Prw off stall help

[mcjohn]

Today I had a more experienced flight instructor take a student of mine on a simulated check ride. He didn't approve of the way I had him doing pwr off stalls:
From slow flight, full flaps, c-152
1. Carb heat on, pwr to idle
2. Pitch level to establish descent (500 fpm)
3. Apply back pressure to induce stall
4. To recover pitch to horizon, full pwr, carb heat off, roll level (opposite rudder)
5. Retract flaps to 10 degrees establish climb pitch attitude
6. Stabilize climbout at Vx (until obstacle cleared)
7. Retract flaps to 0 degress and stabilize at Vy
8. Announce "safe altitude" and level off

Now, the other instructor wants me to break it up and not start it from slow flight. He said the student should put in flaps as if turning to base then to final: even though flying straight ahead - 10 pitch for 70, 20 pitch for 65, 30 pitch for 60 , then gently begin inducing the stall. Then recovering pitch for V? and notch flaps out to 20, 10, then 0.
He says the 152c sinks to much when flaps go from 30 straight to 10 degrees as in my list above.

Need some input here. I've taught 4 or 5 people my way and now I'm concerned. Thanks.

 

[9GClub]

Not qualified to speak to your technique, but I remember go-around practice in the -150...... we used to go from 40 deg to zero and that thing wanted to drop like a rock..... little tricky.

 

[Workin'Stiff]

I think you're really splittin' hairs with this... But take it for what it's worth, I taught all of my students roughly the same was as you did concerning P.O. stalls. Keep the big picture in mind. Did the student recognize the stall??? Yep. Did they keep the aircraft coordinated??? Yep. Did they apply the necessary action to correct the stalled condition and return to normal flight? Yep.

The only issue I have with the technique of the other instructor is that should this occur low to the ground, you're going to have your student so focus on incrementally bringing the flaps up, they'll lose focus of what's going on around them. Not only that, but it's proven that Flaps 10 in a C-152 produces a bunch of lift vs the amount of drag. This is the optimal flap setting for a short field TO. How much altitude will a 152 lose by going flaps 30 to 10??? 50 to a hundred feet??? I don't know. But I would rather get the flaps into a climb setting (short field flap setting) and then have them concentrate on correcting the stalled condition and returning the aircraft to a normal flight attitude.

Sorry. This is a little long, but it always got under my skin when some instructor would climb on their high horse and say "your technique is incorrect." AAAAHHHHH...

 

[midlifeflyer]

The difference is no big deal. There has been a recent FAA preference for a power-off stall that really looks like an approach to landing stall. I learned the entry the way you teach it and teach it both ways.

When I teach the "new" version, the scenario is a power-off final approach in which the pilot is getting too low. A good pilot, I explain, would correct with pitch and power, but we're simulating a "bad pilot" correcting only with pitch.

 

[Resocha]

Okay, I admit it's been a few years, but...

Does the PTS address technique? My understanding (which certainly may be obsolete), is that as long as the student performs per the PTS, the technique is irrelevant.

 

[minitour]

Okay, I admit it's been a few years, but...

Does the PTS address technique? My understanding (which certainly may be obsolete), is that as long as the student performs per the PTS, the technique is irrelevant.

Pretty sure (as was mentioned before) that the PTS says you establish an approach glide (for lack of a better word) then stall from there and recover.

In a 152, I would teach just as you do. Full flaps, carb heat, power idle, glide, stall, nose to horizon flaps 10 full power carb heat off to start recovery, climb Vx to clear any obstacles then Vy and flaps 0 to safe maneuvering altitude.

Just make sure the students also know they need to do stalls at an altitude allowing recovery at or above 1500' AGL. I know a lot of CFI candidates got busted on that one at Airman while I was there. The one examiner would do the soft field takeoff, go out for Chandelles, Steep turns, Lazy Eights, steep spiral to about 500' and "recover" then say "okay, give me a power off stall right here". Most did and, you bet..."that was beautiful, but I'm afraid we'll have to end the flight.".

FWIW, an examiner I talk with pretty regularly does the power off stall the way you taught it. Slow flight at MCA to the stall.

-mini

 

[gkrangers]

I've done it both ways. I don't see anything wrong with either. I'll teach both...

 

[mcjohn]

Thanks for the input

Take into consideration - the other thing the more experienced instructor said was that the student risks bumping the flaps all the way to zero as did my student while performing the maneuver for him. Then the plane does sink like a rock. At 10 it just kind of flys level for a bit. At 20 it climbs a little quicker but the airspeed is slower to build. Yes this is splitting hairs, but my student is concerned I've been teaching him wrong so I've gotta have something solid to tell him about 10 hours from now.
I really like midlifeflyer's example of teaching it both ways. I think I'm gonna run with that one.
PTS doesn't get very detailed regarding all of this because all the planes are so different. I know I should check out the old 1970's POH but half the stuff I see in that thing seems improper.
Minitour, thanks for that advice. I don't like thinking about those kind of check rides! I hate it when examiners practically set you up for a disaster like that. I've been lucky, but I hear those kind of stories all the time.

 

[nosehair]

the student risks bumping the flaps all the way to zero as did my student while performing the maneuver for him. Then the plane does sink like a rock. At 10 it just kind of flys level for a bit. At 20 it climbs a little quicker but the airspeed is slower to build. Yes this is splitting hairs, but my student is concerned .

Retracting in small increments is always the best way. In airplanes with manual flap handles, the pilot gradually and slowly raises flaps as airspeed builds. If a sinking sensation or visible decrease in climb occurs the retraction process is stopped or reversed. You can actually do that with electric flaps, but that's another story. The point is, you should use the 10 degree increment method as a standard practice. You said in your post "at 20 it climbs a little quicker" and that is what you want. You want to find a balance between airspeed increse and climb performance. That requires that you retract the flaps in a manner similar to elevator input on landing. It takes some sense of aircraft performance - not just some rote procedure.
Regarding the PTS on flap retraction: "Retracts the flaps to the recommended setting." Well, what's that? The best I can guess for a 152 is the POH "Balked Landing" procedure checklist: "Wing Flaps - retract to 20."
Don't short-cut it. You're building a safe habit-pattern. The fact that it will retract from 30 to 10 without sinking is one of the "forgiving" features of this trainer. Other airplanes are not so forgiving. You do have to split hairs. And even a 152 will sink when fully loaded on a hot day. Try it at minimum speed next August.
Also, as to the entry method. The PTS does say: "Establishes a stabilized descent in the approach or landing configuration, as specified by the examiner. In a 152, that is a power off glide. Establish a final approach glide attitude/airspeed, then "Transition smoothly from the approach or landing attitude to a pitch attitude that will iduce a stall."

I teach the beginning stalls from slow flight. But after student can recognize and effect a steady recovery, and when prepping for checkride, I teach the full entry into a stabilized power off glide approach and smootly raise the nose to an attutude that results in a stall as if rounding out high over the runway, and stall recovery that results in a minimum loss of altitude, as the PTS says, which involves the judicious retraction of flaps.
​

 

[NW_Pilot]

[FONT=&quot]Ever been demonstrated a torque roll? Go find a place with something turbo charged & with 300+ pony’s, then go so stalls like you are doing in the 152 you will learn very fast that very quick full throttle before actually breaking the stall will roll you! Let the instructor know what you’re doing first so you don’t exceed 60 degrees bank! And always retract flaps 10 degrees at a time or to what the POH says.


Ever done a spin & recovery under the hood? thats fun also.
[/FONT]

 

[sandslob]

Hey.. as long as they can recoginze the stall, correct it, keep the plane happy, the f*ck it. It all works.

There are SO many different personal variations that cover so many different planes... so many variables... just keep blue skies up and all is OK. It's flying .. not rocket science.

 

[flyer172r]

Keep in mind that on a checkride the examiner may well have them go into slow flight, then go from slow flight to a power off stall to save time. That's what happened to me on my private checkride. I would definitely teach them both ways so that they're prepared either way for the ride and so that they know what it would look like if it happened in real life. Which would never happen because they'd stop it before it got that bad, right?

 

[white knuckle]

Vx,Vy

For instructors; Climb always at Vx initially? Do any instuctors have them go for Vy. If no obstacle. Also, I do flaps in increments (sp?) go from 30 to 20 instantally after throttle, carb ht., pitch for horrizon, then 20 degrees, once on the horizon go to ten, then verify positive rate raise the last 10 degrees. I've never taken anything without using 10 degree incr. because that CE-150 or CE-152 will settle. I'm open for opinions. That is why I posted. I'm looking for suggestions. Thanks.

 

[cforst513]

since i'm too lazy to read this whole thread, i'm sorry if this has been brought up already, BUT add a bit of realism to it by adding altitudes to the equation. i'll explain in a sec. on the checkrides, a lot of examiners will have them go from slow flight straight to a power off stall. teaching it this way is fine, but the power off stall practice is most useful to the student when you set it up like it's a landing. so once the student gets flaps down and slows to his/her approach speed, look at the altitude. mark it, and then have them descend to a specified lower altitude, then cut the power and pitch up. i have found that it helps make the stall situation a little more realistic. examiners just go from slow flight to stalls to save time. i mean, how often are you going to be pitching up 15+ degrees, full flaps, going like 30kts, on a landing? you're not. keep it simple. however, i read your procedures and they look almost the same as what i would do.

 

[midlifeflyer]

For instructors; Climb always at Vx initially? Do any instuctors have them go for Vy. If no obstacle. Also, I do flaps in increments (sp?) go from 30 to 20 instantally after throttle, carb ht., pitch for horrizon, then 20 degrees, once on the horizon go to ten, then verify positive rate raise the last 10 degrees. I've never taken anything without using 10 degree incr. because that CE-150 or CE-152 will settle. I'm open for opinions. That is why I posted. I'm looking for suggestions. Thanks.

Your comment about settling is the reason it's done incrementally.

I think a lot of the questions about the PTS stall and recovery are based on looking at it as though it's some abstract procedure that someone made up to test pilot applicants. It's not. A power off stall is a simulation of a stall that could take place on approach to landing. What about the recovery?

Well, if the power-off stall simulates a stall on approach to landing, then the recovery (hopefully except for the stall itself) is similar to a go-around (think going around when a deer darts out onto the runway as the stall warning goes off during the flare). So the procedure and even to a large degree the purpose, is the same: minimize loss of altitude initially and climb back up.

The go-around procedure for most airplanes recommends an initial flap reduction to a value that will enhance the ability to stop the descent and climb - so that's what we do in stall recovery also. Same for the rest of the procedure, including the rest of the flap retraction at target airspeeds. Those targets happen to usually coincide with Vx and Vy for the same avoidance of sink reasons.

And just like a go-around, it's not "pitch for Vx and =then= pitch for Vy." It's pitch for a =climb= and, as your airspeed passes through those airspeeds, you have the speeds you need continue your flap retractions.

Let's put this in the context of that 172 you mention: At the beginning of the recovery, after breaking the stall, you "cram it and climb it" (to use the go-around phrasing) - that means full power, climb attitude and a flap retraction to 20 so that it =can= climb. As you achieve a positive rate of climb and cross Vx, you continue to "clean it" by reducing flaps to 10 and, as you cross Vy, can finish cleaning up the airplane by retracting flaps to 0 and climbing normally.

 

[dogismycopilot]

Why teach the student a different procedure for stall entry/recovery when they need to know approach-to-land configuration/flare/go-around procedures? Building blocks help students learn more effectively and efficiently. Also (perhaps unrelated to this topic), doesn't a DPE/FAA examiner have a reasonable expectation to see maneuvers performed per the airplane flying handbook?