Teaching Stalls in Wing Heavy Aircraft....

[avbug]

Maybe that aircraft was the only one available on that day.

More of that soul-narcotic, again. Yes, the aircraft is unairworthy. Yes, it's a bad example for the student. But it's christmas. But it's the only one that's available. But I have to pay rent. But I'll justify it because...because, because, because, but, but, but.

If you try hard, you can justify anything.

Or maybe on that day, practice something other than stalls, and write the aircraft up after you land.

More narcotic. We'll accept it this time and write it up when we land. That is, you already know it's got a problem...if it's enough of a problem to write up when you land, why are you taking it to begin with???

Alot of the 727's that I fly and have flown do not fly straight. That does not mean it's not airworthy

Of course, you know this from studying the aircraft maintenance publications...and you know that airworthy means A) in conformity with approved data (AFM, Mx pubs, AD's, STC's, etc), AND B) is in safe condition for flight. If it doesn't meet both of those criteria, then it's NOT airworthy.

There's an older 172 at my flight school with a heavy left wing. In cruise flight, in order to fly hands off, rudder input has to be such that the ball is deflected to the left, fully outside the "window". As such, the rudder trim tab has been bent to accomplish this wings-level cruise flight.

It's all fine and dandy,

Good luck finding the Mx specifications in the Manufacturers approved publications for rigging an airplane that flies like that, to fly like that...I was handed a C-182 a few years ago prepatory to an annual inspection. One of the things the DZ's regular pilot commented about was that the control wheel required almost full deflection one way to maintain wings level. I approached the IA who had done the work the previous year and signed off the annual, as well as signing off having rigged the controls. His response was that the aircraft just needed a lot of rudder trim to make it fly straight, and not to worry about it. I had to re-rig everything, and I've never seen an aircraft so far out of rig or specification (excepting a couple that have had the ailerons rigged backward).

The Type Certificate Data Sheet calls out specific control deflections, and the maintenance manual echoes the TCDS, as well as giving a number of specifics regarding the rigging of the aircraft. If the aircraft is not in conformity with this data, then the aircraft is NOT airworthy.

 

[Kaman]

Hello,
Where I flew 135 cargo, it wasn't uncommon to have an airplane that was rigged a little out of whack, but never to the point that I felt safety was compromised. And, some careful fuel planning/burning made for a comfortable day of flying. In an ideal world I'd have had them fix it, but an ideal world I didn't live in.
Addressing the stall issue, it's why you teach RUDDER, RUDDER, RUDDER for recovery from a stall. A common reflex is to get on the ailerons and correct for the wing drop. A No-No in the Sundowner especially. I used to teach students to use nothing but rudder all the way through the recovery, because this will keep the airplane coordinated and as any student pilot should be able to tell you, An uncoordinated stall leads to a spin... my humble .02 cents.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

 

[pianoman]

In the EMB-145, we have two ball inclinometers and an electronic one on the stby. AI. It's not uncommon to have three different readings. So there's a pretty good chance the one in your 172 could be off. So if you stall it according to that, maybe you ARE actually uncoordinated.

Sucks, I know.