Live data from Hacker News

The unstallable plane that stalled

fearoflanding.com

11–20 of 183 posts

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#11
post #9

Just so we're clear, there's practically no such thing as an "unstallable plane". If some pilot believes that then their license should be revoked. Even jet engines can experience stalls internally on the compressor blades, and even helicopters can experience stalls on their retreating blade. I would compare it to someone believing that their car cannot possibly lose traction. Exceptions, which of course must exist,…

Edit: It seems that I completely misread what Wikipedia said, disregard this comment.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#12
post #3

>“I let it lift off by itself. It was well-trimmed and it lifted off normally by itself.” It sounds like the pilot wasn't fully prepared and engaged to compensate for propeller torque at the moment the aircraft left the surface of the water. At full takeoff power in a single engine aircraft this can be very intense and jarring, particularly with a high pitch ascent and full prop pitch. All it took was a momentary lap…

> The pilot had set the trim so that the aircraft would lift off from the step and begin to climb away. The rudder trim was set almost as far right as it could go. The pilot described the take-off as quick and easy. “I let it lift off by itself. It was well-trimmed and it lifted off normally by itself.” Further down. > The maintenance team discovered an incorrect right wing geometric twist, which was unrelated to the…

Kind of my point though. The pilot was disengaged from the controls, and relying on trim settings for takeoff. Regardless of the different roll characteristics, if he had been actively controlling the yoke at the time rather than needing a split second to react and correct, the accident probably would not have occurred.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#13
post #9

Just so we're clear, there's practically no such thing as an "unstallable plane". If some pilot believes that then their license should be revoked. Even jet engines can experience stalls internally on the compressor blades, and even helicopters can experience stalls on their retreating blade. I would compare it to someone believing that their car cannot possibly lose traction. Exceptions, which of course must exist,…

Canard aircraft, for example, stall the canard first, resulting in the nose dropping, preventing the main wing from ever stalling.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#14
post #9

Just so we're clear, there's practically no such thing as an "unstallable plane". If some pilot believes that then their license should be revoked. Even jet engines can experience stalls internally on the compressor blades, and even helicopters can experience stalls on their retreating blade. I would compare it to someone believing that their car cannot possibly lose traction. Exceptions, which of course must exist,…

Edit: It seems that I completely misread what Wikipedia said, disregard this comment.

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/65718/what-make...

There are many ways of totalling a plane beyond a stall.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#17
It is not necessary to empirically determine a specific airplane's stall speed in order to operate it safely. It's not required in the US, we just use the number the manufacturer publishes.

It's normal for airplanes of the same model to fly differently: I fly a little fleet of six Citabrias, and their stall characteristics are radically different. You'd expect more uniformity from a modern aluminum airplane, but still: nobody should be flying an airplane like this so close to the edge the exact stall speed needs to be known numerically within one knot.

The 40lbs of gas I burn flying for an hour decreases the stall speed by more than 1mph on those Citabrias I fly.

EDIT: I was mistaken, this isn't a requirement in Europe either.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#18
post #13
post #9

Just so we're clear, there's practically no such thing as an "unstallable plane". If some pilot believes that then their license should be revoked. Even jet engines can experience stalls internally on the compressor blades, and even helicopters can experience stalls on their retreating blade. I would compare it to someone believing that their car cannot possibly lose traction. Exceptions, which of course must exist,…

Canard aircraft, for example, stall the canard first, resulting in the nose dropping, preventing the main wing from ever stalling.

The main wing can still be stalled in a canard; it’s not easy but it is possible and when it happens it’s almost unrecoverable because the canard will be stalled too and no flying surfaces will have sufficient lift to correct the condition. It’s a condition called “deep stall”

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the two surviving passengers would have died if they had life jackets on. I can’t imagine getting out of an inverted, flooded 185 cabin with a life jacket on. I think there was some sense to not requiring life jackets on seaplanes. They’re much more confined spaces than most pleasure boats, not to mention that you’re usually on a boat rather than in it. The flooding is also usually just about instant a…

My reflex is to never mandate safety procedures. To put it simply, why should the state use force to mandate something like safety. The implication being if someone refuses the force of the state is used on them… which is definitely not good or improving safety. Mandating the seatbelts exist, sure. Mandating people wear them? Idk about that. In the case of tractors for instance, wearing a seatbelt is downright danger…

Mandating the wearing of seatbelts isn’t entirely about protecting the person wearing the seatbelt. An unbelted occupant becomes a projectile in a sufficiently violent collision, and that projectile can cause harm to people outside of the vehicle.

Re: The unstallable plane that stalled

#20
Stick and Rudder (Wolfgang Langewiesche 1972):

> There are situations in flying when he who "ducks," he who flinches, is lost. The most important example is the re­covery from a stall at low altitude-getting that stick forward and pointing the nose at the ground; that does require courage, and no two ways about it. [...] It might seem that learning to fly the conventional airplane must necessarily be mostly a matter of drill, like animal training, like making a dog not eat when he wants to eat, making him jump through a flaming hoop when he does not want to jump. [...] But another view of the problem is also possible. It may be that our common sense, our natural reactions mislead us simply because they are working on the basis of wrong ideas in our minds concerning the wing and how it really flies, the controls and what they really do. [...] Perhaps what happens when the beginner reacts wrongly in an airplane is similar to what happened in the early days of the automobile, when a man trying to stop in an emergency would pull back on the wheel as if he had reins in his hands and would even yell "Whoa." There was nothing re­ally wrong with his reactions, with his intentions; the only thing wrong was the image in his head that made him see the automobile as a sort of mech­anized horse, to be controlled as horses are controlled. Had he clearly seen in his mind's eye the mechanical arrangement we take for granted now-the clutch that can disconnect the motor, the brakes that can clamp down on the wheels; had he clearly appreciated that the thing was a machine and had no soul at all, not even a horse's soul, and that thus there was no use in speaking to it-he would then have done the right thing without diffi­culty. It may be that, if we could only understand the wing clearly enough, see its working vividly enough, it would no longer seem to behave contrary to common sense; we should then expect it to behave as it does behave. We could then simply follow our impulses and "instincts." Flying is done largely with one's imagination! If one's images of the airplane are correct, one's behavior in the airplane will quite naturally and effortlessly also be correct.

Post reply on HN