can't stall this plane..

Peter Ha

Peter Ha

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
226
Display Name
Display name:
Leadpan
After many hours of excuses, I finally took my 150 up for stalls... I couldn't make it stall.
Stall horn sounded and it 'buffet' but no stall. I've been landing this plane too fast. I could probably land at 27knots! :rolleyes:
 
What do you mean you can't stall it? Understand that some airplanes you can continue to hold the high angle of attack even after the aircraft stalls (your VSI would be a big clue). What you should do is grab an instructor.
 
Yep it doesn’t break like most airplanes. You can sit there with the controls in your chest and it will just descend straight ahead.
 
Where are you at in the CG range?

You can absolutely stall that wing, you may have to get more creative. Especially if you are toward the forward part of CG and entering it smoothly.
 
Try full flaps and a steep turn accelerated stall. On second thought, don't try that, unless you want to practice spins.
Edit: make sure that you have the factory amount of up-elevator travel.
 
I promise the 150 will stall. Many of us have done it several times. Like someone else said, you may have to be a little aggressive at the end to get the stall to break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tape some yarn on you wing about 1/3 of the way back, and do it again. You'll see that you are stalled.
 
Now try doing it with a little bit of skid. You'll see exactly how a 150 stalls.
 
Did all my ppl training in a c150. stalled it many times. You really have to hold that yoke back max travel to get it to break. Almost spun it once because I wasn’t coordinated. It did a hard break to the left.
 
I've found stalls in a Cessna are far more "stallish" than some other planes. Perhaps you're just slowing too much before starting to pitch up and sinking rather than stalling. I did my iitial flight training in a Piper Archer. When I was first told we would do some stalls, I thought it would be exciting. I couldn't have been more wrong. Stalls in an Archer are about as boring as I could have ever imagined. I don't think I ever noticed a discernable "break" whether power off or power on. The plane just got a little mushy and then you recover. It wasn't until I got checked out in 177 Cardinal about a year after getting my PPL that I found out what a real stall was.
 
You're likely letting the plane settle/mush as you're pulling the yoke back. You will get a more pronounced stall if you ensure the plane is not descending at all before you reach full aft elevator.
 
A 150 has an easy stall. I'd suspect some serious misrigging in that elevator system. There's no way it should refuse to stall. At any power setting. Some 172s can sometimes need a bit of a yank, but never the 150.

I have found those system way off too many times. Sometimes it's the elevator travel stops out of whack, but more often the cables and turnbuckles are haywire and the control column is limiting out against the panel. In one airplane I found the travel limited by a heading indicator that was too long, longer than the original. The system should be set so that when the elevator hits its stops, the control tee and control wheel shafts should still be clear of the fireall and panel.

If that elevator system is off, I bet the aileron and rudder/nosewheel stuff is way off, too. Experience tells me that. When all else fails, read the instructions.
 
keen9 said:
Tape some yarn on you wing about 1/3 of the way back, and do it again. You'll see that you are stalled.
Click to expand...
Would that work reliably on the underside of the wing?
I'd think the relative wind would still hold the yarn in trail down there (where it can be seen)

I'm reminded of one of my early student solo flights to the practice area...practicing a few stalls...it was a very long time ago and memory is fuzzy, but probably about like you are seeing and I was probably getting lazy with it.... and then it broke off to one side...sorta suprising me. Not really a full spin before I recovered, but it woke me up
 
WHILE THE AIRPLANE IS ON THE GROUND, ENGINE NOT RUNNING: :rolleyes:

position yourself so that you can look up behind the instrument panel at the part of the yoke mechanism that's up there. Move the elevator full up, and ensure that the yoke travel is not artificially restricted by things like wires hanging down and snagging on the yoke mechanism.

No, I didn't lay awake at night thinking that up. ;)
 
MauleSkinner said:
WHILE THE AIRPLANE IS ON THE GROUND, ENGINE NOT RUNNING: :rolleyes:

position yourself so that you can look up behind the instrument panel at the part of the yoke mechanism that's up there. Move the elevator full up, and ensure that the yoke travel is not artificially restricted by things like wires hanging down and snagging on the yoke mechanism.

No, I didn't lay awake at night thinking that up. ;)
Click to expand...

Another thing to look at is the cable tensions. Pull the cover off the back of the baggage compartment and see if they're sagging.

If one has a digital protractor (inclinometer), or even a cheap mechanical inclinometer, one can check the elevator travel. From neutral (elevator streamlined with the stab) it should move 25° up and 15° down on all models of the 150 except the A150M, which was 23° up and 15° down.
 
Peter Ha said:
After many hours of excuses, I finally took my 150 up for stalls... I couldn't make it stall.
Stall horn sounded and it 'buffet' but no stall. I've been landing this plane too fast. I could probably land at 27knots! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
What's your vertical speed while you are doing this? I have no clue but it might not be favorable to landing...at least not without a rather big thunk.
 
evapilotaz said:
Did all my ppl training in a c150. stalled it many times. You really have to hold that yoke back max travel to get it to break. Almost spun it once because I wasn’t coordinated. It did a hard break to the left.
Click to expand...
A wing drop in the break is NOT a spin.
 
flyingron said:
A wing drop in the break is NOT a spin.
Click to expand...

Yep, ya pretty much gotta be holding full aft elevator AND full rudder AND sit there like a log with both controls fully deflected for it to enter an actual spin. Stall avoidance training causes pilots to fear simple wing drops as if they're spins into the unknown.
 
Unless other pilots also can't get it to stall, it probably isn't a mechanical/control problem. I wouldn't spend to much time overthinking that angle if it's just a problem you are having in the aircraft (with one exception discussed below).

How do you have it trimmed? In some aircraft if you have it trimmed for cruise speed, or something close to it, you may run out of elevator authority before you can get the AOA high enough to stall at low speed. At the forward CG limit you'll potentially run out of aft stick authority, and if you are a lot lighter than average, and have a low fuel state (less than 1/4 tanks, that could be a possibility.

For example, I weighed about 130 pounds when I learned to fly and I learned to fly in a Supercub. Getting it to stall in flight with the resulting forward CG took a fair amount of aft trim. The trim on the Supercub is a jackscrew that moves the whole elevator and it has a lot of authority - if you use it. On my first solo I had three rather poor three point landings (9 landings total if you count the bounces) as with the aircraft trimmed for 80 mph, with my light weight, low fuel state and resulting forward CG, I ran out of aft stick before it was ready to stall. Losing 220 pounds of instructor in the back seat made a big difference, and the briefed "trim it for 80 mph on downwind" didn't quite work in that aircraft with my weight and low fuel.

(Doing some W&B calculations after the fact showed that with low enough fuel I could actually get the CG just out of the front of the CG range in that aircraft.)

Running out of aft stick in a taildragger makes a bounce pretty much inevitable if you are trying for a three point landing. The best you can do with inadequate back stick is a tail low wheel landing, and I had not learned those uet. I had the same issue trying to get nice clean stall breaks in the air in the Supercub at a forward CG as well. Once I figured out that I had to trim it for an airspeed no more than 60 mph to ensure adequate aft stick authority, both stalls in flight and full stall landings were once again "normal".

With that in mind, since then, I've always focused on trimming the aircraft for my approach to landing speed. If I'm looking for 65 mph on final with a Citabria, I'll trim it for 65 mph on final, to ensure I have ample aft stick available.
 
Y'all are doing it wrong. My collegiate student can stall the 150 we're using and she'd probably make your stalls look bad.
 
Larry Vrooman said:
Running out of aft stick in a taildragger makes a bounce pretty much inevitable if you are trying for a three point landing. The best you can do with inadequate back stick is a tail low wheel landing, and I had not learned those uet. I had the same issue trying to get nice clean stall breaks in the air in the Supercub at a forward CG as well. Once I figured out that I had to trim it for an airspeed no more than 60 mph to ensure adequate aft stick authority, both stalls in flight and full stall landings were once again "normal".

With that in mind, since then, I've always focused on trimming the aircraft for my approach to landing speed. If I'm looking for 65 mph on final with a Citabria, I'll trim it for 65 mph on final, to ensure I have ample aft stick available.
Click to expand...
Huh? AND irrelevant.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Huh? AND irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Grumpy this one is....

Sadly however, it may well be irrelevant.

The point was that if the aircraft - any aircraft - is operated at a sufficiently forward CG and has had a significant amount of the elevators pitch authority trimmed off, it may not have enough pitch authority left to get a proper stall, or a proper full stall landing.

Does that cover the "huh?" or do I need to use smaller words?

The reason that is potentially irrelevant is that the FAA in it's ultimate wisdom is now focused on stall avoidance and requires pilots to do slow flight to avoid a stall warning (the first bleat of the stall warning horn, or the stall buffet in an A/C that is not stall warning horn equipped, and worse, to demonstrate a stall recovery at the warning, not the stall. As it was described to me, the current concern is that training students to fly around with the stall horn activate might lead to normalization of deviance, where the stall warning is now normal and is ignored. Apparently it's far better to train pilots who've never experienced an actual stall and who have no experience flying an aircraft very close to the critical AoA, and hoping they'll never actually be in a situation where that's necessary.

Theoretically then, if the instructor just teaches to the check ride, and does not require the student to do an actual stall, a student could earn a PPL (and a commercial license for that matter) without ever stalling an aircraft.

Given the OPs' "after many hours of excuses I finally took muy 150 up for stalls", I gather he isn't real keen on stalls, and that's really unfortunate, and I suspect may be an artifact of his training to the recent change in standards.

If I'm getting a checkout in a light aircraft, or doing a pre-buy check flight, intentionally stalling the aircraft is very close to the top of the list, usually just after doing some rolls on a point to get comfortable with the control harmony and some slow flight to start feeling how it performs close to a stall. Those stalls will include, at a minimum, power on, power off, and approach to landing stalls. If nothing else, it's one of the things necessary to determine if the aircraft is properly rigged and I would not even consider buying a light aircraft I have not stalled several times in various configurations.
 
Larry Vrooman said:
Apparently it's far better to train pilots who've never experienced an actual stall and who have no experience flying an aircraft very close to the critical AoA, and hoping they'll never actually be in a situation where that's necessary.
Click to expand...

Is that a fact?

From the ACS:

VII. Slow Flight and Stalls
Task B. Power-Off Stalls

PA.VII.B.S7 Acknowledge cues of the impending stall and then recover promptly after a full stall occurs.
PA.VII.B.S8 Execute a stall recovery in accordance with procedures set forth in the POH/AFM.


VII. Slow Flight and Stalls
Task C. Power-On Stalls

PA.VII.C.S7 Acknowledge cues of the impending stall and then recover promptly after a full stall occurs.
PA.VII.C.S8 Execute a stall recovery in accordance with procedures set forth in the POH/AFM.
 
I believe it. Margy's instructor never let her take it into a full stall in the 172. She asked me to demonstrate a few for her on the side. The 172 is even more of a ***** than the 150. You can actually get the 150 to spin if you intentionally do it.
Similarly I don't think the same instructor (who also did my transition) for the Navion ever fully stalled it. The Navion is even more benign than the Skyhawk. It gives a couple of prestall shtuters (hence not needing any stall indicator) and then gently drops the nose.
 
On an aircraft with a jack screw stabilizer trim like a Cub, trimming increases elevator authority. A trim tab like a Cessna has does not; all it does is changes where the elevator trails when you let go of the stick*, it doesn't affect anything (except maybe stick pressure) at full deflection.

*or yoke, of course
 
Brad W said:
Would that work reliably on the underside of the wing?
Click to expand...
No, it needs to be on the top (which yes you won't see in a a152), but the point is that feeling a sudden break does not mean that the wing is not stalled.
 
Larry Vrooman said:
Grumpy this one is....
Click to expand...
Not so much grumpy as saying your post was a waste of electrons.
Sadly however, it may well be irrelevant.

The point was that if the aircraft - any aircraft - is operated at a sufficiently forward CG and has had a significant amount of the elevators pitch authority trimmed off, it may not have enough pitch authority left to get a proper stall, or a proper full stall landing.

Does that cover the "huh?" or do I need to use smaller words?
Click to expand...
It was better, but I'd still bet we could get the plane to stall, if properly configured. That and I'm trying to think of a scenario where Peter's specific aircraft, a Cessna 150, would really be that far forward in the CG envelope for your statement to be meaningful in his situation and this thread. The seats MAYBE move back and forward two inches, so I wouldn't even give him the "forward CG" excuse for not being able to stall the thing.
The reason that is potentially irrelevant is that the FAA in it's ultimate wisdom is now focused on stall avoidance and requires pilots to do slow flight to avoid a stall warning (the first bleat of the stall warning horn, or the stall buffet in an A/C that is not stall warning horn equipped, and worse, to demonstrate a stall recovery at the warning, not the stall. As it was described to me, the current concern is that training students to fly around with the stall horn activate might lead to normalization of deviance, where the stall warning is now normal and is ignored. Apparently it's far better to train pilots who've never experienced an actual stall and who have no experience flying an aircraft very close to the critical AoA, and hoping they'll never actually be in a situation where that's necessary.

Theoretically then, if the instructor just teaches to the check ride, and does not require the student to do an actual stall, a student could earn a PPL (and a commercial license for that matter) without ever stalling an aircraft.

Given the OPs' "after many hours of excuses I finally took muy 150 up for stalls", I gather he isn't real keen on stalls, and that's really unfortunate, and I suspect may be an artifact of his training to the recent change in standards.

If I'm getting a checkout in a light aircraft, or doing a pre-buy check flight, intentionally stalling the aircraft is very close to the top of the list, usually just after doing some rolls on a point to get comfortable with the control harmony and some slow flight to start feeling how it performs close to a stall. Those stalls will include, at a minimum, power on, power off, and approach to landing stalls. If nothing else, it's one of the things necessary to determine if the aircraft is properly rigged and I would not even consider buying a light aircraft I have not stalled several times in various configurations.
Click to expand...
Agreed on the training standards problems.
 
A lot of issues getting stalls to break happen when you go in with too much speed. Doing a power on in a 182 can be near impossible if you don't get it very slow first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top