Motoadve or anyone with the heads up AOA display,

I would be interested in a pilot report on how this instruments might back up the very natural feel of the energy management turn. Pitching up or zooming up wings level from cruise to slow down and increase altitude to set up the 1g turn, I expect you would want to arrive at the ball. Next, banking as steep as necessary to quickly get the nose (going down naturally because we release all back pressure on the stick,) onto the target, I expect the indicator would move from ball back to cruise (green.) With the nose on target and wings returned to level, you could again go for the ball to convert the now increasing airspeed back into altitude to return to or near original altitude.

I don't want to turn the very natural energy management turn into an instrument maneuver like the FAA did with the very natural lazy eight. For those who have not benefited from a demonstration of the energy management turn, however, the AOA heads up display should encourage and comfort far better than the lagging airspeed indicator.

Thanks for the help.

Contact

Hi, how are you?
Sorry if i restart an old topic.
I´m looking for some critical AoA information in stol airplanes.
I know that the stall can occur between the 14 and 20 ° of AoA , but, how about stol airplanes?
When you use the stol kit, flaps, slats and others, can you fly at greaters AoA?
I searched in the forum and I thinked that this was the best topic to ask.
If you have a link with more information I will thak you.

PD (Learninig english too )

Jorge,

These guys have lots of experience with AOA indicators. If you are just wanting to understand the difference between out of ground effect AOA at stall and in ground effect AOA at stall, that is simple. In ground effect angle of attack at full stall is the same as a tailwheel airplane with the mains and tailwheel on the ground. Or your 172 with the mains and the tail tiedown on the ground.

Click on my signature box below for more on the sights, sounds, and feel of non-instrument flying.

Jim

contactflying wrote:Jorge,

These guys have lots of experience with AOA indicators. If you are just wanting to understand the difference between out of ground effect AOA at stall and in ground effect AOA at stall, that is simple. In ground effect angle of attack at full stall is the same as a tailwheel airplane with the mains and tailwheel on the ground. Or your 172 with the mains and the tail tiedown on the ground.

Click on my signature box below for more on the sights, sounds, and feel of non-instrument flying.

Jim

I'm not sure this is correct Jim. The ability to land tail first dictates that in ground effect your AoA at full stall is higher then that of the aircraft sitting on the ground. Splitting hairs maybe, but there's a reason that so many people are extending the gear on their aircraft, to take advantage of that AoA sooner on takeoff.

Yes, I hadn't thought about the airplanes that can hover out of ground effect. !

contactflying wrote:Yes, I hadn't thought about the airplanes that can hover out of ground effect. !

Even in ground effect. If I can go down the runway with my tailwheel dragging and still be flying, am I not in ground effect? I think with most of our planes we are.

A1Skinner wrote:

contactflying wrote:Jorge,

These guys have lots of experience with AOA indicators. If you are just wanting to understand the difference between out of ground effect AOA at stall and in ground effect AOA at stall, that is simple. In ground effect angle of attack at full stall is the same as a tailwheel airplane with the mains and tailwheel on the ground. Or your 172 with the mains and the tail tiedown on the ground.

Click on my signature box below for more on the sights, sounds, and feel of non-instrument flying.

Jim

I'm not sure rhus is correct Jim. The ability to land tail first dictates that in ground effect your AoA at full stall is higher then that of the aircraft sitting on the ground. Splitting hairs maybe, but there's a reason that so many people are extending the gear on their aircraft, to take advantage of that AoA sooner on takeoff.

I am pretty sure Skinner is right. Just think about the exact same tailwheel plane with 800-series tires on the mains versus 31" ABWs. The AoA sitting in a 3-point attitude on the ground is going to be VERY different between those two setups.

Ditto for a tricycle-geared airplane with the tail "skid" on the ground. With 700-series main tires, the AoA would be quite a bit different than an otherwise identical plane with 26" Goodyears.

And it's very possible that none of the above ground attitudes is the same as the AoA at stall speed...

Jorge
The simple answer to your question is, yes. However, it depends on the plane type of mod, wing shape, power available, ect. The term STOL gets used way too much in general. My stock wing cub with just vg's can fly all day with the tail a foot below the mains and that is with 3 inch gear and 31" tires.
Another term that is often used and confusing to pilots is" full stall landing". The reason for this is what is the definition of FULL STALL??? you can find more than one definition and which one you use changes the meaning and effect.
DENNY

The little experience I have with the big tires is Stearman and the BCP folks who have come by to fly with me. The old airplanes were designed so that in a no wind condition, we would get stall in two inch ground effect when we brought the stick full back to the stop. I wasn't flying, just talking big tire pilots through the deceleration of the apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach. I think what you'all are saying is that, unless leveled to wheel land, the mains will touch down slightly before the tailwheel when the stick is brought full back to the stop. I prefer the wheel landing, after deceleration to very near full stall. Big tires might make that more comfortable as a default.

contactflying wrote:The little experience I have with the big tires is Stearman and the BCP folks who have come by to fly with me. The old airplanes were designed so that in a no wind condition, we would get stall in two inch ground effect when we brought the stick full back to the stop. I wasn't flying, just talking big tire pilots through the deceleration of the apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach. I think what you'all are saying is that, unless leveled to wheel land, the mains will touch down slightly before the tailwheel when the stick is brought full back to the stop. I prefer the wheel landing, after deceleration to very near full stall. Big tires might make that more comfortable as a default.

Huh?

During landing, can the stick come full back to the stop before 31 inch tires touch?

A basic cub with 31 inch tires and 3 inch will easily land tailwheel first every time if you keep pulling back on the stick. Most of the people I have seen that say they are doing a 3 point are tailwheel first. You can do a slow wheel landing but to do so requires a lot of practice as when to release pressure and roll it on the mains. A true full stall of a wing happens with the tailwheel about 1 1/2 foot or more below the mains. A wing will break and drop. Not a big deal if you are ready for it, tire will hit first and usually keep wing tip off the ground. Sooooooo what is the definition of stall?? A sudden drop of a wing or just a wing that does not have enough lift to hold altitude and starts to descend in a controlled manner? This is what causes a lot of confusion. IE "Full stall landing"
DENNY

Yes, it has always meant that the airplane will stay down and not try to fly again. That is why a wheel landing is required in a big headwind component. The wing will still be flying at zero ground speed. When you have tailwheel down first, Denny, you are still carrying power...right? That would be hover taxi with the tailwheel rolling on the surface.

You can do it with or without power, I am usually a power on landing guy. As you point out the goal is for the plane not to fly again, If I am stoping short I get the tail up to weight the mains or I just skip/slide when I brake hard. I recently flew a J3 for a friend, not having be flown the plane before I just did a simple wheel landing and roll out. As I started to set the tail down it just lifted off again. Great flying plane just pilot has to get used to how light it is. I think what a lot of people don't think about is as long as air is moving over the wing it is going to be making lift. Every wing will have a critical AOA but in 3 point AOA most will fly just fine once lift is greater than weight.
DENNY

What Denny and I are saying, I think, is that there are just too many variables for Vso to be of any use determining no wind touchdown airspeed and that even an angle of attack indicator would have to deal with a lot of variables. And then we would have to be looking at the panel at a time when looking outside might be more useful. The audio part should be more helpful. The regular stall warning goes off way too early for short field landing work, but is helpful during maneuvering flight. Using good energy management, the stall warning should not go off except during deceleration on approach. I would think the same true for the AOA indicator.

I should have posted this before, when I posted the "big vs little" wheels... My absolutely stock '65 Champion Citabria 7ECA would touch down tail-first during 3-point landings. Just barely, but it would do it every time. That's why I learned to do "tail wheel low" wheel-landings – just didn't want to beat up the tailwheel that much (paved runway at the home drome).

A silly question about the STOL airplanes that will stall out of ground effect around 20 or so: when performing a power pitch deceleration to landing on the tailwheel, will slow power reduction be required to get the mains to settle on softly?