Stalls, Students, what how are you teaching or learning?

[aktango58]

Was flying with a lower time pilot this weekend and I asked him to stall the plane. As the stall came pretty quickly, (Crosswind Stol wing), the right wing dropped and the pilot pushed the stick forward until we were in about 30 degree down prior to bringing the nose back up. His actions were pretty rapid, and I could tell he was very nervous.

After a demonstration, his next stall was better, but his habit of pushing hard was there and he was still over correcting and showing nerves.

I had him take it up higher, pull back and do some falling leafs, using only rudders.

The stress and what appeared to be a fear of stalls seemed to melt away as the plane continued to recover on it's own with only rudder input, and he realized that the plane wants to fly in spite of what we do to the controls.

This is not the first pilot I have flown with that has been unnaturally afraid of stalls. Are we teaching fear of stalls in our primary lessons? Is the FAA continued propaganda and changing standards to stay so far from a stall that everyone wants to land at Mach 3?

What other techniques do you all use to make folks comfortable with flying into the stall?

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Gordon Misch]

With the Crosswinds wing my -12 just doesn't get mean. But I'll offer that it would be a bad idea to inadvertently get a student thinking that all planes behave so kindly.

Edit: I'm not intending to suggest striking fear of other planes, rather to note that different planes can behave very differently and some practice with others could be a significantly different experience.

 

[aktango58]

With the Crosswinds wing my -12 just doesn't get mean. But I'll offer that it would be a bad idea to inadvertently get a student thinking that all planes behave so kindly.

Edit: I'm not intending to suggest striking fear of other planes, rather to note that different planes can behave very differently and some practice with others could be a significantly different experience.

Compared to a stock wing, this thing was ill mannered. Vg's on it, but very little buffet before the break, and breaks hard.

No, was not touting all planes are gentle, but trying to get the owner to relax and don't over correct.

Where do they learn to dive hard out of a stall though? His last review was in a 172, they don't break hard either.

 

[GreggB]

Grumpy old guy mode. PTS->ACS has sissy'd up stalls. The thing to do is what the OP did, teach the ones you can, what you can. Hope someone else catches the rest, or they figure it out, or they never go anywhere near the edge of the air.

 

[Gordon Misch]

Compared to a stock wing, this thing was ill mannered. Vg's on it, but very little buffet before the break, and breaks hard.

Interesting. Mine is much milder post Crosswinds and VGs. Doesn't buffet, maybe shudders just a little, but gets "soft" then just kinda staggers. It'll break hard if abused, but that takes effort. To be clear, I'm only offering this up as it applies to my -12.

Edit again - Your original point had to do with exploring the slow flight / stall regime. I absolutely agree with doing that. Didn't mean to get argumentative - sorry.

 

[aktango58]

Interesting. Mine is much milder post Crosswinds and VGs. Doesn't buffet, maybe shudders just a little, but gets "soft" then just kinda staggers. It'll break hard if abused, but that takes effort. To be clear, I'm only offering this up as it applies to my -12.

Edit again - Your original point had to do with exploring the slow flight / stall regime. I absolutely agree with doing that. Didn't mean to get argumentative - sorry.

The only other one of these wings I flew was like you describe also. This one is on floats, wonder if that is the difference.

Don't think you are argumentative, just sharing observations. That is my goal is to have other views so expand my thoughts on this!

Yes on discussing stall training also.

Gregg, spot on. In fact, they have neutered the requirements to get a ticket that they might as well just put them in cracker jacks. Or, issue everyone a Cirrus and let god sort them out.

I am digressing.

As a note, this pilot with 400 hours was smooth and really beyond what I expect. If he was looking for a flying job I would be telling the boss to hire him!

 

[skywagon8a]

Was flying with a lower time pilot this weekend and I asked him to stall the plane. As the stall came pretty quickly, (Crosswind Stol wing), the right wing dropped and the pilot pushed the stick forward until we were in about 30 degree down prior to bringing the nose back up. His actions were pretty rapid, and I could tell he was very nervous.After a demonstration, his next stall was better, but his habit of pushing hard was there and he was still over correcting and showing nerves.

The only other one of these wings I flew was like you describe also. This one is on floats, wonder if that is the difference.

This is making me think he had scared himself in that airplane for some reason. I know some people wash in the wings to lower the stall speeds. How is the rigging on that plane? If the wings are washed in too much, the tips will stall first with the results you described. There should be wash out on the wings to maintain lift at the tips during stalls as well as improved aileron control. Wash out = airfoil at the tips pointed down in relation to the wing root. =Less angle of attack when the wing root stalls.It's also possible the Vgs are not installed the same on both wings? Are the Crosswind cuffs the same on both wings? In addition to pointing the nose down, did the pilot use opposite rudder? You mentioned a previous review in a 172 in which rudders aren't as important as they are in Cubs.

 

[CubCruiser]

I teach tailwheel to a number of recent commercially-rated young pilots enrolled at a major university.

On our way out to the grass strip where we start landing practice, I have them perform a turning stall in a 10-15 degree bank. Nearly everyone of them believes the airplane will spin when it stalls. When they realize that it’s a non-event if they keep the airplane coordinated, it amounts to an “a-ha” moment.

There is very limited understanding of coordination and the effects of ailerons and rudder on slips and skids. They know the “step on the ball” saying, but when you show them that they can maintain the same rudder pressure but reduce the angle of bank with ailerons to center the ball, it’s a completely foreign concept. They are not being taught the interactions of all the control surfaces.

The use of ailerons to correct from a dropped is wing is unfortunately all too common response with them as well.

Daryl

 

[sj]

Stall apprehension

Stall apprehension is not a new phenomenon. Granted I've only been instructing for twenty-three years, so spins in primary were already out of the curriculum - because so many people were dying in the process of demonstrating them I suspect.

I would say nine out of ten people I fly with do NOT "enjoy" stalls. Some - even very high time folks - are dripping sweat on a cold day. Most have not done a stall since their last fight review - IF the instructor even required it since he/she was likely not comfortable with them.

Part of the backcountry instruction we do here (often in owner airplanes) is getting to know the edge of the envelope in all the different configurations. In newer planes with garmin autopilots, this involves turning off ESP or it will prevent you from doing what you need to do. It can also be disconcerting on final when you are trying to approach slowly and it is pushing the nose down.

Like anything else (as others have pointed out), properly guided practice / experience is the best way to get comfortable with it. There is no YouTube video substitute for that.

On another note, if an airplane is behaving in an ill manner, I like to know what the heck is going on before going much further...

Finally, there are two things I see all the time - aileron use in stall recovery and raising the nose rather than adding power when low on final. Both are incorrect subconscious reactions and can be hard to overcome.

sj

 

[Skywalker]

If he is above average in skill at 400 hrs, perhaps he has a few hundred unloggable hours in the Part 103 world. Because of high drag and low momentum, you have to instantly push if the engine stops on takeoff.

 

[mvivion]

I agree with everything Steve said here. The old Practical test standards for private pilot did not require demonstration of a “full stall”, ie: a stall to the break. The new “ACS” does actually require the pilot to stall the plane. While that’s a step in the right direction, many CFIs are themselves scared of stalls.

Every CFI is required to have completed “spin training”, but in many cases, that “training” is very minimal, which doesn’t do the CFI or their future students a favor.

Any more, I assume that an applicant for a flight review is going to be really reluctant to stall their airplane, but a full stall series is going to be demonstrated. Most are pretty good with it, others, not so much, but they are going to do them.

A cautionary note about airplanes, to follow up on what Pete discussed: Never assume a given airplane will exhibit “normal” stall characteristics, or normal recovery. If you’re stalling a plane for the first time, get plenty of altitude, then start with a wings level, power off, one G deceleration to the stall. If there’s ANYTHING hinky there, be cocked and locked for a ride if you poke it any deeper.

We used two virtually identical S model 172s at the University for spin training. One of those was a beautiful spinner (as 172s go), it would stall straight ahead in a normal stall, and, with proper inputs, it’d roll over into a nice spin, and STAY IN the spin as long as the pilot held pro spin inputs.

The other airplane would not break over in a normal coordinated stall. It would buffet and argue with itself, and settle, but no “normal” break. To get it to spin required full pro spin control input at the stall, then an aggravating input, like full opposite aileron. Then it would break violently and spin, but even with full in spin controls, it would only stay in the spin for a couple turns, then break hard into a spiral. That one got your attention. Point is, it may be a type approved for spins, but the rigging, as Pete noted, may not be “spin friendly”.

Modified airplanes: Note that ANY modification of an aircraft can change its spin characteristics, and MAY subsequently prohibit intentional spins…..like that Crosswinds STOL kit, for example.

Finally, if you’re going to actually spin a plane, study the fine print in the Type Certificate and Owners Manual. For example, to qualify for operation in the Utility Category (where spins MAY be authorized), the Super Cub weight must be below 1500 lbs All Up Weight, and a forward CG. Thus, many Cubs can’t be legally spun with two up…. Modifications may restrict operations to the Normal Category, which may prohibit intentional spins. Before I’ll spin a plane, some research is due and then a full stall series is done first, to verify rigging.

MTV

 

[bcone1381]

I wonder if teaching Spins to a degree where a pilot can practice them solo.

I wonder about teaching a bank angle/slow speed game....trying to do a 360 degree turn in as little time as possible. For example, a 12 second turn in a glider is a good goal to stay cored in a thermal. (it requires very slow speed, very high bank (like 60 degrees) angle tickling the edge of a stall) This might give the student a "Why" to the stall procedure, and get hime to enjoy it. Self competition where one plays around with it is a great teacher.

 

[aktango58]

A cautionary note about airplanes, to follow up on what Pete discussed: Never assume a given airplane will exhibit “normal” stall characteristics, or normal recovery. If you’re stalling a plane for the first time, get plenty of altitude, then start with a wings level, power off, one G deceleration to the stall. If there’s ANYTHING hinky there, be cocked and locked for a ride if you poke it any deeper.

MTV

That is a really good reminder Mike.

Please understand, my view of "ill mannered" on this plane is that from the Cub family I expect a plane to want to fly, announce with a buffet that it is feeling less inclined to fly, have a long time between the first buffet and then a bit of a much where the nose begins a pitch down. This plane barely shakes the stick before the nose comes down, and it drops like an Otter- right down through the horizon. It does tend to drop the right wing a bit though it flies strait in normal flight.

Not excessive for a plane, just excessive for a cub.

We worked the 'panic' out by the falling leaf using rudders only. After a few times of the plane correcting itself with only rudder to keep wings level the pilot began to relax and enjoy letting the plane fly.

I think spins are a great thing to teach. Once a pilot realizes that it is easy to recover it takes the fear out of the stalls. But as Mike said, just because the model says it is strong enough to spin when NEW from the factory, I am loath to take a 75 year old plane up to spin without lots more information on it's condition and capability. Also, having floats below us just sets my caution meter up as I don't recall if they are certified for spins in that configuration.

Appreciate the dialog. Nice to be back instructing a bit.

 

[skywagon8a]

Every CFI is required to have completed “spin training”, but in many cases, that “training” is very minimal, which doesn’t do the CFI or their future students a favor.
...
We used two virtually identical S model 172s at the University for spin training. One of those was a beautiful spinner (as 172s go), it would stall straight ahead in a normal stall, and, with proper inputs, it’d roll over into a nice spin, and STAY IN the spin as long as the pilot held pro spin inputs.

The other airplane would not break over in a normal coordinated stall. It would buffet and argue with itself, and settle, but no “normal” break. To get it to spin required full pro spin control input at the stall, then an aggravating input, like full opposite aileron. Then it would break violently and spin, but even with full in spin controls, it would only stay in the spin for a couple turns, then break hard into a spiral. That one got your attention. Point is, it may be a type approved for spins, but the rigging, as Pete noted, may not be “spin friendly”.

Modified airplanes: Note that ANY modification of an aircraft can change its spin characteristics, and MAY subsequently prohibit intentional spins…..like that Crosswinds STOL kit, for example.

Finally, if you’re going to actually spin a plane, study the fine print in the Type Certificate and Owners Manual. For example, to qualify for operation in the Utility Category (where spins MAY be authorized), the Super Cub weight must be below 1500 lbs All Up Weight, and a forward CG. Thus, many Cubs can’t be legally spun with two up…. Modifications may restrict operations to the Normal Category, which may prohibit intentional spins. Before I’ll spin a plane, some research is due and then a full stall series is done first, to verify rigging.

MTV

George didn't mention spins, but since Mike brought them up....... There are subtle differences in stock factory produced airplanes which effect their flight characteristics. Sometimes these little differences mean very little and sometimes as Mike has demonstrated with the 172Ss, when operated at the outside ends of the envelope surprises happen. Just as an example with my E-AB Cub on floats with a squared wing tip shape (non-standard). I did an extensive spin test program looking for surprises which may come up to bite me in the future. The airplane appeared to stall when I applied rudder into the spin (both L&R). The nose dropped and the "spin" occurred. However it wasn't a spin because the airspeed accelerated up into the 100 mph range. Spins are stall maneuvers, this was a high speed spiral. Visually they are the same except for the airspeed. Try as I did, it would not spin .... until I added ballast to move the CG to the aft limit. In this case 20.25". Piper's limit is 20". Then the spin behaved as a spin should with the airspeed remaining at the stall speed. The difference was in the first instance, the elevator didn't provide enough up authority to force the wing to the full stall angle of attack. Once the CG moved aft, the full stall break occurred.

I've also investigated stall and spin characteristics in another type of production airplane. Some of them would stall normally, some would break to the right and some would break to the left. There was no obvious reason for this until it was found that the curvature of the leading edge of the wings was not controlled properly during manufacturing. After that was resolved, all the subsequent production planes stalled as they were supposed to.

What does all this mean? It means that there are little differences between most like airplanes that can sometimes bite you.

George, All single engine airplanes are required to pass spin testing for certification. This includes those on floats. Also, a properly performed spin does not produce any loads on the airplane which do not occur on a normally turbulent day. One should be able to recover from a spin without increasing the airspeed much more than 10 or 20 mph above the stall, at the most. The loads will be low.

 

[bob turner]

Interesting and popular thread. Thanks.

My only experience with the Crosswinds wing was that in a full stall landing attempt a wing could violently drop. No aileron control at all, and the thing that saved it was the ground was only six inches away, arresting the drop. It only happened a couple times, but it got your attention.

A different subject, but related - we are no longer teaching aileron into the wind on rollout/ takeoff roll. I am having serious problems with this - we always have a left crosswind, and when the nose of that big Stearman starts wandering left, I see the stick going to the right. It takes serious training to get the stick to go to the left and the rudder to go right. Some never get it. This is a habit that should be ingrained at hour one.

opinion.

 

[skywagon8a]

A different subject, but related - we are no longer teaching aileron into the wind on rollout/ takeoff roll.

Bob, Who is the "we" in this case. Are you referring to the current crop of CFIs? If so, where are they "learning" to fly?

 

[mvivion]

Everybody drives cars these days, so the natural instinct if you want to go right is to try to steer with the “steering wheel”. My second instructor was an original, in many ways, a WWII C-46 pilot on the Hump. His mantra was “Drive it into the ditch”, meaning turn the yoke/stick TOWARD where you DON’T want to go.

point is is REALLY hard to break solid habits developed in driving cars.

MTV

 

[RedOwlAirfield]

I don't believe stalling the airplane more than an inch or two above the runway is a good idea. Yes it has to be done occasionally to teach recovery technique, but that is preparation for an emergency. It should not be a common occurrence. The right way to combat deaths by stalls is to keep them from happening. Consequently all those folks who are "afraid" of stalls have a pretty good attitude. If they are uncomfortable getting close to those conditions it's a very good thing. We need to remember we are here to fly the airplane, not merely keep from crashing it.

 

[mvivion]

I don't believe stalling the airplane more than an inch or two above the runway is a good idea. Yes it has to be done occasionally to teach recovery technique, but that is preparation for an emergency. It should not be a common occurrence. The right way to combat deaths by stalls is to keep them from happening. Consequently all those folks who are "afraid" of stalls have a pretty good attitude. If they are uncomfortable getting close to those conditions it's a very good thing. We need to remember we are here to fly the airplane, not merely keep from crashing it.

I respectfully disagree. Properly taught stalls in a properly rigged airplane are essentially boring, and they are a functional and essential part of learning to fly.

A certain large University flight training program had students running of the ENDS of 4500 foot long runways, with good approaches. Why? Largely because they had the “airspeed is life” mantra pounded into them from day one. Their 172 checklists called for final approach at 70 KNOTS.

Teach them to fear stalls, and they’ll never really learn to fly proficiently.

MTV

 

[bob turner]

I only did seven landings today - six in taildraggers, and all fully stalled prior to touchdown. Even the stupid Cherokee - stall, then touch. Hadn't touched a Cherokee in almost two decades.

The 172s used to have a sacrificial tail skid.

And yeah - "we" has to be the flight instructor community. Some are otherwise quite good - nobody ever taught them proper rollouts in crosswinds. Once a pilot has 20 years experience, I have to work my tail off to get that aileron in there.

Deadly in the Stearman. Can cause problems in a Cub.

 

[texmex]

Where do they learn to dive hard out of a stall though?

My first solo was in a Blanik Glider. You had to push the stick well forward on that to un-stall it.

Fast forward two years, now 19 and my Dad was teaching me in our family C180. To be covered by insurance, or so he thought, I went to a mate of his for a flight check and license. As part of that check I was required to demonstrate a stall. I'd never done one in the C180, but I had done plenty in the glider.

So neutral ailerons, opposite rudder if required and push forward. A can of Mr Sheen that was behind the back seats rose up, floated through the air and landed on the combing.

We both laughed heartily. Although I was a little shocked.

I did some reading years latter on Chipmunk accidents of which there were plenty of stall, spin accidents. It turns out in the recovery process they were not pushing the stick forward enough as they had never been taught to 'dive hard out of a stall'.

I guess it's horses for courses. (not an instructor)

 

[bcone1381]

Consequently all those folks who are "afraid" of stalls have a pretty good attitude. If they are uncomfortable getting close to those conditions it's a very good thing. We need to remember we are here to fly the airplane, not merely keep from crashing it.

I happen to know of a US air carrier had four unstable aircraft states (high aoa event/stall) in about a 4 year period. All recovered so no news was generated.


Another viepoint is....one can get unintentionally into those situations even though they are uncomfortable. Being well trained puts a pilot in a better position for recognition and recovery.

I have no fear of stalls. Knowing about a stall is not equal to "knowing stalls with some intimacy." Experience and recoginiton will foster an attitude of "ops, no big deal, fly the wing" so elegantly the passenger might not even notice it. Its a debriefing instead of fear inducing danger.

Once you can feel confident spinning, then one can go out and experiment and discover that slow side of the envelope with no fear. Stalls while slipping, skidding, or banking or nose high or secondary during a recover. The threat is deminished greatly. Lack of knowledge and experience leads to fear.

 

[hotrod180]

.... All single engine airplanes are required to pass spin testing for certification. This includes those on floats. ....

Yes, and maybe no.
My old C150/150 taildragger was placarded "intentional spins prohibited".
Dunno if it's true, but I've heard this was because it was cheaper and easier for the STC developer to just prohibit spins
than to do spin testing.

 

[skywagon8a]

Yes, and maybe no.
My old C150/150 taildragger was placarded "intentional spins prohibited".
Dunno if it's true, but I've heard this was because it was cheaper and easier for the STC developer to just prohibit spins
than to do spin testing.

I repeat "... All single engine airplanes are required to pass spin testing for certification. This includes those on floats. ...."
The spin test is a one turn spin followed by no more than one turn for recovery. Then the airplane is placarded "intentional spins prohibited" To remove that placard further spin testing is required. Your 150 was spin tested.

 

[mvivion]

Even the Cirrus was spin tested, although the company opted to use an “alternate means of compliance” ie: a full aircraft parachute to meet airworthiness standards.

MTV

 

[akmarty]

What is the pilots student background? In the AirForce flight training program the spin training was exclusive to the T-37B Tweet.

Spin recovery procedure:

Throttles: Idle
Rudder and Airlerons: Neutral
Stick: full aft and Hold
Determine Direction of rotation
Abruptly apply full rudder opposite the direction of of rotation
Stick: Abruptly full forward one turn after applying rudder
Recover: from the ensuing dive.

Perhaps he was trained in the T-37. Or more likely, he was taught by an old AirForce pilot whose technique bled over from the T-37.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

 

[Eddie Foy]

And if you did not do it verbatim, the Tweet would spin into the ground!

What is the pilots student background? In the AirForce flight training program the spin training was exclusive to the T-37B Tweet.

Spin recovery procedure:

Throttles: Idle
Rudder and Airlerons: Neutral
Stick: full aft and Hold
Determine Direction of rotation
Abruptly apply full rudder opposite the direction of of rotation
Stick: Abruptly full forward one turn after applying rudder
Recover: from the ensuing dive.

Perhaps he was trained in the T-37. Or more likely, he was taught by an old AirForce pilot whose technique bled over from the T-37.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

 

[skywagon8a]

Spin recovery in a Cub

Simultaneously: Throttle closed, rudder opposite the turn to stop the turn and forward stick to break the stall.
Immediately followed by: Rudder neutral and back stick to level flight. Power as desired.

Immediate application of back stick prevents over speeding in a dive along with the return to level flight while producing only light wing loading. Speed during recovery will not exceed 70 mph or less. This method produces minimum altitude loss.

If you hesitate with the back stick, expect a rapid speed build up (100 mph +/-) which requires a gradual back stick to keep wing loading low. This method produces a high altitude loss.

Airspeed during the spin will remain at the stall speed.
IF the airspeed is high during the spin, it is not a spin but is a spiral.
Once the rotation is stopped...the spin is finished. You are now in a dive.

 

[RedOwlAirfield]

I respectfully disagree. Properly taught stalls in a properly rigged airplane are essentially boring, and they are a functional and essential part of learning to fly.

A certain large University flight training program had students running of the ENDS of 4500 foot long runways, with good approaches. Why? Largely because they had the “airspeed is life” mantra pounded into them from day one. Their 172 checklists called for final approach at 70 KNOTS.

Teach them to fear stalls, and they’ll never really learn to fly proficiently.

MTV

Thank you for your nice (read civil) reply.
Perhaps we're not as far apart as you might imagine.

I too believe stalls need to be taught - just like spins and basic Attitude Instrument flying - to every pilot. All of us no matter what level of rating. I just think they ought to be avoided vigorously. For instance in training I think much more emphasis needs to be on stall avoidance as opposed to what we've always done - which is stall recovery.

As interestingly enough I agree with your comment about folks landing a 172 using 727 airspeeds. ( OK. not 727 but you get the point.) It's kind of my pet peeve actually - along with folks flying a 727 pattern when in a 172. But I digress....

The idea here is not the "fear". If you have "fear" while you're flying, you need to quit flying. I would argue that if you were ever truly afraid of stalls you don't need to be flying. But as with most things aviation, the possibility needs more respect than it gets.

 

[bob turner]

Yes, but we should be exploring all flight regimes with students, including flight at stall angle of attack. Teach stall avoidance, sure, but teach recovery too, and at least demonstrate that a Cub will fly just fine at stall airspeed.

You have no idea how few Cub pilots know how to do a 20 degree bank departure stall. Sure, avoid them, but teach the skill level necessary to successfully demonstrate them.

I thought your post above was to avoid full stall landings. I guess Mike got it and I didn't.

The flight instructor community around here is about 23 years old, a lot of the time female hardbody, with 250 total hours. Zero tailwheel time. That places a burden on the students - study hard, and don't fall in lust with your instructor.