Excellent discussion! My airline has an extensive training module on this subject that goes beyond the FAA-mandated training for upset recovery. Your teaching here is entirely consistent with our training.
Awesome video and demo! We learned for our PPT, that on final, you can control pitch with prop. Every airman learns that but it does feel more natural to pull back on the yoke to control the nose and that can get us killed. Thanks for the refresher!.
A skill that can be very effective and what will set you up for success during your IFR training as well is "Pitch for Airspeed, Power for Altitude" Meaning if you're slow, push the nose over. If you're low, add throttle. If you're low and slow, perhaps do both. This will making holding a stabilized approach on final tremendously easier and more smooth while also drilling in the concept of pushing that nose low when maneuvering and getting too slow.
@@2025at No. It won't. CFII. The technique can be used effectively in all phases of the approach when used properly. No one should be nosing to the ground when they are at MDA/DA to recapture airspeed. At that point you should have long ago elected for a Missed Approach due to an unstabilized approach. But if you are on the glideslope the technique can be used effectively to maintain a stabilized approach and makes flying it a breeze.
@@Keys879 You are partially correct if you fly a small airplane . Try this technique in any airliner. Even autopilot is controlling pitch (elevator) to stay on the glide slop. Talk to any 10 pilots (IFR) and there will be 50/50 on this topic. This idea was ok. decades ago but now, flying an airplane with flight director, autopilot etc…….those airplanes “fly” pitch for altitude or simply simultaneously are doing both. But I totally agree that this is the safest way (pitch for airspeed) to train new pilots. This topic is similar to discussion about the lift:Bernoulli vs Newton. In FAA publications Bernoulli is “the guy” but NASA will say:No, it is Newton. Actually both guys are “causing” the lift.
Keep in mind that neither low airspeed nor high bank angle causes a stall.. Only a high angle of attack causes a stall an that is regardless if you are upside down, if you are at 2x the minimum speed shown on the airplane or if you are pulling up from a dive, wings level. The correct action is to unload the wing as shown in the video. At a load factor of 0g you continue flying just like a ball that you throw. You won't maintain altitude but you also don't stall and spin.
People use 'stall speed' because its a number they can see on a gauge in the cockpit, but whats the indicator for angle of attack? Its not pitch or attitude. (Hint, the answer is the stick position)
@@aaronhammond7297 speed is a good proxy for AoA. Stick position is true, but is not intuitive. An easier way is to understand that speed is energy, and if you have low energy it is easier to stall the wing. That keeps people out of trouble.
@@aaronhammond7297 Yes, the position of the stick, but there are actual angle of attack indicators on the market as well. The stall warning is also an angle of attack indicator, though a very crude one at best
I know we are trying to keep this simple to understand but faster airspeeds allow for higher wing loading and more G. So what we are doing when we lower the nose in the pattern is unloading the wing AND we are also increasing airspeed which allows the wing now to sustain a higher loading before stall. Both are beneficial in avoiding stall/spin.
I've always felt that a steep turn (the ACS maneuver) is a terrible influence on private pilots. It gives them an idea that the best way out of a tricky situation is to bank a lot and pull hard. Then we wonder why so many people die trying to turn their airplanes around. In reality, the best way out of almost any situation where you need to turn around is to bank and accept the altitude loss by not pulling. If you don't pull - not much can happen to you. This video demonstrates that point very well, thank you.
I think the reason that so much emphasis is placed on the load-factor curve is that people instinctively try to keep their flight path level when turning. I feel like the reason people do this is that we are used to moving around on the ground, where we are constrained to planar movement. People take the habit of planar movement with them into the cockpit, and end up wanting to turn, THEN descend, or turn, THEN climb. I believe that there needs to be more emphasis in primary training on breaking this habit and learning to think about your movement in three dimensions. This is something where incorporating some of the advances in PC flight simulation into ground training could be useful. Modern simulators have extremely accurate edge-of-the-envelope performance modelling, and military-oriented simulations (such as DCS) give us access to high-performance aircraft where considering your flight path is a 3D volume is functionally mandatory because of the speed of the aircraft. Additionally, the advent of VR give us the ability to learn the correct visual cues of the cockpit without our inner ears trying to betray us. When i first started real flight training, i was worried that my PC flight sim experience would hold me back, that my unfamiliarity with the physical sensations of movement of the aircraft would have caused me to develop bad habits. This turned out to be the opposite of true: by spending so much time "flying" on the ground, i had learned to maneuver the aircraft purely by visual cues: sight picture and instruments. Visualize where you want the plane to go through the sky, and then fly it there. For in-the-cockpit training: practicing US-navy style continuous-turn 180-degree-to-final-at-idle-power approaches is a really useful drill for learning to fly tight patterns without loading up the wings. I never worry about my bank angle in the pattern, because i don't load up my wings. If i need more turn rates, i bank steeper and let the nose fall through as i do so. Something you didn't mention in the video: when you allow the nose to drop in a turn, ***you reduce the radius of the apparent ground-track of the turn.*** Overshooting that final turn? no worries, roll steeper, keep a 1G load, and let the nose fall through the turn. Don't try to tighten the turn with the rudder or the elevator, instead tighten it with GEOMETRY by changing the plane you're making the turn in.
@@ShuRugal "I think the reason that so much emphasis is placed on the load-factor curve is that people instinctively try to keep their flight path level when turning. I feel like the reason people do this is that we are used to moving around on the ground, where we are constrained to planar movement. People take the habit of planar movement with them into the cockpit, and end up wanting to turn, THEN descend, or turn, THEN climb." Totally agree and understand your point. However, consider this. one of THE most practiced maneuvers for student pilots is the downwind-to-base, and base-to-final turns. Descending turns. And which turning maneuver is THE most deadly among pilots? The descending, base-to-final turn. So we NEED to be teaching people what is Actually happening in this condition. "I believe that there needs to be more emphasis in primary training on breaking this habit and learning to think about your movement in three dimensions." i completely agree with you. I also have no issue with sim training. in fact, sim training is prominent in official flight training, as you may well know. "Something you didn't mention in the video: when you allow the nose to drop in a turn, **you reduce the radius of the apparent ground-track of the turn.** Overshooting that final turn? no worries, roll steeper, keep a 1G load, and let the nose fall through the turn. Don't try to tighten the turn with the rudder or the elevator, instead tighten it with GEOMETRY by changing the plane you're making the turn in." This is a VERY interesting thought. I had never considered that one before. I will definitely go try that a bit and see how well it works vs other methods. I have other suggestions I always gave pilots to avoid overshooting (taught at a parallel runway towered airport), but I never suggested anything like that.
One more clarification: Instead of thinking about stall 'speeds' think about stall 'stick position' Stalls occur at a critical angle of attack - angle of attack is controlled by the stick/yoke position -> the stick position controls stall. You can remain unstalled in any aircraft even with the nose *high* and *low* airspeed, so long as you are not pulling the stick back past the stall stick position. This video hints at that, saying to lower the nose, which is akin to saying push the stick forward of the stall stick position, but any aerobatic pilot knows that you can stall even with 120kts and pointing directly at the ground - the stick position determines stall. I think this is an important video, I would have made it differently, but its closer to the truth. I tried to explain this in the mentour pilot discord, only to have 30 people gang up on me to tell me that 'they'll use the stall speeds that have kept people out of the dirt for the last 100 years', however, as you said in the video 'each year loss of control is cited as the number one cause of GA accidents'. Clearly its important to understand the true cause of stalls, and how to prevent it.
caution on "nose-low" statement, "load" is the important part. Be mindful of back pressure and load on the airplane during all maneuvers. Remember you can still achieve an accelerated stall "nose low".
When I was learning Basic Fighter Maneuvers for a in an old (late 90s) WW2 combat sim, i remember trying to read flight envelope charts that IAS requirements for certain amount of g’s, which was important to manage your turn rate and radius. In a way that introduced me to energy management, and in the plane had only two ways to keep the airspeed up in a maneuver: throttle up or descend. I still think about this all the time in civilian flight and sim.
Great video! I want to make one comment...hopefully useful. The maneuver @3:10 performed at only 1,300 feet AGL??? Not much margin for error. I get that you weren't 'planning' on stall/spin (In fact demonstrating that it would not occur) but just in case something unexpected would happen...that's cutting a recovery very close. As student pilot, I was taught that 1,500 AGL as a minimum starting altitude for steep turn maneuvers is prudent. I add this comment for any student pilots watching this.
My ground school instructor said years ago "we teach you bad habit by letting you stall the airplane, but I am asking you, once you get your pilot license, forget what we teach you to stall the airplane"
The corollary fact to “you can stall an airplane at any airspeed and attitude” is that you can avoid a stall at any airspeed or attitude if you go 0 Gs.
Check out Medium with several articles on the topic to include Improve your Landings with AOA and Power Techniques. If you learn to do constant AOA turns instead of constant airspeed, you won’t approach turn stall. See the correlating F-35C Crash into the South China Sea - A Case Study as well as Going Beyond Procedure - An Open Letter Regarding Spins.
correct me if i'm wrong ( I'm not a pilot). when banked at 90 degrees there can be no vertical lift from the wings, so pulling back on the stick will not hold altitude. But it will load the wings to go in a circle, slowing the plane at the same time. Meanwhile, the plane is falling due to no vertical lift. I suppose that at some point the forward speed could drop to the point that its not possible to recover - unless the plane is pointed towards the ground (left or right stick depending on which wing is lower ?). If in a flat spin ( and I don't know how this develops), I suppose there is not enough wind over the control surfaces to change anything?
I suggest every pilot invest in an emergency maneuver training course in an aerobatic airplane, with an approved curriculum from a trusted flight school. Another term for it today is 'upset training'. Whether you are a student pilot or a veteran, any misunderstanding regarding the topic of this video will probably be clarified. Well worth the money and time.
Pedantic alert! KEEPING the nose low does not unload the wing. If the nose is down 10 degrees with the wings level, the wings are loaded at exactly 1G, by definition. It's the DROPPING of the nose that unloads the wing. While the nose is dropping, you are at less than 1G, but once you hold the nose at any constant angle, you're back at 1G. In steeper climbs and dives, the pilot will feel a change in G's as the plane accelerates and decelerates, but that has nothing to do with G's in the plane of the wings. So if you want to unload the wing, let the nose continue to drop. Obviously, this is only useful for so long until you turn into a lawn dart :)
I also dont get the pulling part. Seems like you are just loading the plane unnecessary. Actually when you see birds flying avoiding obstacles they accept the lose in altitude too.
In military flying training, aeros and spin recovery are introduced very early - before even going solo according to the syllabus I followed. More to the point, we did groundschool and passed our theory tests before starting in the airplane so nobody should have got flying with such a misconception, although it would not surprise if a few did.
I do not agree with the “NEVER GO BEYOND 30 AOB IN THE PATTERN.” The FAA does not have a limit, if that was the case the would publish one. It is all about understanding aerodynamics and the forces and accelerations the aircraft is experiencing based on our inputs. Since we cannot demonstrate and teach spins, we are limited to classroom setting we have to make sure the students understand all those relationships. The main goal is to minimize the YAW rate with any stalls, that is what causes the potential auto rotation to development and ensue we are in a spin if nothing is done. The turn to base and final are more dangerous if we have a yaw rate higher than an AOB and this is more common during skidding turns. Slipping turns are far less dangerous, but the main goal is to maintain the coordinated flight. Essentially once the turn is stablished, specially in medium bank turns, the rudder application will be lesser as adverse yaw is no longer present. When we turn the nose drops (heavy engine in front) and if we pull the nose up while skidding, loading the aircraft at low airspeed it is a recipe for spin entry, but notice that AOB, while it has a play on this since the higher it is the higher stall speed, the main condition for a spin is a yaw rate which will endure the autorotation. So, mastering aerodynamic and understanding all the conditions (forces, accelerations) during flight is paramount.
Really good advice. Every pilot should do spins with an instructor and practice them--they should be required for PPL and maybe in complex aircraft as they are for commercial. Also, I think practicing slips (without flaps--keep the nose down) is also great practice in an overshoot situation. We do this in taildraggers and it can be done with most GA aircraft (read the POH) . Seems much safer than trying to bank back into alignment on an overshoot. Not sure why this is not taught. 😂. Seems like it would save lives.
I'm the luckiest pilot on earth, why? Because I was trained by an experienced ag pilot who shifted my learning towards understanding the relevance of the stick /yoke AOA and stall stick position. Since then, when flying slowly or manoeuvring hard i rarely concern myself with anything other than where is my stick in relation to the stall stick position, which never moves regardless of airspeed, bank angle, skidding , load, none of which alter the stall stick position. It's that simple.
Make sure they've done it before and are comfortable, that the aircraft is able to do it, you're in the utility category and the owner/flight school is ok with it, and that you do it on a calm day at least 5000 AGL!
Ok, the plane won’t stall in a 90 degree bank if you don’t pull on the elevator, but your passengers are going to kill you for scaring the crap out of them. If you don’t pull on the elevator in a steep bank, the plane will simply lose altitude and not turn, so why would you do that? Why not keep the bank angle reasonable and just say “Unload the wing by not pulling too hard on the elevator.”? I don’t see the point of making this video.
It’s an illustration. He’s not saying to bank 90 degrees. He’s saying the increase in load factor is due to trying to maintain altitude in a banked turn. There are times such as a traffic pattern when you want to lose altitude so you can bank harder at times even with lower airspeed and not risk excessive load factor and high stall speed if you are losing altitude through out said bank
@@Dub636 It’s a poor illustration and can actually be considered an aerobatic maneuver. Why couldn’t he just say to unload the wing and it won’t stall or use DMMS and a reasonable bank angle?
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Expert explanation. This video should be mandatory viewing for every student pilot.
I’ve done my UPRT course on a Pitts Special recently and it gave me so much knowledge about spin recovery and other recoveries
Excellent discussion!
My airline has an extensive training module on this subject that goes beyond the FAA-mandated training for upset recovery.
Your teaching here is entirely consistent with our training.
Awesome video and demo! We learned for our PPT, that on final, you can control pitch with prop. Every airman learns that but it does feel more natural to pull back on the yoke to control the nose and that can get us killed. Thanks for the refresher!.
underrated
A skill that can be very effective and what will set you up for success during your IFR training as well is "Pitch for Airspeed, Power for Altitude"
Meaning if you're slow, push the nose over. If you're low, add throttle. If you're low and slow, perhaps do both. This will making holding a stabilized approach on final tremendously easier and more smooth while also drilling in the concept of pushing that nose low when maneuvering and getting too slow.
@@Keys879 This idea will get you in trouble during a real approach from FAF in IMC.
@@2025at No. It won't. CFII. The technique can be used effectively in all phases of the approach when used properly. No one should be nosing to the ground when they are at MDA/DA to recapture airspeed. At that point you should have long ago elected for a Missed Approach due to an unstabilized approach.
But if you are on the glideslope the technique can be used effectively to maintain a stabilized approach and makes flying it a breeze.
@@Keys879 You are partially correct if you fly a small airplane . Try this technique in any airliner. Even autopilot is controlling pitch (elevator) to stay on the glide slop. Talk to any 10 pilots (IFR) and there will be 50/50 on this topic. This idea was ok. decades ago but now, flying an airplane with flight director, autopilot etc…….those airplanes “fly” pitch for altitude or simply simultaneously are doing both. But I totally agree that this is the safest way (pitch for airspeed) to train new pilots. This topic is similar to discussion about the lift:Bernoulli vs Newton. In FAA publications Bernoulli is “the guy” but NASA will say:No, it is Newton. Actually both guys are “causing” the lift.
Keep in mind that neither low airspeed nor high bank angle causes a stall.. Only a high angle of attack causes a stall an that is regardless if you are upside down, if you are at 2x the minimum speed shown on the airplane or if you are pulling up from a dive, wings level. The correct action is to unload the wing as shown in the video. At a load factor of 0g you continue flying just like a ball that you throw. You won't maintain altitude but you also don't stall and spin.
This. Only angle of attack matters. You cannot stall a wing at zero g.
People use 'stall speed' because its a number they can see on a gauge in the cockpit, but whats the indicator for angle of attack? Its not pitch or attitude.
(Hint, the answer is the stick position)
@@aaronhammond7297 speed is a good proxy for AoA. Stick position is true, but is not intuitive. An easier way is to understand that speed is energy, and if you have low energy it is easier to stall the wing. That keeps people out of trouble.
@@aaronhammond7297 however I have read your other responses and completely agree with you on the reasons for the stall. 👍
@@aaronhammond7297 Yes, the position of the stick, but there are actual angle of attack indicators on the market as well. The stall warning is also an angle of attack indicator, though a very crude one at best
I know we are trying to keep this simple to understand but faster airspeeds allow for higher wing loading and more G. So what we are doing when we lower the nose in the pattern is unloading the wing AND we are also increasing airspeed which allows the wing now to sustain a higher loading before stall. Both are beneficial in avoiding stall/spin.
You are such a gift to all aviators out there. Thank you.
No lie bro, Dan makes me wanna revisit CFI. He’s awesome
I've always felt that a steep turn (the ACS maneuver) is a terrible influence on private pilots. It gives them an idea that the best way out of a tricky situation is to bank a lot and pull hard. Then we wonder why so many people die trying to turn their airplanes around. In reality, the best way out of almost any situation where you need to turn around is to bank and accept the altitude loss by not pulling. If you don't pull - not much can happen to you. This video demonstrates that point very well, thank you.
Agreed, danger comes with the hand creeping back the control stick and pulling
agree... as long as you have the altitude under you to do it....
I always stress the load factor curve ONLY applies to level flight, to my students. Definitely something I see taught wrong far too often.
I think the reason that so much emphasis is placed on the load-factor curve is that people instinctively try to keep their flight path level when turning.
I feel like the reason people do this is that we are used to moving around on the ground, where we are constrained to planar movement. People take the habit of planar movement with them into the cockpit, and end up wanting to turn, THEN descend, or turn, THEN climb.
I believe that there needs to be more emphasis in primary training on breaking this habit and learning to think about your movement in three dimensions. This is something where incorporating some of the advances in PC flight simulation into ground training could be useful. Modern simulators have extremely accurate edge-of-the-envelope performance modelling, and military-oriented simulations (such as DCS) give us access to high-performance aircraft where considering your flight path is a 3D volume is functionally mandatory because of the speed of the aircraft.
Additionally, the advent of VR give us the ability to learn the correct visual cues of the cockpit without our inner ears trying to betray us. When i first started real flight training, i was worried that my PC flight sim experience would hold me back, that my unfamiliarity with the physical sensations of movement of the aircraft would have caused me to develop bad habits. This turned out to be the opposite of true: by spending so much time "flying" on the ground, i had learned to maneuver the aircraft purely by visual cues: sight picture and instruments. Visualize where you want the plane to go through the sky, and then fly it there.
For in-the-cockpit training: practicing US-navy style continuous-turn 180-degree-to-final-at-idle-power approaches is a really useful drill for learning to fly tight patterns without loading up the wings. I never worry about my bank angle in the pattern, because i don't load up my wings. If i need more turn rates, i bank steeper and let the nose fall through as i do so.
Something you didn't mention in the video: when you allow the nose to drop in a turn, ***you reduce the radius of the apparent ground-track of the turn.*** Overshooting that final turn? no worries, roll steeper, keep a 1G load, and let the nose fall through the turn. Don't try to tighten the turn with the rudder or the elevator, instead tighten it with GEOMETRY by changing the plane you're making the turn in.
@@ShuRugal "I think the reason that so much emphasis is placed on the load-factor curve is that people instinctively try to keep their flight path level when turning. I feel like the reason people do this is that we are used to moving around on the ground, where we are constrained to planar movement. People take the habit of planar movement with them into the cockpit, and end up wanting to turn, THEN descend, or turn, THEN climb."
Totally agree and understand your point. However, consider this. one of THE most practiced maneuvers for student pilots is the downwind-to-base, and base-to-final turns. Descending turns. And which turning maneuver is THE most deadly among pilots? The descending, base-to-final turn. So we NEED to be teaching people what is Actually happening in this condition.
"I believe that there needs to be more emphasis in primary training on breaking this habit and learning to think about your movement in three dimensions."
i completely agree with you.
I also have no issue with sim training. in fact, sim training is prominent in official flight training, as you may well know.
"Something you didn't mention in the video: when you allow the nose to drop in a turn, **you reduce the radius of the apparent ground-track of the turn.** Overshooting that final turn? no worries, roll steeper, keep a 1G load, and let the nose fall through the turn. Don't try to tighten the turn with the rudder or the elevator, instead tighten it with GEOMETRY by changing the plane you're making the turn in."
This is a VERY interesting thought. I had never considered that one before. I will definitely go try that a bit and see how well it works vs other methods. I have other suggestions I always gave pilots to avoid overshooting (taught at a parallel runway towered airport), but I never suggested anything like that.
One more clarification: Instead of thinking about stall 'speeds' think about stall 'stick position'
Stalls occur at a critical angle of attack - angle of attack is controlled by the stick/yoke position -> the stick position controls stall.
You can remain unstalled in any aircraft even with the nose *high* and *low* airspeed, so long as you are not pulling the stick back past the stall stick position.
This video hints at that, saying to lower the nose, which is akin to saying push the stick forward of the stall stick position, but any aerobatic pilot knows that you can stall even with 120kts and pointing directly at the ground - the stick position determines stall.
I think this is an important video, I would have made it differently, but its closer to the truth.
I tried to explain this in the mentour pilot discord, only to have 30 people gang up on me to tell me that 'they'll use the stall speeds that have kept people out of the dirt for the last 100 years', however, as you said in the video 'each year loss of control is cited as the number one cause of GA accidents'. Clearly its important to understand the true cause of stalls, and how to prevent it.
caution on "nose-low" statement, "load" is the important part. Be mindful of back pressure and load on the airplane during all maneuvers. Remember you can still achieve an accelerated stall "nose low".
When I was learning Basic Fighter Maneuvers for a in an old (late 90s) WW2 combat sim, i remember trying to read flight envelope charts that IAS requirements for certain amount of g’s, which was important to manage your turn rate and radius. In a way that introduced me to energy management, and in the plane had only two ways to keep the airspeed up in a maneuver: throttle up or descend.
I still think about this all the time in civilian flight and sim.
Great video! I want to make one comment...hopefully useful. The maneuver @3:10 performed at only 1,300 feet AGL??? Not much margin for error. I get that you weren't 'planning' on stall/spin (In fact demonstrating that it would not occur) but just in case something unexpected would happen...that's cutting a recovery very close. As student pilot, I was taught that 1,500 AGL as a minimum starting altitude for steep turn maneuvers is prudent. I add this comment for any student pilots watching this.
My ground school instructor said years ago "we teach you bad habit by letting you stall the airplane, but I am asking you, once you get your pilot license, forget what we teach you to stall the airplane"
I like your videos, they're well presented and good narration.
I'm learning a lot. Thank you.
Descending turn stalls fully configured for landing should be practiced regularly.
Every airplane has a built-in angle of attack indicator… it’s called the YOKE
Amazing video and knowledge sir and am doing my A320 type rating soon
Brilliant explanation and thank you for this video
Because you can’t stall if you don’t pull. It’s important to have that down deep in your head and your muscle memory.
great video and excellent topic to discuss.
Excellent advice, beautifully explained too.
Amazing advice. Love your videos!
Excellent video! Thank you!!!
Thanks again.. You are a blessing
Bravo! You have a new subscriber!
I've never flown but this makes perfect sense.
The corollary fact to “you can stall an airplane at any airspeed and attitude” is that you can avoid a stall at any airspeed or attitude if you go 0 Gs.
Check out Medium with several articles on the topic to include Improve your Landings with AOA and Power Techniques. If you learn to do constant AOA turns instead of constant airspeed, you won’t approach turn stall. See the correlating F-35C Crash into the South China Sea - A Case Study as well as Going Beyond Procedure - An Open Letter Regarding Spins.
correct me if i'm wrong ( I'm not a pilot).
when banked at 90 degrees there can be no vertical lift from the wings, so pulling back on the stick will not hold altitude. But it will load the wings to go in a circle, slowing the plane at the same time. Meanwhile, the plane is falling due to no vertical lift.
I suppose that at some point the forward speed could drop to the point that its not possible to recover - unless the plane is pointed towards the ground (left or right stick depending on which wing is lower ?).
If in a flat spin ( and I don't know how this develops), I suppose there is not enough wind over the control surfaces to change anything?
Hands-down, the best instructional videos and explanations on the Internet, no comparison. All of my students will be using Flight insight.
I suggest every pilot invest in an emergency maneuver training course in an aerobatic airplane, with an approved curriculum from a trusted flight school. Another term for it today is 'upset training'. Whether you are a student pilot or a veteran, any misunderstanding regarding the topic of this video will probably be clarified. Well worth the money and time.
I need a video on ' straight in landing
Pedantic alert! KEEPING the nose low does not unload the wing. If the nose is down 10 degrees with the wings level, the wings are loaded at exactly 1G, by definition. It's the DROPPING of the nose that unloads the wing. While the nose is dropping, you are at less than 1G, but once you hold the nose at any constant angle, you're back at 1G. In steeper climbs and dives, the pilot will feel a change in G's as the plane accelerates and decelerates, but that has nothing to do with G's in the plane of the wings. So if you want to unload the wing, let the nose continue to drop. Obviously, this is only useful for so long until you turn into a lawn dart :)
how does the load factor gauge measure? by wing flex displacement? or some kind of accelerometer and preset weight calculation?
I also dont get the pulling part. Seems like you are just loading the plane unnecessary. Actually when you see birds flying avoiding obstacles they accept the lose in altitude too.
can anybody tell me what is this flight simulator app,thx
This is dope!
Good day
Could you please make videos about Communication what to say and what to expect because there’s no such a content on YT
Excellent! So we’ll stated
In military flying training, aeros and spin recovery are introduced very early - before even going solo according to the syllabus I followed. More to the point, we did groundschool and passed our theory tests before starting in the airplane so nobody should have got flying with such a misconception, although it would not surprise if a few did.
Excellent!
What should be mandatory is spin training
Saving lives
I do not agree with the “NEVER GO BEYOND 30 AOB IN THE PATTERN.” The FAA does not have a limit, if that was the case the would publish one.
It is all about understanding aerodynamics and the forces and accelerations the aircraft is experiencing based on our inputs. Since we cannot demonstrate and teach spins, we are limited to classroom setting we have to make sure the students understand all those relationships.
The main goal is to minimize the YAW rate with any stalls, that is what causes the potential auto rotation to development and ensue we are in a spin if nothing is done. The turn to base and final are more dangerous if we have a yaw rate higher than an AOB and this is more common during skidding turns. Slipping turns are far less dangerous, but the main goal is to maintain the coordinated flight. Essentially once the turn is stablished, specially in medium bank turns, the rudder application will be lesser as adverse yaw is no longer present.
When we turn the nose drops (heavy engine in front) and if we pull the nose up while skidding, loading the aircraft at low airspeed it is a recipe for spin entry, but notice that AOB, while it has a play on this since the higher it is the higher stall speed, the main condition for a spin is a yaw rate which will endure the autorotation.
So, mastering aerodynamic and understanding all the conditions (forces, accelerations) during flight is paramount.
Really good advice. Every pilot should do spins with an instructor and practice them--they should be required for PPL and maybe in complex aircraft as they are for commercial. Also, I think practicing slips (without flaps--keep the nose down) is also great practice in an overshoot situation. We do this in taildraggers and it can be done with most GA aircraft (read the POH) . Seems much safer than trying to bank back into alignment on an overshoot. Not sure why this is not taught. 😂. Seems like it would save lives.
I had to do accelerated stalls for my private license
I always shallow bank in the pattern with tiny extra speed
I'm the luckiest pilot on earth, why? Because I was trained by an experienced ag pilot who shifted my learning towards understanding the relevance of the stick /yoke AOA and stall stick position. Since then, when flying slowly or manoeuvring hard i rarely concern myself with anything other than where is my stick in relation to the stall stick position, which never moves regardless of airspeed, bank angle, skidding , load, none of which alter the stall stick position. It's that simple.
You can still do 60° steep turns guys and not stall if you use adequate power.
Going to ask my CFI to demonstrate a spin next time we go up.
Make sure they've done it before and are comfortable, that the aircraft is able to do it, you're in the utility category and the owner/flight school is ok with it, and that you do it on a calm day at least 5000 AGL!
Ok, the plane won’t stall in a 90 degree bank if you don’t pull on the elevator, but your passengers are going to kill you for scaring the crap out of them. If you don’t pull on the elevator in a steep bank, the plane will simply lose altitude and not turn, so why would you do that? Why not keep the bank angle reasonable and just say “Unload the wing by not pulling too hard on the elevator.”? I don’t see the point of making this video.
It’s an illustration. He’s not saying to bank 90 degrees. He’s saying the increase in load factor is due to trying to maintain altitude in a banked turn. There are times such as a traffic pattern when you want to lose altitude so you can bank harder at times even with lower airspeed and not risk excessive load factor and high stall speed if you are losing altitude through out said bank
@@Dub636 It’s a poor illustration and can actually be considered an aerobatic maneuver. Why couldn’t he just say to unload the wing and it won’t stall or use DMMS and a reasonable bank angle?