New PTS standards, in effect 6/2012

If we're talking about high powered singles. I have done power on stalls in most of the common HP birds: Bo, Cirrus, C400, 206, etc. The maneuver seems a little silly to me as you have to slow way, way, down, hammer it, and pull about as hard as you can to get it to fully break (some won't really do it). I've done them at all different altitudes both Turbo and NA. I still don't see how anyone could unintentionally get into a power on stall. It takes so much effort that your first reaction is to let the nose down, which is all you need to do anyway.

Do you CFI's fly with people qualified on a HP bird, that really can get themselves in an unintentional power on stall?

BTW- With the wing on the Cirrus & C400, I don't know how anyone could unintentionally fully stall power on or off. Talk about super forgiving, they just keep bobbing along, without dropping a wing, with the stick fully back.
 
Alexb2000 said:
If we're talking about high powered singles. I have done power on stalls in most of the common HP birds: Bo, Cirrus, C400, 206, etc. The maneuver seems a little silly to me as you have to slow way, way, down, hammer it, and pull about as hard as you can to get it to fully break (some won't really do it). I've done them at all different altitudes both Turbo and NA. I still don't see how anyone could unintentionally get into a power on stall. It takes so much effort that your first reaction is to let the nose down, which is all you need to do anyway.

Do you CFI's fly with people qualified on a HP bird, that really can get themselves in an unintentional power on stall?

BTW- With the wing on the Cirrus & C400, I don't know how anyone could unintentionally fully stall power on or off. Talk about super forgiving, they just keep bobbing along, without dropping a wing, with the stick fully back.
Click to expand...

When you're heavy and at a high DA, it's not all that hard to get into a departure stall. Rotate too early, get behind the power curve...
 
matthammer said:
When you're heavy and at a high DA, it's not all that hard to get into a departure stall. Rotate too early, get behind the power curve...
Click to expand...

I'm sure that is the scenario. Seems like you'd have to really pull it off below Vs. Can you really fully replicate that in the air? Even starting from slow flight, clean, you're still faster than you would be ripping it off the runway with the benefit of ground effect?
 
Alexb2000 said:
If we're talking about high powered singles. I have done power on stalls in most of the common HP birds: Bo, Cirrus, C400, 206, etc. The maneuver seems a little silly to me as you have to slow way, way, down, hammer it, and pull about as hard as you can to get it to fully break (some won't really do it). I've done them at all different altitudes both Turbo and NA. I still don't see how anyone could unintentionally get into a power on stall. It takes so much effort that your first reaction is to let the nose down, which is all you need to do anyway.
Click to expand...
At lower DA's and lighter weights, I agree. Go to Angel Fire in the summer with a full load, and that changes a lot. My concern is that they learn from the training experience that you really have to do something bizarre to get a power-on stall, and then they don't realize what it happening (or about to happen) when they get in that adverse situation until it's too late.

Do you CFI's fly with people qualified on a HP bird, that really can get themselves in an unintentional power on stall?
Click to expand...
In the right (or maybe, wrong) circumstances, yes, I'm sure we do. In fact, one of us had to have flown with each of the folks who did that and crashed.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I'm sure that is the scenario. Seems like you'd have to really pull it off below Vs. Can you really fully replicate that in the air? Even starting from slow flight, clean, you're still faster than you would be ripping it off the runway with the benefit of ground effect?
Click to expand...
Yes -- to a great extent, you can, if you set the throttle appropriately. And that's the point I'm trying to make. It's also important to discuss with the trainee the perceptions associated with pitch attitude, and how at high DA/weight, the plane will stall at a normally "no-stall" attitude, and then demonstrate that. If you want to make it even more realistic, add weight in the baggage area to move the cg near the aft limit and reduce stick force needed for a nose-up response so the plane will pitch too nose-up more easily -- just like it happens with the back seat/baggage area full.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Yes -- to a great extent, you can, if you set the throttle appropriately. And that's the point I'm trying to make. It's also important to discuss with the trainee the perceptions associated with pitch attitude, and how at high DA/weight, the plane will stall at a normally "no-stall" attitude, and then demonstrate that. If you want to make it even more realistic, add weight in the baggage area to move the cg near the aft limit and reduce stick force needed for a nose-up response so the plane will pitch too nose-up more easily -- just like it happens with the back seat/baggage area full.
Click to expand...

Interesting. So do you have the student do a heavy reduced power take-off? Or is all of this air work?

I live very close to Angel Fire and we certainly see lots of high DA in the summer. I've flown most all the aircraft I listed here in the summer and heavy. I always felt the secret was to just not force the airplane to do something it wasn't ready to do. I start by lifting the nose wheel on the roll and letting it fly off whenever it wants. In most cases with approach flaps. Hold that basic attitude until you get some altitude even if the climb is very slow. If it doesn't fly I just shut it down on the runway and wait for better conditions. Maybe I'm over simplifying, but it seems to work pretty well.

I mention the above because often the high DA accidents we see here are not a full power on stall, rather being too aggressive pulling it out of ground effect, and then coming back down and pancaking. Sometimes just off the runway or when they make their turn.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Interesting. So do you have the student do a heavy reduced power take-off?
Click to expand...
No -- too much like having combat troops practice bleeding.

Or is all of this air work?
Click to expand...
Yes -- with plenty of recovery room between us and the ground.

I mention the above because often the high DA accidents we see here are not a full power on stall, rather being too aggressive pulling it out of ground effect, and then coming back down and pancaking. Sometimes just off the runway or when they make their turn.
Click to expand...
You can examine that as part of the process -- talk to the trainee about the loss of climb rate and even sink which occurs as you approach the power-on stall.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Interesting. So do you have the student do a heavy reduced power take-off? Or is all of this air work?
Click to expand...

In helicopter training this would be simulated by reducing take off power (manifold pressure) and having the student do a "running takeoff" across the ground, light on the skids until reaching translational lift and climbing out.

Landing while simulating a hot/high density altitude (once again by reducing power) by doing a run on landing.

Works in the helicopter training environment, so I don't see why it wouldn't work in airplanes as well. :dunno:
 
If we can do it safely every day up here at real high DA, I laugh at the thought that it's considered too dangerous to attempt at lower altitudes with a fistful of throttle available to fix any problem that arises at a lower airport.
 
We deal with it here in summer in the 152 :)... The joke is that the plane only flies because the earth curves. My students practice stalling and unstalling the airplane in various ways and at different points in the stall... And we talk about why etc. The DPE out here has us do the power on stall with reduced throttle and recover with full throttle. Doesn't hurt ... They all have done it with full throttle and reduced, and at first indication and after the break and done falling leaf so they know the differences
 
Jeanie said:
The DPE out here has us do the power on stall with reduced throttle and recover with full throttle.
Click to expand...
Use of the throttle to recover from the power-on stall is both contrary to FAA guidance and counterproductive. Since we're simulating a takeoff/climb condition, the throttle would in reality be all the way forward, and you'd have to recover by pitch control alone. See the Airplane Flying Handbook for more on that.
 
TMetzinger said:
From the current PTS:
...Recognizes and recovers promptly after the stall occurs..."

I learned, and all the students at the local flight schools learn, that the standard is to stall the airplane and THEN recover.
Click to expand...
I did power-on and power-off stalls a couple of weeks ago with my CFI... it was to full stall, every time, and we did several. He said the object was two-fold... first, to be able to recognize the impending stall before it happened, and to be able to recover if I was dumb enough to let it happen anyway. So I would tell him just before the stall what was going on, then recover once it broke (to the extent that you can actually get a Cherokee to stall, anyway).
 
Looked at the "new" PTS info, thanks for posting it. Come to think of it, my CFI-CFII's did all of the above and then some anyway in all of my training for both the PPL and IR...including spin work in the 172 during my PPL.

Oh wait, as far as a full stall, well, in the 172 it was more like an accelerated mush:rofl:...YMMV
 
Alexb2000 said:
If we're talking about high powered singles. I have done power on stalls in most of the common HP birds: Bo, Cirrus, C400, 206, etc. The maneuver seems a little silly to me as you have to slow way, way, down, hammer it, and pull about as hard as you can to get it to fully break (some won't really do it). I've done them at all different altitudes both Turbo and NA. I still don't see how anyone could unintentionally get into a power on stall.
Click to expand...

Run away elevator trim seems to be a recurring theme, though I agree with your assessment of stalling an SR-22, but it's still damn good to know what she'll give you.
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
In helicopter training this would be simulated by reducing take off power (manifold pressure) and having the student do a "running takeoff" across the ground, light on the skids until reaching translational lift and climbing out.

Landing while simulating a hot/high density altitude (once again by reducing power) by doing a run on landing.

Works in the helicopter training environment, so I don't see why it wouldn't work in airplanes as well. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Exactly, why not find a good long runway and give it a try.

Now if we could only restrict the oxygen flow to the students brain, then we'd really simulate some mountain training.
 
Ron Levy said:
Use of the throttle to recover from the power-on stall is both contrary to FAA guidance and counterproductive. Since we're simulating a takeoff/climb condition, the throttle would in reality be all the way forward, and you'd have to recover by pitch control alone. See the Airplane Flying Handbook for more on that.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but I have seen more flight schools teach it that way than not.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That may be true, but I have seen more flight schools teach it that way than not.
Click to expand...
You see lots of dumb stuff being taught by some flight schools. Doesn't make it right, smart, or safe.

In a real-world takeoff/departure stall situation, all you have to work with is pitch, and usually you have very little altitude to play with. It's a fine balance between giving away more altitude than you have and creating a secondary stall during the recovery after the initial pitch-down. Teaching that balance is what the power-on stall maneuver is all about, and you don't learn that if you use added power as part of the recovery, since you won't have any extra power to add if it happens for real.
 
Last edited:
Once someone understands the fully stalled condition. Why not train someone to fly in and out of the stall, take it where it's just starting to break, catch it, repeat. Flying along doing that is a lot more fun than just forcing a full break. Besides training our muscle memory to fully stall and then recover seems counter intuitive to building up the habit to catch an impending stall and correct, just like you'd want to do when landing or departing.

Isn't that really the reaction and feel someone should learn?
 
Alexb2000 said:
Once someone understands the fully stalled condition. Why not train someone to fly in and out of the stall, take it where it's just starting to break, catch it, repeat. Flying along doing that is a lot more fun than just forcing a full break. Besides training our muscle memory to fully stall and then recover seems counter intuitive to building up the habit to catch an impending stall and correct, just like you'd want to do when landing or departing.

Isn't that really the reaction and feel someone should learn?
Click to expand...

Two different things being taught:
Stall avoidance - recognizing the incipient stall and preventing it from developing further - this is the real point of slow flight, which should be done in such a way that you're RIGHT ON THE EDGE of the stall - the stall warning should be going off, you should feel the airplane running out of lift. In some airplanes you can even hear the airflow changes.

Stall recovery - where you're already in a stalled condition and you need to fix it WITHOUT entering a secondary stall. That's the purpose of the Private-level stall exercises.

There are lots of scenarios (accelerated stalls) where you can go from flying with a relatively high load factor to stalled quickly. Getting that "push/relax-to-fly" reaction taught is the point of the stall exercises in my opinion.

I got cheated by one of my earlier instructors who felt that "slow flight" was 70 knots in a TB-9. Fortunately a later instructor caught and fixed that.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Once someone understands the fully stalled condition. Why not train someone to fly in and out of the stall, take it where it's just starting to break, catch it, repeat. Flying along doing that is a lot more fun than just forcing a full break.
Click to expand...

:confused: That is Commercial standard. That is what this whole clarification is about is the FAA stating once and all for the record, at PP standards full stalls are required. I'm not getting all this. Are you saying to continue to train PP candidates to an incorrect standards in defiance of FAA notification to the contrary? Wow, people say I break rules.
 
"Flying along doing that is a lot more fun than just forcing a full break."

I didn't know fun was part of the PTS? I'm not saying this to be a pain in the a** either...the best lessons I had left me totally wiped out, sometimes a bit upset with myself at how I was flying, but always set the stage for moving on...the idea that I could save my bacon if the sh*t hit the prop was enough of a motivation for me, but WTH do I know...
 
Last edited:
Why do you think AF 447 crashed, and Colgan? 'Understanding' the full stall condition is not good enough, you have to understand it by feel, by nature. It only takes an extra 3 seconds to recover from flying 1 second further into the stall if you do it correctly. By the end of PP the full stall condition should be natural, you should be able to comfortably perform a falling leaf in any basic trainer for 3+ seconds and recover to level flight with no issue within 3 seconds of initiating recovery. That is what the PP candidate should be comfortable with, recovering his airplane. You don't get that by doing them 3 times. It's not until Commercial standards are we refining the skill set. The FAA seems to have seen the light on this issue as it kind of is a reversal in trend, likely because the inadequacy it causes is starting to show in the airline ranks now.
 
Last edited:
DutchessFlier said:
"Flying along doing that is a lot more fun than just forcing a full break."

I didn't know fun was part of the PTS? I'm not saying this to be a pain in the a** either...the best lessons I had left me totally wiped out, sometimes a bit upset with myself at how I was flying, but always set the stage for moving on...the idea that I could save my bacon if the sh*t hit the prop was enough of a motivation for me, but WTH do I know...
Click to expand...

Having fun while learning makes the check you write at the end of the lesson much more palatable IMO. It doesn't mean you aren't taking the lesson seriously. Perhaps you would've felt less wiped out if you were having some.

Also, saving your bacon will most likely not depend on your ability to recover from a full stall, rather to sense an impending stall, then make the correct reaction instantly, and without thought. Chances are you will be close to the ground and not have the 200' or whatever the current standard for recovery is. The stall training I was discussing is what builds those reactions into reflexes.
 
Ron Levy said:
You see lots of dumb stuff being taught by some flight schools. Doesn't make it right, smart, or safe.

In a real-world takeoff/departure stall situation, all you have to work with is pitch, and usually you have very little altitude to play with. It's a fine balance between giving away more altitude than you have and creating a secondary stall during the recovery after the initial pitch-down. Teaching that balance is what the power-on stall maneuver is all about, and you don't learn that if you use added power as part of the recovery, since you won't have any extra power to add if it happens for real.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Having fun while learning makes the check you write at the end of the lesson much more palatable IMO. It doesn't mean you aren't taking the lesson seriously. Perhaps you would've felt less wiped out if you were having some.

Also, saving your bacon will most likely not depend on your ability to recover from a full stall, rather to sense an impending stall, then make the correct reaction instantly, and without thought. Chances are you will be close to the ground and not have the 200' or whatever the current standard for recovery is. The stall training I was discussing is what builds those reactions into reflexes.
Click to expand...

That is Next Tier. Without the full stall comfort level you are missing a foundation block to build that on. It becomes a hollow skill more likely to fail in a pinch. It's the easy way, a cop out in complete training to make it easier to pass. The problem is that and spins are the great telling points for washout for non reactors. The people who can never get comfortable with it should never go on to commercial certification. Without that or some other critical washout criteria like drugs and a loaded to fail sim, we will see more like AF447 and Colgan.
 
Ron Levy said:
Use of the throttle to recover from the power-on stall is both contrary to FAA guidance and counterproductive. Since we're simulating a takeoff/climb condition, the throttle would in reality be all the way forward, and you'd have to recover by pitch control alone. See the Airplane Flying Handbook for more on that.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
You see lots of dumb stuff being taught by some flight schools. Doesn't make it right, smart, or safe.

In a real-world takeoff/departure stall situation, all you have to work with is pitch, and usually you have very little altitude to play with. It's a fine balance between giving away more altitude than you have and creating a secondary stall during the recovery after the initial pitch-down. Teaching that balance is what the power-on stall maneuver is all about, and you don't learn that if you use added power as part of the recovery, since you won't have any extra power to add if it happens for real.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying and I agree with you. I'll discuss it with the DPE. I am not inclined to be a slip shod instructor. Of course, up here in the summer it's a bit moot since we will be practicing at 10K. DA. Anyway.
 
Last edited:
Jeanie said:
I understand what you are saying and I agree with you. I'll discuss it with the DPE. I am not inclined to be a slip shod instructor.
Of course, up here in the summer it's a bit moot since we will be practicing at 10K. DA. Anyway.
Click to expand...
Now that's real-world power-on stall training.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Having fun while learning makes the check you write at the end of the lesson much more palatable IMO. It doesn't mean you aren't taking the lesson seriously. Perhaps you would've felt less wiped out if you were having some.

Also, saving your bacon will most likely not depend on your ability to recover from a full stall, rather to sense an impending stall, then make the correct reaction instantly, and without thought. Chances are you will be close to the ground and not have the 200' or whatever the current standard for recovery is. The stall training I was discussing is what builds those reactions into reflexes.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you have never been pushed to your limits by an instructor, YMMV, and please don't lecture me on this. I did not judge my training by how much 'fun' I had, that's not the point. I paid for and got instruction that will be embedded in my piloting such that it will help serve to keep me alive.

The issue is PTS standards and how to deal with getting training that is more than just "adequate" training, which is all too often missing.

Your comment was about a maneuver that, in your opinion, was more 'fun' than another maneuver. My reply was the I did not understand how judging one against the other had anything to do with a 'fun' factor.


And I disagree about your full stall recovery comment, but again, you are entitled to your opinion, YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Alexb2000 said:
I wasn't trying to lecture anyone about anything, my apologies if that's how it sounded. If you've got your stall recovery nailed down, good deal.

Have fun.... er. scratch that.

Fly safe and serious.:)
Click to expand...

No apologies needed, and I have nothing nailed down in any aspect of my flying...I, like you I am sure, practice all the time and work hard to be proficient and stay safe.

Oh and for sure, I have fun everytime I get in the plane, even when I'm being challenged to be on top of the game.
 
Ron Levy said:
Use of the throttle to recover from the power-on stall is both contrary to FAA guidance and counterproductive. Since we're simulating a takeoff/climb condition, the throttle would in reality be all the way forward, and you'd have to recover by pitch control alone. See the Airplane Flying Handbook for more on that.
Click to expand...

Plenty of problems caused by throttles creeping backwards because someone forgot to set the friction lock or it was weak. That throttle may not be all the way forward if you're not guarding it during takeoff.
 
denverpilot said:
Plenty of problems caused by throttles creeping backwards because someone forgot to set the friction lock or it was weak. That throttle may not be all the way forward if you're not guarding it during takeoff.
Click to expand...
While that is true, it's not the objective of this particular exercise.
 
Ron Levy said:
While that is true, it's not the objective of this particular exercise.
Click to expand...
The objective of the exercise is to expose the new and refreshing pilot all possible combinations of stall entries and recovery techniques. Recovering with no additional power applied, as you stated, and pushing the throttle forward as in Max Except Take-Off Power, the throttle creeped out, whatever.

The objective of training is to become as skilled as possible in the machine with all it's possible scenarios. The objective of testing is to be certified by our federal government, with appropriate testing standards that government officials are willing to expose themselves to.

You don't have to train beyond the PTS minimum standards, if you truely believe that's enough. I don't. And many instructors and students who want to train to learn everything they can don't. I just don't want you discouraging them. You are a very respected instructor here, and we al appreciate your input, but not this one.

The 91.307 exemption from parachutes is the one that allows spins without parachutes.

Spins are not required, but exempted as other maneuvers.

And you have not answered about the stall attitude in a Bo with full power.

Really, most airplanes we all fly can be stalled at full power in less than a 30 degree attitude - just gotta slow it up to below lift-off speed power up and pull up and stall it. You may have accelerate a bit, but that is sorta the point - to familiarize the pilot with the airplanes stall characteristics, like it says on page 4-3 in the AFH.

The Flight Training Handbook is the guide for training.
The PTS is the guide for testing.
 
nosehair said:
Really, most airplanes we all fly can be stalled at full power in less than a 30 degree attitude - just gotta slow it up to below lift-off speed power up and pull up and stall it. You may have accelerate a bit,
Click to expand...
Whipstalls are generally prohibited in planes like we're discussing. In any event, the accident files suggest that the problem is not one of people not noticing the throttle has retarded itself until the stall has occurred. And regardless of that, read the title of the thread again -- the PTS is what we're discussing here.
Spins are not required, but exempted as other maneuvers.
Click to expand...
No, spins are required for a certificate/rating, and the exemption is for those maneuvers required for a certificate rating such as spins. OTOH, since power-on stalls with a pitch attitude of over 30 degrees are not part of any PTS (the PTS even says not to do them as part of the practical test), they are not required for any certificate/rating and thus not exempted from the parachute requirement.
 
Last edited:
Some direct questions to the CFI's.

Does the new PTS go far enough in your opinion with regard to stalls?

How about turning stalls at standard rate plus, like a base to final stall?

BTW- Since we discussed it earlier, does anyone know someone who got into a FULL power on departure stall and recovered before hitting the ground?
 
Alexb2000 said:
BTW- Since we discussed it earlier, does anyone know someone who got into a FULL power on departure stall and recovered before hitting the ground?
Click to expand...

Considering how it can be done in many types with little to no altitude loss - I'm sure it has happened countless times. It's not like people go around bragging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top