Proposed Advisory Circular For Stall And Stick Pusher Training

SteveC

SteveC

"Laconic"
Staff member
From the Federal Register:
Advisory Circular for Stall and Stick Pusher Training
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of availability of proposed Advisory Circular for Stall and Stick Pusher Training, request for comment.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a proposed Advisory Circular, regarding stall and stick pusher training for transport category airplanes for comment. This Advisory
Circular provides guidance to training providers on stall event and stick pusher demonstration training, including recommendations and best practices for academic training, job performance training, and instructor training.
Click to expand...
...
Background
The primary goal of this proposed advisory circular is to provide training, testing, and checking recommendations designed to maximize the likelihood that pilots will respond correctly and
consistently to unexpected stall warnings, aerodynamic stalls, and/or stick pusher activations. Additionally, the advisory circular provides guidance for operators and training centers in the
development of stall and stick pusher event training to include stall prevention, recognition of an approachto-stall or actual stall, familiarity with stick pusher systems, and the correct procedure to recover from those conditions. Core principals of this Advisory Circular include:
• Emphasis of ‘‘reduce angle of attack’’ response as the primary response for stall events.
• Clarification of the evaluation criteria for a recovery from a stall or approach.
• Scenario-based training that includes realistic events that could be encountered in operational conditions, including stalls encountered with the autopilot engaged.
• Clarification of training to a full stall, to ensure that pilots execute the stall recovery at the first indication of a stall.
• Stick Pusher demonstration training.

The information within this proposed advisory circular was developed based on a review of recommended practices developed by major aircraft manufacturers, labor organizations, air
carriers, training organizations, simulator manufacturers, and industry representative organizations. The FAA recognizes that the content of this draft AC explains in further detail concepts proposed in the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), entitled
Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers, FAA Docket FAA–2008–0677, and corresponding flightcrew member training AC, regarding stall and stick pusher training. Following review of the comments regarding the stall and stick pusher training proposed in the SNPRM, this advisory circular may require additional revision. The FAA will review both the comments received in response to this advisory circular and the SNPRM, and revise the documents
accordingly to ensure consistency and standardization.
The agency will consider all comments received by January 12, 2012. Comments received after that date may be considered if consideration will not delay agency action on the review. A copy of the advisory circular is available for review in the assigned docket for the advisory circular at http://www.regulations.gov.
Click to expand...
 
Some of the best training I've ever experienced was with our Dir. of Ops taking me up in our Hawker, flying around at stick shaker, doing 10* banked turns, and finally full stalls. Not BS stick pusher stalls, but REAL aerodynamic stalls.

When you're flying around in level flight at stick shaker, all you have to do is THINK about pushing forward on the stick, and you're out of shaker. Do it in the sim sometime. If your aircraft has an AOA gauge, or stall margin indicator, or whatever, watch it. The slightest movement of the yoke can drastically change the AOA.
 
One of the biggest injustices to turbine flight training was naming flying slow with the shaker a "maneuvering stall." It's merely slow flight, as TFaudree explains. There is a lot of difference between intentionally flying such a maneuver and an inadvertent shaker/pusher, which is far more serious and warrants quick action.

I think most pilots would struggle far less with the maneuver if it was taught/trained properly, and if stalls were considered a completely separate issue.
 
I'm in recurrent now. We just changed our stall series and it's a huge difference.

Instead of US flying into the stall (You're "in the game"), the AP now is set to stall the aircraft (trimming the whole way in), and then we recover.

Way, way different than doing it hand flying into it, or setting the scenario where you hand fly into a stall. Very glad to have practiced this in the box....

Please don't every forget though, the reason planes have shakers, pushers, ventral fins and such is because they are very ill-mannered in a full, deep stall. Prevention is ALWAYS the best medicine in for keeping the machine out of the dirt.
 
Polar742 said:
I'm in recurrent now. We just changed our stall series and it's a huge difference.

Instead of US flying into the stall (You're "in the game"), the AP now is set to stall the aircraft (trimming the whole way in), and then we recover.

Way, way different than doing it hand flying into it, or setting the scenario where you hand fly into a stall. Very glad to have practiced this in the box....

Please don't every forget though, the reason planes have shakers, pushers, ventral fins and such is because they are very ill-mannered in a full, deep stall. Prevention is ALWAYS the best medicine in for keeping the machine out of the dirt.
Click to expand...

That's cool. Ours is still the oldskool "Stop trimming at the bug" variety. Only difference I've seen between initial and recurrent is that we're now allowed to lose as much altitude as we want; the main thing is not getting a second shaker on the recovery. Ah whatever, I just work here.
 
mojo6911 said:
This is pre-solo stuff. Amazing what FAA approved "training" programs have become at the airlines.
Click to expand...

While I don't necessarily disagree with your assertion, swept-wing heavy jets don't exactly act like something a pre-solo student would fly.
 
dasleben said:
Yes you do, but you may also lose thousands of feet in the process. These things need to be trained, not brushed off as "stuff a pre-solo should know."
Click to expand...

He's not saying these items should be brushed off, he's saying the foundation should be there, which in a lot of time it is not.
 
dasleben said:
While I don't necessarily disagree with your assertion, swept-wing heavy jets don't exactly act like something a pre-solo student would fly.
Click to expand...
I am resisting the urge to shout, "big duh, dummy."

And although quality time in a Super Decathlon (inverted) doesn't exactly translate to a jet, maybe the former should be a prerequisite of the latter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top