I have searched the forum and have found a few comments about AOA indicators.

Just curious if anyone has one. If so, do you find it useful? Are you glad you installed it?

I am considering installing one in a Cessna 185.

Squash wrote:I have searched the forum and have found a few comments about AOA indicators.

Just curious if anyone has one. If so, do you find it useful? Are you glad you installed it?

I am considering installing one in a Cessna 185.

BOY YOU DID IT NOW!!

HAS BEEN CUSSED AND DISCUSSED HERE AND DIFFERENT FORUMS!
Some folks like em, some think they are a waste of time, money, and that you should be lookin out the window instead of lookin at it when you need it!
Can't say one way or another!! Never had one, but I can tell when the bird is about to stall!

Good luck!!

Someone just posted a picture of I think the Q2?? didnt look like he could use one!!
Found it

M6RV6 wrote:Someone just posted a picture of I think the Q2?? didnt look like he could use one!!
Found it

Hah! Great image. His AOA is when his head hits the ceiling!

I installed one with both visual and audible outputs as part of our integrated PFD system - seemed like a good compromise between looking our the window and knowing AoA when you want to. If you decide you don't want it at some point, you can always turn down the volume independantly, switch it off visually, or both.

Battson wrote:- seemed like a good compromise between looking our the window and knowing AoA when you want to.

Battson, serious question, when did you find the AOA of value? I can only imagine it might be handy under IFR conditions, or perhaps night ops, when ones eyes might be spending more time in the cockpit then out. But can't imagine a use for it during Day VFR. Curious since I've never had one.

Queston......

Is an AOA indicator the same as a Reserve Lift Indicator or is that a completely different animal?

Just curious!

Go270 wrote:Queston......

Is an AOA indicator the same as a Reserve Lift Indicator or is that a completely different animal?

Just curious!

It's the same thing. Everybody here thinks they are worthless except the military pilots. For some reason the dang military keeps putting them in all their aircraft. I can't imagine why,.......except maybe that aircraft equipped with them, curiously enough, have lower accident rates during the landing phase.

I wish I could find the little icon that shows a guy hitting his head against the wall or the one that has a guy beating a dead horse...

I would love a real AOA, but my limited experience in our type aircraft is that AOA doesn't work as well in a plane you may be flying so close to stall speed, and the installations are closer to airspeed indicators than OEM AOA installations. These are not military aircraft we are flying.

Just my 2c

AKT

Nice!

I have had onefor 400hrs or so, and really use it and like it.Helps a lot to be very consistent in landings.
Helps a lot when windy conditions, heavy, light every time very consistent.
Great for Photo and video flights too.

Only time I dont look at it is on short and challenging strips, I look once and after that Im looking outside and feeling the sounds and behaviour of the plane.

I do recommend it for sure.

I flew with them a lot in the military. They are crucial to landing on an aircraft carrier, and for training to do ACM, weapons launch, refueling and field arrestments. In the civil world I have occasionally wanted one, but in reality have never wanted one enough to spend the money. They have reliability issues and there is no data relating their output to any actual performance on the vast majority of aircraft. I would feel the money is better spent on other things.

... if you have the buck$$, then go for it.

I don't have any significant experience with AoA's or in military aircraft.

However I do have some experience (as a lowly unwashed private pilot) with audible sound indicators hooked up to primary air data instrumentation, in situations where you want or need to keep your visual focus outside the aircraft. It had nothing to do with bush flying, but it did have an awful lot to do with terrain avoidance, and traffic avoidance, and safety, at low speeds.

In those situations, getting important primary indications without having to take your eyes off of where you are flying, was very very helpful. It allowed me to fly the aircraft a lot better than I would have been able to do otherwise.

I believe sincerely that using this concept (audio indication of AoA) would give a pilot more and better information, and allow some gain in safety or performance. Matter of fact, two or three projects from now, I will be experimenting with this for my own aircraft, to see if it does what I think it will do.

I am an ex-USAF pilot and simply love AoA.... wish they used it in the airlines, wish it was available for GA. Everything I have seen on the market is an approximation of AoA not an actual measurement of it. Real AoA is achieved by means of an Angle of Attack vane that actually aligns with the relative wind... kind of hard to do with a prop throwing artificial airflow over the vane (the probes are fuselage mounted, usually on the nose). All the GA versions I have seen use air pressure probes to detect changes in the relative wind, and none of them are adapted to a particular wing. They all approximate the actual AoA. To be fair it is probably impossible to measure AoA on the wing... it is what it is.

So, if an approximation is good enough for you then go for it. AoA is excellent information.

gunny

Thank you for all the responses. I really like the concept of flying a reproducible angle of attack (or pressure instrument approximation) at varying weights. Most airplanes fly completely differently when flown light versus heavy. Why guess at the best approach speed for that particular weight and balance? I don't fly enough to know how to dial the plane into an ideal approach speed when at 2300#, 2700#, 3150#, or gross. If I do end up installing one, I will be sure to provide a review on the forum.

I don't mind that most products use pressure sensors to approximate AOA. As long as I appreciate the limitations of the method, I should still be able to extract the important info. I find the airspeed indicator and the VSI to be useful even though they do not display the actual airspeed or VS.

It doesn't seem that there are too many of these things out in the field. I am considering the mechanical version that weighs 2 lbs and costs $700. The electronic versions can cost double that, and I can understand the reluctance to spend that kind of money on a non-essential instrument.

I have an Alpha Systems analog/mechanical AOA in my airplane. After flying with it for several years now and about 250 hours or so, I'm sold on it--it was not a waste of money, at all. Here's an older pic of my panel (I have recently replaced the Airpath with a SIRS compass) showing the AOA, centered in the pilot's line of vision:



At different weights, if I just keep the needle in the middle of the yellow, I'll be at a safe approach speed. The airplane stalls as the needle approaches the bottom of the red, so whenever I get into the red, that's a bit too slow for short final. Since I typically fly with just me and my dog, my approach and landing speeds are typically slower than they were before I installed the AOA. Fully loaded, my approach speeds are just about at book speeds with the needle centered in the yellow.

Calibrating this version is trial and error, adjusting the vane on the wing on the ground, then testing it. It took several flights to do that. The electronic versions use an "in the cockpit" adjustment. It's calibrated so that when the needle is at the red/yellow mark, the airplane is being flown as slow as possible in level flight with full control of all controls. Although there is some difference with flaps extended or retracted, there isn't much.

With the gauge located where it is, it's easy to see during a short approach without taking my eyes off the runway environment. The only downside of it is that it isn't lit, so at night I can't see it--then I have to rely on my airspeed indicator.

I should mention, before someone says that any experienced pilot knows what his airplane is doing without such gimcracks to help him, I'm no newbie. After almost 41 years of flying, instructing, SE charter, etc., I can feel what a 172 or 182 is doing as well as anyone--but using the AOA, now I can do it better.

Cary

Have LRI on top of panel over 10 years - Best $400.00 bucks I spent on 182. Non electric version - wish it had heater but O well . Works excellent !!!

Redid my whole panel in my skywagon. Alpha AOA was the best money I've spent, haven't bounced a landing since, and I've watched alot of naysayers bouncin' down the runway.

Brad

Incidentally, the vane on mine is heated. I don't turn on the heat unless I'm on an approach in cold moisture, because it does draw quite a bit of juice--with landing lights, strobes, and the pitot heat on, my alternator keeps up with it, but just barely. If I'm cruising in clouds, I'll have the pitot heat on, but not the AOA heat, since it's not as important an instrument in cruise conditions.

Cary

Cary wrote:Incidentally, the vane on mine is heated. I don't turn on the heat unless I'm on an approach in cold moisture, because it does draw quite a bit of juice--with landing lights, strobes, and the pitot heat on, my alternator keeps up with it, but just barely. If I'm cruising in clouds, I'll have the pitot heat on, but not the AOA heat, since it's not as important an instrument in cruise conditions.

Cary

Hey Cary, that's a good reason to upgrade to LED lights.