I did not know that about the alternate static! Good to know. But I guess it’s pretty difficult to accidentally activate it in the Tomahawk – you have to (with my one at least) reach blind behind the throttle quadrant and fumble for the valve.
Like stalling practice, waste of time, training should concentrate on watching airspeed (wont fly without it). You should always have one eye on the ASI, thats all that you need.
So you say that you’re not able to fly without ASI. And what about partial panel training? Have you ever received it? I’m perfectly capable of flying without ASI, having AI and knowing engine settings, even in IMC. In VFR I can fly without any instrument and I don’t think it’s something special when we’re talking about piston single.
And of course there’s no such thing as a ‘stalling speed’.
Interesting. And all those years I thought the “V” in “Vs” stood for speed.
The wing stalls at an angle of attack, which, depending upon weight and G will correspond to a speed. The stall warning system reacts to that angle of attack, not to a speed. Therefore, irrespective of IAS, the stall warning will warn of a stall. IF a pilot is actually dependent upon a stall warning system to avert a stall, then this is a vitally important factor, as that pilot will probably get it all wrong, by reference to IAS alone… As tot he original question, 5 KIAS is the minimum speed margin at 1G gross weight, and my standard is that I will not accept a system which warns ar faster than 10 KIAS before the stall break on light singles.
Reference to IAS during a “normal” approach to a stall may be reasonable, and certainly gives a sense of impending stall. Skillful flying and awareness of the feel of the aircraft will give you a much better awareness of the impending stall. Much more important than the “speed” in the realm of the stall, is the trend of the speed and G. If speed is decreasing, and G increasing (or either is about to be) THAT is your stall warning, irrespective of the horn. If the pilot is not getting that, then the horn will likely be too little too late to avert a stall.
I can, and demonstrate to hearty observers that my C 150 can be flown at 20 MPH IAS, with good control and no stall warning, for brief periods of time, albeit at somewhat less than 1G. But the trend of doing that is that it is not sustainable, and I am going to have to initiate a recovery to avert a stall – that is the warning! If you pulled back into 1G doing that, you would have a stall warning, and a stall so close together that you could not prevent a stall entry. ’Doesn’t apply to the real world of flying you say? On a really gusty slow approach, you could be trending into those conditions of flight, so the conditions of flight are your stall warning, the horn is just there to keep the lawyers of the manufacturer happy. When you read accident reports, you’ll sometimes read the phrase “The pilot failed to maintain flying speed”, which is reasonable wording for what happened. Obversely, the pilot tried to fly with inadequate speed, which resulted in pulling back too much, and exceeding the critical AoA. The warning of the stall was the trend of the speed and G, and the phase of flight. The warning system probably sounded too late and too briefly before the stall, and probably spin, to assist in preventing stall entry.
When you read 23.207, a stall warning system is not a requirement, and I have flown some “modern” aircraft which do not have any such system. I find that pilots trained to fly in those aircraft are more stall aware…..
I find that pilots trained to fly in those aircraft are more stall aware…..
Maybe. But as an instructor, helplessly watching from the ground when a student is doing his first solo patterns, I really appreciate it that Mr. Cessna usually installs a stall warner on his aeroplanes, even if this is no formal requirement. Gives me some peace of mind and has probably saved thousands of lives over the last 50 years. Not every pilot is a natural born test pilot…
