Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Pinnacle CRJs

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
JetDriverWanaBe said:
Any one know the Critica Angle of Attack for the CRJ-200? It's an interview question that I just can't seem to find the answer for.

Maybe they are looking for honesty in that you don't know and aren't going to BS them. Who knows. Anyway they didn't tell us in ground school what the AOA is but in the sim, the plane was stalling around 11 degrees nose-up.
 
saw that on the gouge too...was wondering the same.
 
Thats very helpful Thank you. However the question is on the written where there is a 70% pass/ fail line. the answers are supposed to be 10,40,60, or 90 Degrees. I know the AoA Indiccator has a tollerance of + 43 deg. and 10 seemed to be too shallow (don't you rotate higher than that?) Plus going back to bassics he old cessna books say the Crit. AoA is around 16-18 Deg. and larger planes tend to be greater... Did I see you are looking at AirTrains? I used to be an F/A there, good luck.
 
Just because you can pitch up much farther than that doesn't mean that the AOA is what you see on the attitude indictor. Think back to the basics of chord line and the relative wind. If you moving at 300 kts and pitch up slowly, the relative winds changes also. So far as the swept wing, the stall comes earlier. Thats why the bigger planes have leading edge flaps to change the chord line and a more favorable AOA for slower flight during TO and approach.
 
i think mixed into one of the gouges on Aviationinterviews someone listed a value around 28 degrees. I think the nearest choice was 30....FWIW
 
ReportCanoa said:
What an unbelievable amount of class. Your profile says it all.
 
Thank you grunt. Anyway ignoring the smart @$$es... I'm hoping to find a straight answer prferably form someone who has passed the interview or atleast the written portion. The written test is multiple choice and the answers are simply 10, 40, 60 or 90. If it stalls shallow b/c of the swept wing I understand the choord vs. realative wind, or if it's later like 40Deg... Is ther any one who knows for sure?
 
What purpose does that question serve?

Seems pretty pointless to ask someone who has never flown a CRJ about something that most experienced CRJ pilots likely wouldn't know.
 
This is as close as I could get. 10 degrees seems way too low, 40 seems way too high. I'm no aero expert, but I think critical AOA varies with mach number...

"According to Bombardier, the airplane [CL-65] enters the stall reigion after reaching an AOA of 19 degrees."

Page 16 - [SIZE=-1]www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAB0401.pdf [/SIZE]
 
Last edited:
dood...just put the closest answer to what you think it is.
Each question is like 1 point....if you fail it because of that question then you shouldnt have the job anyways...
 
MarineGrunt said:
What an unbelievable amount of class. Your profile says it all.
I still say it's FL410. At least that's what I was told at Gulfstreem. Guess I may have gotten that one wrong. Or maybe when the stick shaking thingamajig starts going off, or something.
 
Last edited:
MarineGrunt said:
This is as close as I could get. 10 degrees seems way too low, 40 seems way too high. I'm no aero expert, but I think critical AOA varies with mach number...

"According to Bombardier, the airplane [CL-65] enters the stall reigion after reaching an AOA of 19 degrees."

Page 16 - [SIZE=-1]www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAB0401.pdf [/SIZE]

Thanks for posting the link.

It should be noted that the aircraft was configured for takeoff with a 20 degree flap setting. The first stall occurred at 23 degrees vane AOA and the second stall occurred at a 26.4 degree AOA. There is no way of determining from this information what the unaccelerated(i.e.-one G) stall AOA would be in the clean configuration.

Actual stall AOA varies primarily and significantly with configuration, not weight or mach number, while indicated stall AOA will vary with the rate at which it is approached. I seem to vaguely recall that temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure may have a minute effect on stall AOA.

As one who has designed and validated multiple choice aircraft systems knowledge tests like the one described by the original poster, I can say the question is bogus being neither relevant nor reliable.
 
JetDriverWanaBe said:
Any one know the Critica Angle of Attack for the CRJ-200? It's an interview question that I just can't seem to find the answer for.
dont worry about it, that is a bad company just dont do the interview. Or even better dont do any interview this industry sucks

and your user name is the reason why it sucks
 
Good points. I am new to the high speed/altitude stuff, so I may be off base...

I thought that as altitude and mach number increase, stall AOA decreases due to mach tuck....?
 
MarineGrunt said:
I thought that as altitude and mach number increase, stall AOA decreases due to mach tuck....?

I haven't cracked Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators in many years but as I recall mach tuck is a phenomenon associated with movements of the Center of Pressure(CP) over(or, more specifically, under) the airfoil and control surfaces due to local supersonic airflow. If so, it has nothing to do with stall AOA.
 
JetDriverWanaBe said:
Any one know the Critica Angle of Attack for the CRJ-200? It's an interview question that I just can't seem to find the answer for.


This isn't going to answer your question but the wing on the CRJ stalls at varying AOA's as you progress down its span. The outer few feet of the wing actually stalls quite frequently while in the normal flight envelope. This posed a problem during flight testing as the ailerons were stalling and unable to provide adequate roll control while operating in the higher AOA range. Instead of redesigning the wing to eliminate this problem Bombardier instead moved the ailerons inward so that the outer 3 feet or so of the wing don't have control surfaces on them.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top