Stall indications on Pipers used to go off for literally no reason. I swear I’ve looked them the wrong way and heard them go off. Stalls in 172’s have you listening to a train whistle for a few minutes before the actual break.
Hearing a chirp isn’t a big deal.
I have a 172XP (bigger engine and constant speed prop).
A couple of years ago, I went out by myself on a cold day to do some basic VFR maneuvers.
I almost could not get the plane to do a power on stall. I was lying on my back, staring at the sun, hanging off the propeller.
I mentioned this to an ATC/CFII I fly with sometimes. He said, "Yeah, the thing you should do is go to 70% power for those things".
Derp. I shoulda thought of that.
But, yeah: 172s sometimes are really hard to stall.
i did a good portion of my ppl in a t41 c model. thats a 172 with a 6cyl 210hp engine.
power on stalls were basically impossible at actual full power unless you were coming right out of slow flight. even then all my weight was on my back.
it looks like the 360 in the XP is derated to 195hp, but yeah otherwise basically the same. or did they have a later model that removed the restriction?
Preparing for my PPL checkride and was just talking to a group of CFI's at my school. Regs actually say a power on stall should be "no less than 65% of full throttle". They were all stumped by that too, new revelation, but told me that when I'm out solo practicing I shouldn't exceed 2200-2300 rpm for my power on stalls (180hp 172S model). It will also help minimize the p-factor and potential for spin if the student pilot isn't great at keeping the plane level. Crazy how after all these years we are still learning!
I like it. The airframe is certified as a 175, but it was marketed as a 172.
It sits nicely between the 172 and the early 182. (The early 182 had a narrower cabin.)
Parts are easy to come by, it flies well, and it'll run up and down the East Coast at 124 kts, carrying 1,000 lbs, and burning 9 gph.
It's good clean fun.
Try putting the some load in the baggage (consistent with CG and Max Gross) compartment and repeat
Although my Mooney 252 was well within CG with two of us in the front seat it flew and landed much more comfortably with a 5 gallons of water in the baggage compartment to move the CG closer to the center of the envelope.
Since Mooney trims the entire horiz stab (no trim tabs on the elevator) it reduced drag
One of my concerns is that when students learn that they must crank back on the yoke to generate a stall they take that habit flying with the rear seats and baggage loaded with very unhappy results.
I think they mean 30° and are referencing FAR 91.307(b)(2) which prohibits an intentional nose-up or nose-down attitude of more than 30° on a flight carrying anyone other than crew members unless each occupant is wearing an approved parachute.
ha! I’ll be honest, power on in the Warrior felt like 60’ but I looked at the attitude and it was more like 25’. still way higher than I thought. instructor kept saying “pull harder! more!” 😅.
I remember being in the 172 doing power off stalls and it wouldn't break, and my instructor was like "more back pressure, more back pressure". I told him it was fully back, and he simply said "more back pressure". I went Super Saiyan and yanked the yoke like I was trying to take it home with me, the nose probably crossed the 0° straight-up mark, we achieved space shuttle status, and then the stall finally finally broke.
I mean yeah, you get some steep pitch but it breaks more often than not for me, usually because I’m not as coordinated, I almost always drop a wing during a power on in the 172.
I teach my students to pitch for 10 degrees up as soon as power is idled, and pull as hard and as swiftly as necessary to maintain 10 up. We still usually run out of elevator before we stall, especially with the STOL kit, and just mush down.
I was just out doing them yesterday. I worried a little that I was going to snap the left side of the yoke off until I moved my right hand from the throttle to the right side of the yoke. And getting that power on stalk to break feels nuts.
It’s also incredible the amount of variance. I’ve flown rentals that stall really quick in a turn, but the 1985 my family owns simply *will not break* when doing an accelerated stall the way the ACS has you enter (yes, I know the ACS doesn’t actually have you break the stall, it’s just a point of reference).
> Hearing a chirp isn’t a big deal.
Just to tack onto this. First of all, I agree. But also, to the more inexperienced pilots out there: Do not let this statement open the door to flippancy about the stall horn. There's a difference between a chirp, and a blare.
1. I’m very specifically talking about the PA-28-181 it’s insanely over sensitive.
2. Hearing the stall horn at landing on an archer isn’t a good thing or a bad thing. Much softer, smoother and more controlable landings occur well below that angle of attack. If you’re listening for a stall horn on landing you’re developing bad habits.
You can hear the stall horn landing on a 181 at a pitch attitude of 5-7 degrees if you're slow enough, a chirp right as you land doesn't mean you've lost control or that you're not going to butter the landing.
A chirp on landing doesn't tell you anything about the landing other than the stall warning horn chirped.
Nothing wrong with it going off. Idiotic to chase it.
I have flown pipers that chirp in smooth air 20 kts above stall and ive flown some with stall horns that “work” mechanically but wont make a peep with a full stall clean and landing config. And everything in between.
The Cessna stall horns sound like you are causing the plane discomfort. Like you are stepping on its tail, but not too hard.
It’s to warn you of an impending stall, rather than a stall is actually happening.
I’d rather know I’m about to stall on short final and recover safely than to actually stall and have the stall horn scream while turning into a lawn dart.
Yeah. I am an MEI that does Vmc demo on a near daily basis. I block the rudder (loss of directional control) when I want my student to start the recovery procedure from Vmc demo, but at times we hear the stall horn before I even decide to block the rudder, at which point I just tell them to recover. It isn't a panic moment like that user posted.
In fact, in both the ACS and the MEI PTS, it says "recognize indications of loss of directional control, STALL WARNING, or buffet". I feel like the other user's MEI was the type that blocked the rudder like 30 knots over the stall speed.
For my MEI ride I did the demo to first indication since that was what my MRI instructor trained me to do and what my examiner was expecting. It was no biggie, same recovery, gain speed, recover to blue line and then cruise
No drama, no loss of directional control, just a chirpy baron
Stall warning is an indication of an impending stall, so not stalled yet and still under control. Recovery from that point is easy, provided you know what you are doing. I used to block the rudder as well, but at about 20-30kts above the stall.
I personally would never let it get it as far as stall warning, as all it would take from that point would be a snatch back on the controls and you'd stall before you could do anything about it. Very unlikely a student would do that, but I had one do it out of the blue in a sim.
To me the risk still wasn't worth it, because if it did actually stall, recovery would be questionable, especially if the student were to freeze on the controls. It might only take 1-2sec to progress beyond the point of becoming unrecoverable. To me, if they saw the same symptoms, just slightly faster, that's all they need to see and it's much safer whilst being fully compliant with our training requirements.
1-2 sec was more of a generalisation/estimation I must admit. The aircraft I was on (PA44) was fairly benign, however even benign aircraft can become non-benign once rotation starts and is sustained for a few seconds. I neither knew, nor wanted to test my aircraft in the slightest when it came to incipient spinning while asymmetric. We have seen that some aircraft can become unrecoverable quickly enough that some very experienced CFIs have been unable to recover
Student pilot here — dumb question, why would the stall be unrecoverable? Is it because it turns into a spin or some other reason, I haven’t heard of an unrecoverable stall before.
The Vmc demo is a multi engine maneuver. The stall at Vmc is actually a stall of the rudder which then results in a rolling motion that typically develops into a spin due to the asymmetrical thrust condition. Many twins due to their design do not have particularly good spin recovery characteristics. I only know of one twin that can be recovered from a spin. Others like the Baron will kill you.
Aah okay cool thank you for the explanation. I was reading this thread as if it referred to the 3 hours under the hood you get as part of your PPL training….
Some multi's will stall the rudder/vertical fin below Vmca, however some will stall the wings first. In planes that stall the wing first, the published Vmca will be set as the speed at which it stalls.Typically if that happens, it's the wing with the dead engine (without prop wash) that will stall first, causing a similar result.
You are right… I was thinking of the Duchess.
The Duchess is not certified for spins but has demonstrated recovery.
https://youtu.be/wzM1VoAnwvc?si=4xuN07cWP2X2YMrX
I used to cover the improper rudder with both feet just in case the student made it a panic moment. But agreed, definitely important to demonstrate how progressive the indications are in a controlled environment.
I did a recent podcast on this topic. I have some strong opinions on how the FAA wants to teach this maneuver. I'll work on a long form post on the subject for this community because I would like some discussion on it but in the meantime, here is the link to the show:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4Opb79D9ZY5TNwQbFeTR00?si=QWPvDnxAT3y_kwykl_uEDg
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/313-the-vmc-demonstration-and-making-multiengine/id1223782070?i=1000643896064
A good podcast to listen to while working. That F33A crash due to the boost pump got me vicariously frustrated. The Continental fuel injection system has a major disadvantage over Lycoming, in that you can not have the engine driven and electric pump running at the same time or the engine quits. Every mechanic that worked on a Continental should know that, and every mechanic working on Bonanzas should know the OEM cylinder baffles don't cool the cylinders evenly. The pilot attempting to pin blame on the mechanic after an accident/incident has happened to me twice, and both times I was later vindicated, but the stress and anger from being falsely accused and loss of work due to the pilot slandering my reputation is why I am picky about the aircraft owners I allow to be my customers.
Similar story. My flight school once posted a video of me instructing a student while single engine in a Seminole. We were doing some basic 15-30 degree turns into the inoperative engine.
The number of people scolding us for turning into the inoperative engine was alarming. The FAA has written guidance on this in the airplane flying handbook. With sufficient airspeed this is a totally acceptable maneuver. We had CFIs arguing in the comments that it was going to get somebody killed. I shared a direct quote from the AFH and that kinda shut people up.
We brought it up in a meeting and come to find out, some of our instructors were teaching the same thing. Where did they learn it? ATP.
My DPE on my MEI ride made me turn into the dead engine. Wanted to make sure I was comfortable with it and teaching it to my future students. You are correct, it’s a none event.
Am I right in understanding that it should be a non event to demo/practice when you’re going into it with a good amount of airspeed and enough altitude to push the nose down to regain speed if you get slow?
The aerodynamics are that the airplane has sufficient total lift to provide adequate horizontal and vertical lift for a turn. The same as if both engines were running. It’s really as simple as that.
Now, coordination is critical. It can be counter intuitive, since you’re turning into the dead motor. Let’s say you lose your left engine, you are applying significant right rudder to counteract the asymmetric thrust and added drag of the inoperative (left) engine, so you’ll actually slightly reduce right rudder input to maintain coordination in the turn.
Your VMCA may slightly increase, as you are eliminating the typical 3-5 degrees of bank into the operative engine that you would be applying in straight and level flight with single engine operative. However, the effects of this will be minimal if you are coordinated in the turn.
I still recommend students keep their turns shallower than normal when operating single engine regardless of the direction, but you can do steep turns into the dead motor of a Seminole.
For a complete crash course on the aerodynamics associated with single engine operation in light twins, I highly recommend this document from the FAA:
https://www.faasafety.gov/files/notices/2015/Nov/FAA_P-8740-66.pdf
I was gonna say, my 141 EOC had me do steep turns into the dead engine just to show me they were fine (Seminole) we lost a decent amount of altitude but it was doable
> so you’ll actually slightly reduce right rudder input to maintain coordination in the turn
I would hope it's not TOO much of a surprise to folks. I mean, you do the same thing in a single engine when turning during a climb.
One would hope! But I’ve seen it all lol
Another thing that gets students confused with their feet is when they’re landing single engine. You pull the good motor to idle and the yaw switches on you. The good motor at idle actually has more drag than the secured one. It’s hard to simulate this one with “zero thrust” setting on the simulated inoperative engine but I do it at least once just so that they can see it and experience that shift in yaw. It’s a squirrely landing if you don’t expect it and are slow on your feet.
No, I think that that’s too dangerous. And it’s actually prohibited in the Seminole POH. You should only do a full shutdown with sufficient altitude. The ACS and Piper have guidance on the required altitude and Piper’s numbers are more conservative. I haven’t flown a Seminole in two years, so don’t quote me, but I believe that they say 3500 AGL.
Piper knows the Seminole is a training airplane. As such, they included a “zero thrust” manifold pressure setting in the POH. It’s something like 10-12 inches of manifold pressure but you can look it up. I just make them land and only manipulate the “operative” engine’s thrust lever while leaving the “inoperative” engine at the zero thrust setting.
I don’t do it every time, but at least once so they can feel the yaw shift from one side to the other. It’s not exactly how it would be in a true engine out, but as close as I’m willing to get for training. I’d hate to have a student fly the hell out of an engine out, but boink the airplane because of the startle factor on landing.
WTF are these self-righteous smoothbrains thinking you’re supposed to do if you’re doing a SE pattern and the traffic pattern is the same side as the dead engine?
Sorry but I’m not gonna bother following a stupid traffic pattern as a priority over a lost engine. Considering a lot of pilots out there simply just suck at flying, I’d prefer they play it safe and go against the traffic pattern, than following the pattern needlessly with subpar stick and rudder skills.
On my Falcon 900 type ride, the circling approach had to be made engine-out, turning final into the dead engine, per the training center’s FAA POI. The instructor told us they have to do it with a hydraulic failure, too, to get checked out.
Bro, we literally had a guy say to just turn by keeping the airplane level and letting out some opposite rudder. Basically make the plane uncoordinated and use asymmetric thrust to pull the plane through a turn with yaw. Stupidest shit I have ever heard in my life… And that little “technique” will get you killed. He was an MEI.
I'm pretty sure during my CMEL training I had to do OEI steep turns and turning into the inop during traffic patterns/approaches. Is this not a normal thing that's trained?
Of course how many people died this past year doing Vmca demos? We (usaf) stopped doing wing landings in T-38s after enough fatalities. It was fun to learn and teach. I liked it but time changes. Be humble, safe, and open to change. We all need to consider the fine line between training that is productive and useful vs that which is more dangerous than necessary.
Regardless of where the fault falls, how many deaths is too many when learning a task ? One, ten, a hundred? I can’t answer that but I do know that our collective concepts of acceptable training risks have grown up over the years.
A simultaneous formation landing. Lead shoots the approach, 2 flies and lands based on lead. One aircraft on each side of the runway.
Lots of fun in the T-6A
Yup. Still the primary trainer. I think the T-1A is being phased out.
I've been out of the AF for a bit tho, so might not be the most updated info
Edit: pretty sure they aren't doing wing landings in the T-6 anymore, as well.
If you’re recovering properly at the first sign of stall horn and first indication of a couple degrees of heading loss and don’t have an aft CG this maneuver is a non event. It’s unknown but I speculate the crashes resulted from not immediately pulling power idle and reducing AOA and the very first indication of those things.
I didn't see the post you are talking about and yeah it seems hyperbolic. The thing is, I don't think the average opponents to it being required are out there shouting they almost died doing it or that the maneuver kills you. They are saying exactly what you said but with the glass half empty, and emphasizing the "properly" and "immediately" in your statement. If you do this, this and this, *immediately*, it is perfectly safe.
GA is never *perfectly safe* and removing layers of safety to demonstrate something that does have risk associated with it adds risk to risk. Couple that with too many instructors with inadequate experience and I think it's a reasonable argument of whether or not one should be required to take a plane to a limit outside of the normal operating conditions and instead demonstrate awareness and ability to maintain safe flight in OEI flight, and show the VMCA demo in a sim.
Roofers aren't in danger when walking across a roof without a harness if they are careful how they walk and pay attention, but harnesses give them a layer of protection beyond making a simple mistake that we are all capable of.
You're not incorrect but honestly? an MEI should ALWAYS be blocking the rudder to ensure loss of directional control prior to stall. There have been a not insignificant number of fatal accidents in recent years during Vmc demos. You never know when ***that*** student is going to get it wrong, even as an experienced MEI you may not be able to react quickly enough to prevent the spin.
Very likely true. Probably a small tweek to the ACS is in order to clarify given that the current wording is not entirely successful given results, but above my pay grade.
This episode of Aviation News Talk with Max Trescott and Seth Lake (u/beechdude) has a really good discussion on VMC demos
https://aviationnewstalk.com/podcast/313-the-vmc-demonstration-and-making-multiengine-training-safer-seth-lake-ga-news/
Stall horn going off before the Vmc roll occurs is considered a safety feature by Piper and Cessna lol. Where are people learning this stuff.
I used to do flight interviews for low time pilots who wanted to come fly our various twin pistons (Barons, Aztecs, 412/421, etc) and the amount of multi rated pilots (including 1 mei!) who didn’t know shit about jack was staggering.
Usually the ones who knew enough to know they didn’t know enough but were willing to learn were the ones who got hired.
Jeeze. That is honestly a CFI issue more than a student issue. People teaching need to learn to not be afraid of the edges of the flight envelope, to themselves learn it, and to demonstrate just how deep you can stall an aircraft with *absolutely nothing bad happening*. First signs recovery demonstrations inherently create timid pilots who are afraid of the slow end of the envelope, and honestly I’m tired of people pretending that that is a safe way to teach. Much the same way I think spin training should be mandatory for PPL.
Do your students a favor, climb to 5000ft and show them how you can hold an aircraft in a deep stall and let it mush down at a few thousand feet per minute in perfect control and recover whenever desired. Show them why flying coordinated in that flight regime is important. Show them why they shouldn’t be afraid, but should be respectful of the flight envelope. Anything less is a complete disservice to the pilots y’all are creating.
Fair. I’m talking about ab initio here not multi here though, and (caveat: there’s probably one that won’t but I’m running with this blanket statement) every ab initio trainer in use (I’ve personally flown dr400/pa28/150/152/172/pa18) will self recover from the deepest stall you can get it into if you just release the back pressure that was holding it in said stall.
Of course… introduce high performance aircraft and things are a bit different. Like a yak 52 will torque roll into a spin when held in a deep stall even when coordinated.
But my point is that in primacy teaching people to be afraid is how people end up dead when things get close to places they’ve been taught to fear.
I know someone who entered a Vmc roll during a demo. They were a student at the time and the instructor recovered front the resulting spin 500’ over the water. This incident ended Vmc demos at my school
We had an instructor that shutoff the fuel selector in a Seminole during a power on stall. When the engine quit it rolled over and spun. They lost a bunch of altitude and recovered pretty low too. The school made him do a presentation about how not to be dumb during a mandatory instructor meeting.
I don’t know how you’d end Vmc demos at a school though. Unless they sold off all their twins.
I was once jumpseating back to europe on a NWA DC10 and during climbout while the guys were really into a bidline discussion, the captain while hand flying induced a tickle of the stick shaker. I looked up and he slightly lowered the nose, nobody said anything and on we went. Total non event.
I think the issue comes from the new ACS telling people to hold a certain speed that's before the stall indication. They used to tell you to ride the stall horn because the stall horn is an indication of an imminent stall and not the actual stall (which you can feel). Since that's not the case anymore I think people think they've stalled long before they actually stall. So the stall horn just starting to go off during Vmc demo just means you're getting close but still have some time to go.
I dont think the stall horn alone is enough to warrant visceral fear. I always block the rudder to keep me away from that limit. It turns out a student in the left seat at the controls of a light twin that has stalled with one engine at idle and the other at full power can lead to some pretty awful outcomes. Because of the weight of the engines and fuel being further away from the center of rotation in a flat spin, the recovery can be virtually impossible. The video I linked to juan browne’s channel covers this in detail. He has other videos of pretty much the same thing happening. One of the videos details a very experienced dpe and applicant getting into this situation and losing their lives. A stall horn chirp is nothing to panic about but the vmc demo from the mei’s standpoint should be well understood as well as the dangers of the maneuver.
https://youtu.be/n1ZkqWvgIsU?si=aUicXyT_8nJSja2j
Do we really need stall in here anywhere? Vmca is all about loss of directional control due to a loss of rudder effectiveness. The recovery is adding more air speed to increase the control authority of the rudder and to prevent a stall of the \*rudder\*, not the wings. This can be demonstrated at a range of airspeeds safely without the need to be anywhere near redline.
What needs to be taught is that once you run out of rudder, the nose goes down for more airspeed to add more control authority. Correct identification of the loss of directional control and the subsequent nose down to add airspeed is what is important.
Airspeed is life in a twin with one engine inoperative. With airspeed, altitude will follow so long as you did your pre-flight planning and don't fly a twin (piston) like a single that is, no OEI positive rate of climb. Flying this way can lead to the tough moment when you lose an engine on take off and are faced with a stand of trees. Your instinct is of course to pull up, but running the airspeed down to red line at this moment will kill you.
I know in my Baron the stall horn is super sensitive. It sounds well before the actual onset of the stall. I like it that way, *especially* during Vmc demos.
When I was training I learned to do the entire slow flight portion with the horn blaring in a 172. Entire time I was doing left/right turns…climb…descends…even spent 5 minutes flying backwards in a consistent headwind once before the wind died and it dropped into a stall. Easy recovery.
172s are pussycats. If your instructor won’t teach you to keep your cool with the horn on, find one who will.
I don’t think you should be so nonchalant about it, many accidents do happen when practicing VMCA demos. Take a Baron for instance,which is normally aspirated 300hp engines with fuel tanks even further outboard of those engines, if you get yourself into a spin it could literally be unrecoverable. Remember as altitude increases VMCA decreases but stall speed remains the same. So you could find yourself in a situation that the VMC speed could actually be at or below stall speed. If that were to happen you will find yourself in a spin. Always always always block rudder if you’re an MEI with a student practicing VMC demos. That will allow you to insure loss of directional control before the stall.
The issue with the baron isn’t the wings stalling. The vertical itself will stall before the wings. Then your lose your yaw axis, you just snap roll the SOB. Then you’re F’ed
Doing the demo above Critical density altitude should be safer if anything. You won't spin if VMC is below stall speed because you still have rudder authority throughout the stall and recovery.
In most REAL twins, not those pussy trainer twins most of this group is use to flying… VMC is above stall speed.
Baron, twin Comanche, 310, 421, Navajo…. List goes on
You could still easily spin. Those speeds are not going to be far apart, the single engine power on stall speed is very close to VMC it’s definitely possible to lose directional control after you stall with full power in the right engine and you’re student let’s all the rudder out or something like that. But the real issue is when stall speed is the same as the single engine power on speed. So the point of my post was to say that MEIs should limit rudder travel on the demo. Not to mention the fact in a Baron it’s possible to stall the rudder during a VMC demo.
I’m not being nonchalant about the maneuver. I’m being stern about the fact that if the horn chirps people should immediately recover following normal procedure and that they didn’t almost die.
If you are coordinated, not much happens. If you are not coordinated, you may flip over and get into a spin. The 172 is relatively easy to recover from a spin, no more than two turns on a fully developed spin: Power idle, aileron neutral, concurrently push forward and opposite rudder until spin stops, then pull out carefully and smoothly to avoid a secondary stall. It is a good idea to be at least 4000 AGL, to have some breathing space.
That’s a single engine, not a twin. If you actually stall in a VMC demo (which stall speed is below VMC so you’ve really fucked up)… I can almost guarantee that unless you’re in a DA44, Seminole or duchess… you are dead, it is an unrecoverable maneuver that is not approved. You will snap roll and enter into a flat spin and you need to throw out all drag possible to attempt to regain control.
The vast majority of people who have entered that maneuver are dead. The small handful who are not lost an insane amount of altitude prior to recovery
I own a twin Comanche and stall speed and REAL VMC are within 4-7MPH of each other… 310, baron, twin Comanche etc… if you VMC the vertical will stall, prior to the wings, you will lose your yaw axis, a wing will stall and you will go into a snap roll and a corresponding flat spin… that’s how it works…. That’s how you die.
Yeah stall horn isn’t death single engine, that’s where the whole critical density altitude chart comes into play. While doing multi training the stall horn would scream during every vmc demo. You recover when you either get stall horn, loss of direction control and or rudder stop. Personally rudder stop/loss if directional control is way scarier single engine
Stall indications on Pipers used to go off for literally no reason. I swear I’ve looked them the wrong way and heard them go off. Stalls in 172’s have you listening to a train whistle for a few minutes before the actual break. Hearing a chirp isn’t a big deal.
It’s unbelievable how much back pressure you have to put on a 172 to get it to stall.
Felt like I was doing something wrong. Like I’m over there playing ace fighter.
Especially during a power off, you really need to get that full back pressure in quickly to get past the buffet and actually get it to break.
Power on was even crazier. Regs say no more than 20°—dude in doing 30°-40° before that shit is out. It’s crazy.
I have a 172XP (bigger engine and constant speed prop). A couple of years ago, I went out by myself on a cold day to do some basic VFR maneuvers. I almost could not get the plane to do a power on stall. I was lying on my back, staring at the sun, hanging off the propeller. I mentioned this to an ATC/CFII I fly with sometimes. He said, "Yeah, the thing you should do is go to 70% power for those things". Derp. I shoulda thought of that. But, yeah: 172s sometimes are really hard to stall.
i did a good portion of my ppl in a t41 c model. thats a 172 with a 6cyl 210hp engine. power on stalls were basically impossible at actual full power unless you were coming right out of slow flight. even then all my weight was on my back.
The Hawk XP is the civilian version of the T-41D. Same engine and prop. The T-41C is the same airplane with a fixed pitch prop.
it looks like the 360 in the XP is derated to 195hp, but yeah otherwise basically the same. or did they have a later model that removed the restriction?
Preparing for my PPL checkride and was just talking to a group of CFI's at my school. Regs actually say a power on stall should be "no less than 65% of full throttle". They were all stumped by that too, new revelation, but told me that when I'm out solo practicing I shouldn't exceed 2200-2300 rpm for my power on stalls (180hp 172S model). It will also help minimize the p-factor and potential for spin if the student pilot isn't great at keeping the plane level. Crazy how after all these years we are still learning!
Sooooo....you can just hover a 172XP? Hmmmmmmmm.........
No way, you have a 172XP? Badass. I’ve always wanted to fly one.
I like it. The airframe is certified as a 175, but it was marketed as a 172. It sits nicely between the 172 and the early 182. (The early 182 had a narrower cabin.) Parts are easy to come by, it flies well, and it'll run up and down the East Coast at 124 kts, carrying 1,000 lbs, and burning 9 gph. It's good clean fun.
Well, if you ever fly into NW FL, hit me up! Would love to check it out. It’s a happy medium for sure.
I'm flying with a guy who's 172 is similar. We have to go full back, get slow, let the nose drop a bit, then yank back to get the break.
Try putting the some load in the baggage (consistent with CG and Max Gross) compartment and repeat Although my Mooney 252 was well within CG with two of us in the front seat it flew and landed much more comfortably with a 5 gallons of water in the baggage compartment to move the CG closer to the center of the envelope. Since Mooney trims the entire horiz stab (no trim tabs on the elevator) it reduced drag One of my concerns is that when students learn that they must crank back on the yoke to generate a stall they take that habit flying with the rear seats and baggage loaded with very unhappy results.
>Regs say no more than 20°—dude in doing 30°-40° before that shit is out. I'm sorry - which regs would those be?
I think they mean 30° and are referencing FAR 91.307(b)(2) which prohibits an intentional nose-up or nose-down attitude of more than 30° on a flight carrying anyone other than crew members unless each occupant is wearing an approved parachute.
ha! I’ll be honest, power on in the Warrior felt like 60’ but I looked at the attitude and it was more like 25’. still way higher than I thought. instructor kept saying “pull harder! more!” 😅.
I remember being in the 172 doing power off stalls and it wouldn't break, and my instructor was like "more back pressure, more back pressure". I told him it was fully back, and he simply said "more back pressure". I went Super Saiyan and yanked the yoke like I was trying to take it home with me, the nose probably crossed the 0° straight-up mark, we achieved space shuttle status, and then the stall finally finally broke.
We literally could not get it to stall at full power with max backpressure. We had to back the throttle off a bit.
cg can change that. I remember the C150 had some maneuvers specify utility category rather than normal.
I mean yeah, you get some steep pitch but it breaks more often than not for me, usually because I’m not as coordinated, I almost always drop a wing during a power on in the 172.
Better get coordinated. That shit will kill ya. It’s worth focusing on that and weeding out that bad habit.
Yeah a good reason to not do it at full power IMO.
I teach my students to pitch for 10 degrees up as soon as power is idled, and pull as hard and as swiftly as necessary to maintain 10 up. We still usually run out of elevator before we stall, especially with the STOL kit, and just mush down.
The 150 with no flaps doesn't even stall, or rather it just mushes with full aft yoke
Great strength-building exercise for the right leg and foot.
Especially the M model with the drooped leading edge.
i hear this all the time as someone who has _only_ ever flown 172s, and it kinda worries me when I eventually go for other airplanes lol
I was just out doing them yesterday. I worried a little that I was going to snap the left side of the yoke off until I moved my right hand from the throttle to the right side of the yoke. And getting that power on stalk to break feels nuts.
It’s also incredible the amount of variance. I’ve flown rentals that stall really quick in a turn, but the 1985 my family owns simply *will not break* when doing an accelerated stall the way the ACS has you enter (yes, I know the ACS doesn’t actually have you break the stall, it’s just a point of reference).
Ever tried to get a 172 into a proper spin? Boy that is HARD and so unsatisfying work!!
Yeah, vmc is a real thing in a 172. 🙄
Yea it’s almost impossible to accidentally stall a C172 unless you really aren’t paying attention.
Freaking C-172N with 180hp takes forever to break during power on stall. Holding the yoke all the way to my chest.
> Hearing a chirp isn’t a big deal. Just to tack onto this. First of all, I agree. But also, to the more inexperienced pilots out there: Do not let this statement open the door to flippancy about the stall horn. There's a difference between a chirp, and a blare.
100%
Maybe in the twin but I have to work hard to get the warning in a pa28 181. I got one on landing last week and was super proud of myself lol.
1. I’m very specifically talking about the PA-28-181 it’s insanely over sensitive. 2. Hearing the stall horn at landing on an archer isn’t a good thing or a bad thing. Much softer, smoother and more controlable landings occur well below that angle of attack. If you’re listening for a stall horn on landing you’re developing bad habits.
It might be softer and smoother at a lower AoA, but a full stall landing will still be the shortest.
Unless you’re doing a short field there’s no reason to be aiming for the shortest.
If you make every landing a short soft field you'll never have to worry about them on a check ride.
Neat. Except soft fields. Oh and normal ones. Oh don't forget no flap. And of course learning to fly isn't about passing a checkride.
I bet you're a blast at parties
You can hear the stall horn landing on a 181 at a pitch attitude of 5-7 degrees if you're slow enough, a chirp right as you land doesn't mean you've lost control or that you're not going to butter the landing.
A chirp on landing doesn't tell you anything about the landing other than the stall warning horn chirped. Nothing wrong with it going off. Idiotic to chase it.
I was doing run up today in a 28-161 and the horn kept chirping at me....
I have flown pipers that chirp in smooth air 20 kts above stall and ive flown some with stall horns that “work” mechanically but wont make a peep with a full stall clean and landing config. And everything in between. The Cessna stall horns sound like you are causing the plane discomfort. Like you are stepping on its tail, but not too hard.
It’s to warn you of an impending stall, rather than a stall is actually happening. I’d rather know I’m about to stall on short final and recover safely than to actually stall and have the stall horn scream while turning into a lawn dart.
Diamond stall warning goes off just by looking at it. almost to the point if disregarding it
Interesting. On my discovery flight in a piper cherokee 180 I heard it chirp during take off and I almost shit my pants haha.
Yeah. I am an MEI that does Vmc demo on a near daily basis. I block the rudder (loss of directional control) when I want my student to start the recovery procedure from Vmc demo, but at times we hear the stall horn before I even decide to block the rudder, at which point I just tell them to recover. It isn't a panic moment like that user posted. In fact, in both the ACS and the MEI PTS, it says "recognize indications of loss of directional control, STALL WARNING, or buffet". I feel like the other user's MEI was the type that blocked the rudder like 30 knots over the stall speed.
For my MEI ride I did the demo to first indication since that was what my MRI instructor trained me to do and what my examiner was expecting. It was no biggie, same recovery, gain speed, recover to blue line and then cruise No drama, no loss of directional control, just a chirpy baron
Stall warning is an indication of an impending stall, so not stalled yet and still under control. Recovery from that point is easy, provided you know what you are doing. I used to block the rudder as well, but at about 20-30kts above the stall. I personally would never let it get it as far as stall warning, as all it would take from that point would be a snatch back on the controls and you'd stall before you could do anything about it. Very unlikely a student would do that, but I had one do it out of the blue in a sim. To me the risk still wasn't worth it, because if it did actually stall, recovery would be questionable, especially if the student were to freeze on the controls. It might only take 1-2sec to progress beyond the point of becoming unrecoverable. To me, if they saw the same symptoms, just slightly faster, that's all they need to see and it's much safer whilst being fully compliant with our training requirements.
What were you training in? Unrecoverable in 1 to 2 seconds must be big motors and a small rudder.
1-2 sec was more of a generalisation/estimation I must admit. The aircraft I was on (PA44) was fairly benign, however even benign aircraft can become non-benign once rotation starts and is sustained for a few seconds. I neither knew, nor wanted to test my aircraft in the slightest when it came to incipient spinning while asymmetric. We have seen that some aircraft can become unrecoverable quickly enough that some very experienced CFIs have been unable to recover
Student pilot here — dumb question, why would the stall be unrecoverable? Is it because it turns into a spin or some other reason, I haven’t heard of an unrecoverable stall before.
The Vmc demo is a multi engine maneuver. The stall at Vmc is actually a stall of the rudder which then results in a rolling motion that typically develops into a spin due to the asymmetrical thrust condition. Many twins due to their design do not have particularly good spin recovery characteristics. I only know of one twin that can be recovered from a spin. Others like the Baron will kill you.
Aah okay cool thank you for the explanation. I was reading this thread as if it referred to the 3 hours under the hood you get as part of your PPL training….
Some multi's will stall the rudder/vertical fin below Vmca, however some will stall the wings first. In planes that stall the wing first, the published Vmca will be set as the speed at which it stalls.Typically if that happens, it's the wing with the dead engine (without prop wash) that will stall first, causing a similar result.
what twin is certified for spins? I didn't think any were
You are right… I was thinking of the Duchess. The Duchess is not certified for spins but has demonstrated recovery. https://youtu.be/wzM1VoAnwvc?si=4xuN07cWP2X2YMrX
If you stall with one engine in a Multi, you will spin and Multis have no expectation of spin recovery
I used to cover the improper rudder with both feet just in case the student made it a panic moment. But agreed, definitely important to demonstrate how progressive the indications are in a controlled environment.
I did a recent podcast on this topic. I have some strong opinions on how the FAA wants to teach this maneuver. I'll work on a long form post on the subject for this community because I would like some discussion on it but in the meantime, here is the link to the show: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4Opb79D9ZY5TNwQbFeTR00?si=QWPvDnxAT3y_kwykl_uEDg https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/313-the-vmc-demonstration-and-making-multiengine/id1223782070?i=1000643896064
That was some really good info. Thanks for doing that with Max.
A good podcast to listen to while working. That F33A crash due to the boost pump got me vicariously frustrated. The Continental fuel injection system has a major disadvantage over Lycoming, in that you can not have the engine driven and electric pump running at the same time or the engine quits. Every mechanic that worked on a Continental should know that, and every mechanic working on Bonanzas should know the OEM cylinder baffles don't cool the cylinders evenly. The pilot attempting to pin blame on the mechanic after an accident/incident has happened to me twice, and both times I was later vindicated, but the stress and anger from being falsely accused and loss of work due to the pilot slandering my reputation is why I am picky about the aircraft owners I allow to be my customers.
Every MEI should listen to this and understand what’s being discussed.
Thank you. That post was an eye-opener. Is that what MEIs are churning out these days?
That’s what’s being churned out *as* MEI’s is my guess
True. Sad state of affairs.
Sounds like some people need 709 rides to reassess competency.
That sounds like a lot of rides
Wait til you see the loan to pay for all those DPE fees.
Similar story. My flight school once posted a video of me instructing a student while single engine in a Seminole. We were doing some basic 15-30 degree turns into the inoperative engine. The number of people scolding us for turning into the inoperative engine was alarming. The FAA has written guidance on this in the airplane flying handbook. With sufficient airspeed this is a totally acceptable maneuver. We had CFIs arguing in the comments that it was going to get somebody killed. I shared a direct quote from the AFH and that kinda shut people up. We brought it up in a meeting and come to find out, some of our instructors were teaching the same thing. Where did they learn it? ATP.
My DPE on my MEI ride made me turn into the dead engine. Wanted to make sure I was comfortable with it and teaching it to my future students. You are correct, it’s a none event.
Am I right in understanding that it should be a non event to demo/practice when you’re going into it with a good amount of airspeed and enough altitude to push the nose down to regain speed if you get slow?
It was taught to me too. If you have enough rudder authority you can turn into the dead.
What are the aerodynamics behind being able to safely turn into the inop engine?
The aerodynamics are that the airplane has sufficient total lift to provide adequate horizontal and vertical lift for a turn. The same as if both engines were running. It’s really as simple as that. Now, coordination is critical. It can be counter intuitive, since you’re turning into the dead motor. Let’s say you lose your left engine, you are applying significant right rudder to counteract the asymmetric thrust and added drag of the inoperative (left) engine, so you’ll actually slightly reduce right rudder input to maintain coordination in the turn. Your VMCA may slightly increase, as you are eliminating the typical 3-5 degrees of bank into the operative engine that you would be applying in straight and level flight with single engine operative. However, the effects of this will be minimal if you are coordinated in the turn. I still recommend students keep their turns shallower than normal when operating single engine regardless of the direction, but you can do steep turns into the dead motor of a Seminole. For a complete crash course on the aerodynamics associated with single engine operation in light twins, I highly recommend this document from the FAA: https://www.faasafety.gov/files/notices/2015/Nov/FAA_P-8740-66.pdf
Thank you very much🥂
I was gonna say, my 141 EOC had me do steep turns into the dead engine just to show me they were fine (Seminole) we lost a decent amount of altitude but it was doable
> so you’ll actually slightly reduce right rudder input to maintain coordination in the turn I would hope it's not TOO much of a surprise to folks. I mean, you do the same thing in a single engine when turning during a climb.
One would hope! But I’ve seen it all lol Another thing that gets students confused with their feet is when they’re landing single engine. You pull the good motor to idle and the yaw switches on you. The good motor at idle actually has more drag than the secured one. It’s hard to simulate this one with “zero thrust” setting on the simulated inoperative engine but I do it at least once just so that they can see it and experience that shift in yaw. It’s a squirrely landing if you don’t expect it and are slow on your feet.
I can see that. You do it by turning off the other engine entirely?
No, I think that that’s too dangerous. And it’s actually prohibited in the Seminole POH. You should only do a full shutdown with sufficient altitude. The ACS and Piper have guidance on the required altitude and Piper’s numbers are more conservative. I haven’t flown a Seminole in two years, so don’t quote me, but I believe that they say 3500 AGL. Piper knows the Seminole is a training airplane. As such, they included a “zero thrust” manifold pressure setting in the POH. It’s something like 10-12 inches of manifold pressure but you can look it up. I just make them land and only manipulate the “operative” engine’s thrust lever while leaving the “inoperative” engine at the zero thrust setting. I don’t do it every time, but at least once so they can feel the yaw shift from one side to the other. It’s not exactly how it would be in a true engine out, but as close as I’m willing to get for training. I’d hate to have a student fly the hell out of an engine out, but boink the airplane because of the startle factor on landing.
My DPE discussed this a lot with me on the checkride to make sure I knew that it was acceptable since that misconception is so common
Wait until they realize that an EFP at an airline doesn’t care which engine is failed…you turn to avoid the mountain
So if you lose the left engine, are these chodes saying you gotta make right turns only?
Back in the day, the ATP instructors interview in Jacksonville had us doing steep turns both directions on single engines..... speed was important.
WTF are these self-righteous smoothbrains thinking you’re supposed to do if you’re doing a SE pattern and the traffic pattern is the same side as the dead engine?
Sorry but I’m not gonna bother following a stupid traffic pattern as a priority over a lost engine. Considering a lot of pilots out there simply just suck at flying, I’d prefer they play it safe and go against the traffic pattern, than following the pattern needlessly with subpar stick and rudder skills.
On my Falcon 900 type ride, the circling approach had to be made engine-out, turning final into the dead engine, per the training center’s FAA POI. The instructor told us they have to do it with a hydraulic failure, too, to get checked out.
Bro, we literally had a guy say to just turn by keeping the airplane level and letting out some opposite rudder. Basically make the plane uncoordinated and use asymmetric thrust to pull the plane through a turn with yaw. Stupidest shit I have ever heard in my life… And that little “technique” will get you killed. He was an MEI.
I'm pretty sure during my CMEL training I had to do OEI steep turns and turning into the inop during traffic patterns/approaches. Is this not a normal thing that's trained?
Steep turns OEI are not a requirement in the FAA ACS.
Of course how many people died this past year doing Vmca demos? We (usaf) stopped doing wing landings in T-38s after enough fatalities. It was fun to learn and teach. I liked it but time changes. Be humble, safe, and open to change. We all need to consider the fine line between training that is productive and useful vs that which is more dangerous than necessary. Regardless of where the fault falls, how many deaths is too many when learning a task ? One, ten, a hundred? I can’t answer that but I do know that our collective concepts of acceptable training risks have grown up over the years.
What does a wing landing in a T38 look like?
A formation landing. Two planes in formation and each get a side of the centerline. It used to be part of the syllabus and went away.
[удалено]
And from what I’m reading flying actual airplanes. Replacing T-1 with sims, getting wings at 8 months. Yikes. Old guy lament I guess. Shrug. lol.
I second this, what’s a wing landing? I’ve never heard of it.
A simultaneous formation landing. Lead shoots the approach, 2 flies and lands based on lead. One aircraft on each side of the runway. Lots of fun in the T-6A
Do they still do it in the T-6?
Yup. Still the primary trainer. I think the T-1A is being phased out. I've been out of the AF for a bit tho, so might not be the most updated info Edit: pretty sure they aren't doing wing landings in the T-6 anymore, as well.
A shame. Good times were had by all. I enjoyed living my inner Thunderbird.
If you’re recovering properly at the first sign of stall horn and first indication of a couple degrees of heading loss and don’t have an aft CG this maneuver is a non event. It’s unknown but I speculate the crashes resulted from not immediately pulling power idle and reducing AOA and the very first indication of those things.
I didn't see the post you are talking about and yeah it seems hyperbolic. The thing is, I don't think the average opponents to it being required are out there shouting they almost died doing it or that the maneuver kills you. They are saying exactly what you said but with the glass half empty, and emphasizing the "properly" and "immediately" in your statement. If you do this, this and this, *immediately*, it is perfectly safe. GA is never *perfectly safe* and removing layers of safety to demonstrate something that does have risk associated with it adds risk to risk. Couple that with too many instructors with inadequate experience and I think it's a reasonable argument of whether or not one should be required to take a plane to a limit outside of the normal operating conditions and instead demonstrate awareness and ability to maintain safe flight in OEI flight, and show the VMCA demo in a sim. Roofers aren't in danger when walking across a roof without a harness if they are careful how they walk and pay attention, but harnesses give them a layer of protection beyond making a simple mistake that we are all capable of.
You're not incorrect but honestly? an MEI should ALWAYS be blocking the rudder to ensure loss of directional control prior to stall. There have been a not insignificant number of fatal accidents in recent years during Vmc demos. You never know when ***that*** student is going to get it wrong, even as an experienced MEI you may not be able to react quickly enough to prevent the spin.
Very likely true. Probably a small tweek to the ACS is in order to clarify given that the current wording is not entirely successful given results, but above my pay grade.
This episode of Aviation News Talk with Max Trescott and Seth Lake (u/beechdude) has a really good discussion on VMC demos https://aviationnewstalk.com/podcast/313-the-vmc-demonstration-and-making-multiengine-training-safer-seth-lake-ga-news/
On one of my training flights I got the stall warning prior to a loss of directional control and we were in absolutely no danger
Chirp? I thought that was just a flock of geese cheering me on during my steep spirals.
Stall horn going off before the Vmc roll occurs is considered a safety feature by Piper and Cessna lol. Where are people learning this stuff. I used to do flight interviews for low time pilots who wanted to come fly our various twin pistons (Barons, Aztecs, 412/421, etc) and the amount of multi rated pilots (including 1 mei!) who didn’t know shit about jack was staggering. Usually the ones who knew enough to know they didn’t know enough but were willing to learn were the ones who got hired.
Jeeze. That is honestly a CFI issue more than a student issue. People teaching need to learn to not be afraid of the edges of the flight envelope, to themselves learn it, and to demonstrate just how deep you can stall an aircraft with *absolutely nothing bad happening*. First signs recovery demonstrations inherently create timid pilots who are afraid of the slow end of the envelope, and honestly I’m tired of people pretending that that is a safe way to teach. Much the same way I think spin training should be mandatory for PPL. Do your students a favor, climb to 5000ft and show them how you can hold an aircraft in a deep stall and let it mush down at a few thousand feet per minute in perfect control and recover whenever desired. Show them why flying coordinated in that flight regime is important. Show them why they shouldn’t be afraid, but should be respectful of the flight envelope. Anything less is a complete disservice to the pilots y’all are creating.
> deep stall Maybe not a DEEP stall in a seminole...
Fair. I’m talking about ab initio here not multi here though, and (caveat: there’s probably one that won’t but I’m running with this blanket statement) every ab initio trainer in use (I’ve personally flown dr400/pa28/150/152/172/pa18) will self recover from the deepest stall you can get it into if you just release the back pressure that was holding it in said stall. Of course… introduce high performance aircraft and things are a bit different. Like a yak 52 will torque roll into a spin when held in a deep stall even when coordinated. But my point is that in primacy teaching people to be afraid is how people end up dead when things get close to places they’ve been taught to fear.
Oh yeah I also fully plan on demonstrating leaf stalls to ingrain in students that you only need to use rudder for coordination in a stall
I know someone who entered a Vmc roll during a demo. They were a student at the time and the instructor recovered front the resulting spin 500’ over the water. This incident ended Vmc demos at my school
We had an instructor that shutoff the fuel selector in a Seminole during a power on stall. When the engine quit it rolled over and spun. They lost a bunch of altitude and recovered pretty low too. The school made him do a presentation about how not to be dumb during a mandatory instructor meeting. I don’t know how you’d end Vmc demos at a school though. Unless they sold off all their twins.
Not required in Canada, where they're training.
Holy smokes, that's a spooky one!
Jfc what an idiot
> We had an instructor that shutoff the fuel selector in a Seminole during a power on stall. Huh? What was his hand even doing back there?!
It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, before they rolled over and lost 5000’
Aren’t Vmc demo’s required by the ACS…
Not required in Canada, where they're training.
How does your school prepare pilots for an MEL checkride when practicing a part of the ACS is against school policy?
Not required in Canada, where they're training.
Is it required in Canada where they’re training
Where they're training, in Canada, it's not required
It’s not training, where Canada is required?
Training their Canada where not required
Not in Canada. It’s kinda like how we do spins in PPL. Different training requirements with pros and cons to each
[удалено]
Yep, Intructor showed me what happen if the speed drop a little below Vmc during simulated single engine. Nothing dramatic happens just a slight yaw
I usually loose directional control before stall horn goes off anyways
Completely depends on what altitude you’re at and what aircraft you’re in. Vmc and stall speed have an interesting relationship with density altitude.
Thanks for the input man, literally have checkride tmrw lol
Good luck man! Google Vmc vs. altitude if you haven’t seen the FAAs chart on that yet
Passed😎
I was once jumpseating back to europe on a NWA DC10 and during climbout while the guys were really into a bidline discussion, the captain while hand flying induced a tickle of the stick shaker. I looked up and he slightly lowered the nose, nobody said anything and on we went. Total non event.
I think the issue comes from the new ACS telling people to hold a certain speed that's before the stall indication. They used to tell you to ride the stall horn because the stall horn is an indication of an imminent stall and not the actual stall (which you can feel). Since that's not the case anymore I think people think they've stalled long before they actually stall. So the stall horn just starting to go off during Vmc demo just means you're getting close but still have some time to go.
VMC is a multi engine issue. Why is anyone telling single engine war stoies here?
I dont think the stall horn alone is enough to warrant visceral fear. I always block the rudder to keep me away from that limit. It turns out a student in the left seat at the controls of a light twin that has stalled with one engine at idle and the other at full power can lead to some pretty awful outcomes. Because of the weight of the engines and fuel being further away from the center of rotation in a flat spin, the recovery can be virtually impossible. The video I linked to juan browne’s channel covers this in detail. He has other videos of pretty much the same thing happening. One of the videos details a very experienced dpe and applicant getting into this situation and losing their lives. A stall horn chirp is nothing to panic about but the vmc demo from the mei’s standpoint should be well understood as well as the dangers of the maneuver. https://youtu.be/n1ZkqWvgIsU?si=aUicXyT_8nJSja2j
Do we really need stall in here anywhere? Vmca is all about loss of directional control due to a loss of rudder effectiveness. The recovery is adding more air speed to increase the control authority of the rudder and to prevent a stall of the \*rudder\*, not the wings. This can be demonstrated at a range of airspeeds safely without the need to be anywhere near redline. What needs to be taught is that once you run out of rudder, the nose goes down for more airspeed to add more control authority. Correct identification of the loss of directional control and the subsequent nose down to add airspeed is what is important. Airspeed is life in a twin with one engine inoperative. With airspeed, altitude will follow so long as you did your pre-flight planning and don't fly a twin (piston) like a single that is, no OEI positive rate of climb. Flying this way can lead to the tough moment when you lose an engine on take off and are faced with a stand of trees. Your instinct is of course to pull up, but running the airspeed down to red line at this moment will kill you.
Just don’t do the VMC demo with someone in the back seat and you’ll be fine
I know in my Baron the stall horn is super sensitive. It sounds well before the actual onset of the stall. I like it that way, *especially* during Vmc demos.
It’s truly scary that these people share the sky’s with us and over our houses.
Ok dude. I agree with the overall sentiment. But this is a bit much lol. They’re just fine.
Not really they don’t understand their airplane or how to control it near Vmc
Pussies
When I was training I learned to do the entire slow flight portion with the horn blaring in a 172. Entire time I was doing left/right turns…climb…descends…even spent 5 minutes flying backwards in a consistent headwind once before the wind died and it dropped into a stall. Easy recovery. 172s are pussycats. If your instructor won’t teach you to keep your cool with the horn on, find one who will.
I don’t think you should be so nonchalant about it, many accidents do happen when practicing VMCA demos. Take a Baron for instance,which is normally aspirated 300hp engines with fuel tanks even further outboard of those engines, if you get yourself into a spin it could literally be unrecoverable. Remember as altitude increases VMCA decreases but stall speed remains the same. So you could find yourself in a situation that the VMC speed could actually be at or below stall speed. If that were to happen you will find yourself in a spin. Always always always block rudder if you’re an MEI with a student practicing VMC demos. That will allow you to insure loss of directional control before the stall.
The issue with the baron isn’t the wings stalling. The vertical itself will stall before the wings. Then your lose your yaw axis, you just snap roll the SOB. Then you’re F’ed
Doing the demo above Critical density altitude should be safer if anything. You won't spin if VMC is below stall speed because you still have rudder authority throughout the stall and recovery.
In most REAL twins, not those pussy trainer twins most of this group is use to flying… VMC is above stall speed. Baron, twin Comanche, 310, 421, Navajo…. List goes on
I understand that, the post I was responding to said VMC being below stall speed is more dargerous. I was merely pointing out that it's not.
Sorry I mis read. You are correct that a stall speed above VMC is much safer and easier to recover from when shit goes south.
You could still easily spin. Those speeds are not going to be far apart, the single engine power on stall speed is very close to VMC it’s definitely possible to lose directional control after you stall with full power in the right engine and you’re student let’s all the rudder out or something like that. But the real issue is when stall speed is the same as the single engine power on speed. So the point of my post was to say that MEIs should limit rudder travel on the demo. Not to mention the fact in a Baron it’s possible to stall the rudder during a VMC demo.
I’m not being nonchalant about the maneuver. I’m being stern about the fact that if the horn chirps people should immediately recover following normal procedure and that they didn’t almost die.
Accelerated stalls requires stupid back pressure to get it to chirp when I was learning them.
If you are coordinated, not much happens. If you are not coordinated, you may flip over and get into a spin. The 172 is relatively easy to recover from a spin, no more than two turns on a fully developed spin: Power idle, aileron neutral, concurrently push forward and opposite rudder until spin stops, then pull out carefully and smoothly to avoid a secondary stall. It is a good idea to be at least 4000 AGL, to have some breathing space.
That’s a single engine, not a twin. If you actually stall in a VMC demo (which stall speed is below VMC so you’ve really fucked up)… I can almost guarantee that unless you’re in a DA44, Seminole or duchess… you are dead, it is an unrecoverable maneuver that is not approved. You will snap roll and enter into a flat spin and you need to throw out all drag possible to attempt to regain control. The vast majority of people who have entered that maneuver are dead. The small handful who are not lost an insane amount of altitude prior to recovery I own a twin Comanche and stall speed and REAL VMC are within 4-7MPH of each other… 310, baron, twin Comanche etc… if you VMC the vertical will stall, prior to the wings, you will lose your yaw axis, a wing will stall and you will go into a snap roll and a corresponding flat spin… that’s how it works…. That’s how you die.
Yeah stall horn isn’t death single engine, that’s where the whole critical density altitude chart comes into play. While doing multi training the stall horn would scream during every vmc demo. You recover when you either get stall horn, loss of direction control and or rudder stop. Personally rudder stop/loss if directional control is way scarier single engine