The continual degradation of flight training in North America.

[Saxub]

This time it's the FAA. No more stall horn during slow flight.

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation ... O16010.pdf

These slow flight characteristics can be experienced, and therefore the learning objective achieved, in
climbs, turns, descents, and straight and level flight without intentionally flying the airplane with the stall
warning activated. The FAA does not advocate disregarding a stall warning while maneuvering an
airplane.
3 With the exception of performing a thoroughly briefed full stall maneuver, a pilot should
always perform the stall recovery procedure when a stall warning is activated.

The revised evaluation standard requires the pilot to maintain a speed referenced to the 1G stall speed.
One way to set up for the maneuver is to slow the airplane to the stall warning in the desired configuration
and note the airspeed. Next, pitch down slightly to eliminate the stall warning, adjust power to maintain
altitude, and note the airspeed required to perform the slow flight maneuver in accordance with the
standard. For example, the pilot may first note that the stall warning comes on at 50 knots. A slight pitch
down to eliminate the warning, while adjusting the power to maintain altitude, might then cause the
airspeed to increase to 52 knots. That 52 knots would be the base airspeed to perform the slow flight
maneuver. The pilot can adjust pitch and power as necessary during the maneuver to stay within the ACS
airspeed standard of +10/-0 knots (i.e., using the example, the range would be 52-62 knots) without
activating the stall warning. By setting up the maneuver this way, the pilot can achieve similar angles of
attack for the maneuver, regardless of weight or density altitude, and meet the objectives of the slow flight
task.

[PilotDAR]

Sadly, and hopefully something we can help avert here, it is the responsibility of the student to dictate what training they receive. Of course, the problem is that few students do enough research to understand what training they could and should seek during their initial pilot training. The regulator sets the minimum standards, which would appear to be sadly slipping, but the fact that a minimum standard is set, does not mean that is the only standard a student pilot should seek out.

I have been asked over the years, by pilots right up to class one instructors, to demonstrate certain maneuvers and piloting skills. Those pilot knew they needed to learn more, and I was happy to oblige. It is easy for us to agree that the evolution of training skills represents degradation, but until student pilot start demanding that basic flight training take longer, room in the curriculum for new topics will have to be created by removing older ones.

This is probably because finally and sadly, the pilot training curriculum is now diverging from its origins in the basic military training, which likely was increased in content for years, as new topics emerged, rather than editing it. Perhaps even the military now see flight in the region of stall to be more specialized piloting, which not all pilots need as basic skills.

So student and new PPL pilots, as you read this, remind yourselves that what you are taught will be the minimum standard, plus anything other additional training you purchase for yourself. In my experience, being a pilot adequately trained to handle every certified light GA landplane you could encounter would be more than 100 hours of dual training, so PPL training got you about a third the way there - the rest is yours to arrange, because it exceeds the government standards. Also understand that the instructor you choose may also have been trained only to the minimum standards, so may not be that much further down the learning curve than they are training you to be....

[SuperchargedRS]

The FAA knows they screwed up and are fixing it in October.

"Based on the airplane certification standard for a stall warning, a pilot following the AFH guidance of 3-5 knots above the stall speed would most likely be intentionally flying with the stall warning activated, which is a stall indication. Therefore, the AFH guidance to maneuver “without indication of a stall,” is inconsistent with the suggested airspeed range of 3-5 knots above the stalling speed provided in that same handbook. The PTS requirement to fly at an airspeed at which any further increase in angle of attack would result in a stall means the applicant would have to perform the maneuver with the stall warning activated, which is also inconsistent with the AFH. Advocating maneuvering the airplane just below the critical angle of attack with the stall warning activated is neither desirable nor intended."

"To remove the inconsistencies, the FAA is revising the AFH, which includes a significant rewrite of Chapter 4. The revised slow flight standard in the Private Pilot ACS will be reflected in that chapter. The FAA anticipates publication of the AFH revision in October 2016."


http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation ... O16010.pdf

[trey kule]

Well, as I have posted about this previously, I am one of those who believed teaching slow flight with the stall warning horn chirping was wrong.

Stall-spin accidents have been with us forever. And we still have them happening now. With that in mind, it is a good idea to review how pilots have been trained and see if we could do a better job.

Accidents like this generally happen because a pilot was turning at low altitude from which recovery was not possible. The two keys were they slipped into the slow flight speed range without being aware of it. And turned. Nose dropped a bit.pulled back to maintain altitude...maybe even a bit cross controlled.
So the first part of the solution is for pilots to understand exactly what slow flight is and, more specifically that it a speed higher than that required to set off the stall horn. And, as important, the effect of banking the plane in slow flight as it applies to the stall speed. Reducing bank angle and not pitching up when you get to low as well.

As far as manoevering the aircraft in slow flight, some of the more common aircraft being used as trainers (like a 172) have all sorts of design characteristics to help a pilot in slow flight. It can make it difficult.

The emphasis, in my opinion should be on recognizing when you are in slow flight, and if the performance is deteriorating , recovering from it. That has not been what I have seen emphasizeded in the past,

As to recognizing the flight characteristic and control imput changes, do we really need to fly around with the stall warning horn bleating to teach that?
There are some excellent slow flight teaching exercises that Pilots from Canada do not seem to have ever been exposed to. Ask them to demonstrate manoevering in slow flight and they unthinkingly slow down to just above the stall... And then we wonder why they spun it in while turning at a speed they thought was far above the stall speed.

Before we all lament this change, lets wait a bit (ie..a few years) and see if the incidences of stall-spin accidents goes up or down,,

As an aside, I do think another change will be coming. Now We teach student pilots APT to transition to a climb. That is all well and good if you are transition from cruise or approach speeds. Can be a killer on a balked approach if you happen to get a bit slow with full flaps out. Pitching up in slow flight is going to negate a great deal of the power increase....do students understand that when they have only experienced slow flight exercises with the stall horn on?

Sometimes we need to stop defending the old ways, if there is a possible better way to address a problem. And this is from an old guy totally set in his ways..

[photofly]

There's no doubt it's just awful pedagogy to train people deliberately to fly with a warning horn sounding.

We don't teach people to run nuclear reactors with the "core about to overheat alarm" "just sounding", we don't teach train engineers to drive a train with the "you're going too fast" alarm "just sounding", and we don't teach ITU nurses to dial back the oxygen they give to patients so the "blood oxygen level low" alarm is tickling away in the background. You throw away the entire point of an audible alarm by conditioning people *not* to react in the way they should if they hear the alarm at an unexpected time.

On the other hand I would sincerely miss the skill of, at a safe altitude, playing with the edge of the stall during slow flight. I can't think of a better way to gain some respect for how a wing works and what it does.

I'm not smart enough to know what the best way to resolve this contradiction is.

[trey kule]

I think you might be. Give it some thought.
When I read your post it gave me some insight into a possible resolution.

[Zaibatsu]

It's not degradation, it's smartening up.

You don't need a stall warning going to learn about the effects of slow flight. Kind of like you don't need to have the airspeed in the yellow approaching red line to learn about the effects of a spiral dive. Instilling the students with a 'nose down' reaction when hearing the horn might have prevented accidents like the Colgan Dash 8.

Primacy primacy primacy. Practice makes permanent.

[photofly]

For clarity: the purpose of the slow flight exercise is to learn about the effects of slow flight. Those in charge think that can be done away from the stall margin.

But if you choose to practice slow flight on the edge of a stall you also get skilled at controlling an aircraft on the edge of a stall. The people who are making this change feel the risks of learning this skill outweigh the rewards. But I think all skills are valuable for their own sakes, even those with inherent risks, and I would regret never having been taught or tried to learn that skill.

[fish4life]

it could all be saved if people were taught to fly AoA instead of airspeeds. If every private pilot flew approaches based on AoA instead of speeds I bet they would have a better understanding of stalls and margin to stall.

[photofly]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "taught to fly AoA"?

[Saxub]

it could all be saved if people were taught to fly AoA instead of airspeeds. If every private pilot flew approaches based on AoA instead of speeds I bet they would have a better understanding of stalls and margin to stall.

I agree. Not many new pilots I've flown with really have a strong grasp of flying attitude. Schools are doing a terrible job of teaching pilots to LOOK OUTSIDE. Learn what a 500ft/min climb or descent looks like without looking at your VSI. Understand how to adjust your glideslope with power and attitude by looking at the runway when VFR, not loading up the RNAV 5fix and staring at your slope indicator and airspeed.

[PilotDAR]

But if you choose to practice slow flight on the edge of a stall you also get skilled at controlling an aircraft on the edge of a stall.

Yes.

Too much of the piloting I experience in the company of newer pilots lacks the delicate touch. Perhaps because at 1.5Vs the plane will tolerate it, so new pilots learn that precision is not required. 1.1Vs is the only place you can fly a plane where it will safely (at altitude) bite back if handled slopily. Pilots remember being bit, presuming they live through it, so they should master the skills of delicate handling and precise yaw control in a safe training environment.

I like to think that every GA pilot is precisely bringing their plane into the stall warning speed range on every flight, then gently touching the runway, and then holding the nosewheel off (we'll talk wheel landing taildraggers another time) until control fades with speed reduction. Teaching slow flight will build this skill, and reassure the pilot that prior to the stall, the plane will still fly, if handled gently.

And what is a stall warning anyway? What's the best form of warning the pilot of the approach to a stall? Is it a pneumatic horn or switch which are well known to fail? Is it a buffet? Is it the pitch control being against the nose up stop? Is it a tactile change in pitch control force? Yes, it is. But no matter what the type design of the aircraft, it will always be at least on of the latter three I have mentioned. The pilot must learn to recognize these tactile cues.

A pilot who learns to approach, and then avoid a stall based upon speed, and avoidance of stall warning, is cheated out of the opportunity to learn the tactile cues of the approach to stall.

I'm a firm believer in "reduce AoA first" for managing unintended approach to stall. But (gasp/horror) there are times when reduce AoA must be delayed, and the aircraft flown in slow flight. The keen slow flight student will know that the next most important things are to keep the wings level and ball in the middle - and fly the plane. You bounced the landing, and decided to go around, you saw a log floating in the water in front of you at the last moment, or you have to clear an obstacle. In those cases, skilled handling of the plane at very low speed will save your fight.

It's going to take a lot more to convince me that students should not get this training....

[SuperchargedRS]

There's no doubt it's just awful pedagogy to train people deliberately to fly with a warning horn sounding.

We don't teach people to run nuclear reactors with the "core about to overheat alarm" "just sounding", we don't teach train engineers to drive a train with the "you're going too fast" alarm "just sounding", and we don't teach ITU nurses to dial back the oxygen they give to patients so the "blood oxygen level low" alarm is tickling away in the background. You throw away the entire point of an audible alarm by conditioning people *not* to react in the way they should if they hear the alarm at an unexpected time.

On the other hand I would sincerely miss the skill of, at a safe altitude, playing with the edge of the stall during slow flight. I can't think of a better way to gain some respect for how a wing works and what it does.

I'm not smart enough to know what the best way to resolve this contradiction is.

We should also eliminate stall straining, engine failure simulaton too, already got rid of spin training, after "safety first", "the children", and all the crap.

I'm still teaching slow flight where any further reduction would result in a stall, also some planes (proper trainers like a 7AC, PA18, etc) don't have horns or idiot lights.

If you're even comparing a nuclear reactor going to critical to a stall horn in a 172....well

[photofly]

I don't see the parallel you're attempting to draw with training for stalls, spins or forced approaches. In those cases we teach correct recovery actions. Slow flight (with the warning horn sounding) is the odd one out because the exercise is about putting and maintaining the aircraft in that situation for some period of time; the recovery, while graded, is a minority part.

As for your other point, you've grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick. It would make more sense to ask why we need a stall warning horn at all. But if we're going to train in aircraft that have them, we should probably not acclimatize students to fly around for extended periods with it sounding.

[cgzro]

Perhaps a simpler solution would be to disable the warning for this excercise. Rather than dumb down the excercise. That regime where the drag goes up dramatically for small changes in AOA is a pretty valuable place to to explore.

[photofly]

Superficially that's an attractive solution, but the stall warning horn is a required item for aircraft certified under FAR23, as the document points out. I don't know how well the FAA airworthiness folks get along with the FAA flight training folks, but I suspect not well enough to permit the fitting of override switches for a required safety device just for the purposes of a flight raining exercise.

As a saving grace it's unlikely this change will be mirrored by TC. Canada still has compulsory spin training for PPLs, which the FAA removed a long long time ago.

[Gannet167]

The military trains new pilots to recover from the first symptom of a stall. This is taught as an immediate action response and is expected to be conducted straight away. The intent is to build a habit of immediately recovering from the early onset of a stall without stopping to think. However, if the instructor tells the student to take the plane to the full stall, they are to recover at the instant that they see/feel the first characteristic of a stall. The recovery is to release stick pressure and unload AoA while adding power, then establish a climb with reference to AoA as the student's ideal response is to maintain an AoA just below stick shaker. This teaches students to properly look for and identify what a stalled wing behaves like and to recover in a manner that fairly aggressively asks the wing to establish a climb, but with an awareness of AoA such that they stay away from excessive AoA causing a secondary stall.

Stalls are practiced in landing configuration both from slow flight as well as through a simulated final turn (turning and descending.) They also practice a clean high speed stall, well above the 1G stall speed. This requires them to aggressively apply 2 to 3 G in a bank turn and take the wing to critical AoA. At the exact moment when the wing has stalled, they are to recover, demonstrating an awareness of when the wing gives up flying. These can result in a wing drop or a bit of a flick roll, which they have to handle by reducing AoA. They'll also frequently experience momentary stall while doing aerobatics - for example at the top of a loop - where they have to very delicately manage stick pressure to finesse the AoA and keep the plane moving through the maneuver.

This basic skill set is introduced on their first flight typically, and practiced over and over, regularly going to the full stall. It has to be safe for solo by their 7th.

On the advanced syllabus, students have to take the wing to just shy of critical AoA and hold it right on the very edge of stall, at max power in a continuous turn. This simulates some basic fighter handling skills used later - where the student basically stays in light buffet on the edge of stall for most of the flight, max performing the wing. If they relax the AoA even a little, their turn performance will allow the other plane to get behind them. Instructors will explain to the student that the wing "speaks" to you in light buffet, allowing to you feel where you sit on the very edge of stalling.

I believe leaning to really feel and understand what the wing is doing is absolutely essential to operating an aircraft. Maybe an experienced pilot doesn't need to practice stalls and spins on your initial 747 course (although would be exposed to stalls in the sim), but certainly in initial pilot training you have to experience how the wing flies through a range of AoA, speeds and how it behaves when it's stalled. If not, I don't believe you have learned how to fly properly and your lack of fundamental skill set may end up killing you and all your passengers one day.

I understand the apprehension in having students regularly take a plane past the warning for a stall - it can make them complacent or so accustomed to hearing the horn or feeling shaker that they don't react when they should. However, it is necessary to take a wing to a full stall in initial training - and although this requires temporarily continuing towards the stall after hearing the warning - it can be addressed with proper briefing and training to recover both at the first warning (horn, shaker, etc. etc) and to acknowledge and then willfully go past the warning (knowing that this is an exception to normal ops and only for training purposes) to experience a full stall without building a bad habit pattern.

Seriously, if you're not smart enough to differentiate between intentionally stalling a plane for training, and, in an entirely separate situation the stall warning horn/stick shaker going off when you aren't trying to stall (and should recover to save your life) then you shouldn't be operating an aircraft. It's like saying you should never test the smoke alarm in your house, because people will know it's only a test and be so complacent hearing the alarm that they won't think to leave the house if the alarm goes off for a real fire.

[trey kule]

How many of the posts so far speak to slow flight training,. How many to stall training?

They are connected, but this flying on the edge is just plane (pun intended). Silly.
You do not need to fly right on the edge of the stall to teach control imput degradation and co ordination in slow flight.
When it comes to stalls, we need to teach recognition and recovery...that can be done from slow flight , but at that point the empasis should be on recognizing impending stalls, and conditions which will cause stalls..eg...a steep turn in slow flight.....but that is a stall exercise....not a slow flight exercise.There is a difference.

Yes we go through the slow flight phase on every landing and takeoff. The question is exactly how flopping around on the edge of the stall is related to that. Again slow flight training is not specifically stall recogintion and recovery training..
Teach a student they can manoever on the edge of a stall.. Give them confidence. Let them get to thinking that if the stall warning horn is not going off, they are really not in slow flight, and the control inputs will be normal...Then wonder why they got into a stall 300 feet off the ground, and spun it in...
That docile old 172 manages to spin in every year...

But it has nothing to do with the way students are being taught..

After all.....we have always done it that way......

[ahramin]

Can you teach loops and rolls during a PPL? Of course. Can you teach flying around where any increase (SuperchargedRS) in AOA will result in a stall? Of course.

I think what the FAA is talking about here is the slow flight exercise. Nothing more, nothing less. They aren't saying you can't fly around with the stall horn going off if that is the point of the exercise. They are saying that the slow flight exercise does not require or benefit from being so slow that the stall warning is going off, and therefore guidance insisting on it is not appropriate.

There are obvious benefits to learning aerobatics, falling leaf exercises, dunk tanks, and many other things not mandated for the PPL. I don't see how updating the guidance on one exercise to be more consistent with good operational philosophy is degrading flight training.

[photofly]

They aren't saying you can't fly around with the stall horn going off if that is the point of the exercise.

I believe they are saying exactly that. That flying around with the stall warning sounding is a bad idea, period. For that exercise, and for any exercise.

[ahramin]

With the exception of performing a thoroughly briefed full stall maneuver, a pilot should always perform the stall recovery procedure when a stall warning is activated.

So obviously they can think of one exercise where the stall horn is not blindly followed. I'm guessing there are others. Again I believe it's not useful to concentrate on the fly shit and instead take the point about slow flight as it's probably intended.

[photofly]

Well, that's *the* exception - just as it says. It doesn't allow for any others. And that's not "flying around with the horn sounding", that's a stall, and an immediate recovery. If the stall warning horn is sounding for more than 5 seconds, likely you're doing it wrong.

It's quite clear that the FAA doesn't want pilots being trained to fly with the stall warning horn sounding continuously, so, no, there are no FAA recommended exercises that involve learning to fly at the edge of the stall any more. "Slow flight" was that. And now it isn't.

[cgzro]

This is really a shame because the single best excercise IMHO is flying along into and out of the stall at various power and bank angles. Id hope every pilot would strive to be able to do that and try to stay proficient before carrying passangers irrespective of FAA or TC guidelines.

[PilotDAR]

but the stall warning horn is a required item for aircraft certified under FAR23

Though very common, a stall warning horn is not required by Part 23, not even a stall warning "system" of any kind. The required stall warning could be purely aerodynamic.

Code of Federal Regulations


Hide details for Sec. 23.207Sec. 23.207

Part 23 AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, ACROBATIC, AND COMMUTER CATEGORY AIRPLANES
Subpart B--Flight
Stalls

Sec. 23.207

Stall warning.

(a) There must be a clear and distinctive stall warning, with the flaps and landing gear in any normal position, in straight and turning flight.
(b) The stall warning may be furnished either through the inherent aerodynamic qualities of the airplane or by a device that will give clearly distinguishable indications under expected conditions of flight. However, a visual stall warning device that requires the attention of the crew within the cockpit is not acceptable by itself.

And before someone says they never do that, I have flown a turbine powered, Part 23 certified aircraft which had no stall warning system whatever, though I agree this was certainly an exceptional aircraft.

Thinking back to traffic signs, if the STOP sign is smashed down, are you still required to stop? Yes, because it is the white line painted on the road for which you must stop, the sign is a handy reminder that the white line is there.

A stall warning system can fail to operate. Let alone the fussy switches which project out of the wing, a simple electrical failure will shut down man of them. So when things are going poorly, you've got an electrical failure, and your distracted by trying to get into an airport under difficult circumstances, nothing but your wits will tell you that the stall warning horn will not sound for an approach to stall. I sure hope a dedicated instructor taught you to recognize approach to stall by feel!

As I said earlier, this ends up squarely at the feet of the candidate pilot, they must seek out the training they consider necessary, which often should exceed the minimum - particularly when the minimum is being reduced!

New pilots reading this.... Airplanes will still fly in slow flight, stall and spin. whether or not training is offered or suggested for you as a part of a curriculum, seek it out beyond the minimums, for your own sake! Better yet, go and take dedicated aerobatic training!

[photofly]

I wonder if they'll rewrite the CPL test requirements as well - slow flight and chandelle.