incorrect, since FCC profanity rules apply.

So there's stuff you can't say, but it's never enforced on ATC frequencies other than to add to the charges brought against jammers, who are surprisingly rare on Aviation band.

Call it a "wardrobe malfunction".

 

[Ghery]

"Power + attitude = performance." You will hear this many times during your training. The airspeed indicator is not the gospel. I used to have my students fly at least one pattern without the airspeed indicator. Learn to fly by looking at the airplane's attitude relative to the horizon, not at the airspeed indicator. Orville and Wilbur did not have an airspeed indicator.

Bob Gardner

I remember having to make a trip around the pattern with the ASI covered when I was getting checked out in the Arrow years ago. Power settings and attitude didn't change. Sounds help, too.