What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Safety - Install an AOA or Stall warning device!

Walt

Walt

Well Known Member
Many of the recent discussions have focused on item #3 on Van's list with lots of good debate.

However, if we look at the number #1 cause of accidents it continues to be the infamous Stall/Spin scenairo. Could it be the difference in accident rate between AB and certified is because AB does not have/require a stall warning device? I know lots of folks are going to say "man up" and learn how to fly your plane but the reality is sometimes we are less than perfect and get distracted from the task of flying the aircraft. We all know what causes the stall/spin but we continue to fall prey to this trap because we are all human :eek:

Personally I installed and AOA in my aircraft and am glad I did, more than once it has wispered in my ear that I should pay more attention to airspeed or relax the pull a little.

If every aircraft had a stall warning or AOA device of some kind, I believe it would significantly reduce the NUMBER ONE cause of accidents, the STALL/SPIN!

Below is from Van's article on Safety:

PRIMARY CAUSES OF RV ACCIDENTS?

I have researched the NTSB records for RV accidents over the past several years and tried to categorize the causes of fatal accidents. I find them to be:

1. Stall/spin,

2. Power loss

3. Reckless Flying

4. IMC/ VMC into IMC flight.

This is an approximate order, because the ratio of causes varies from year to year. I find that at least half of the total RV fatal accidents involve a stall/spin.
 
Last edited:
What he said! Thanks for starting a thread on it Walt.

I said it in the Van's safety article thread.

Herb, who died in the accident I mention, was the exact opposite of reckless.

Mile High Relic said:
I don't recall ever seeing this brought up, but I have to believe some of the manuevering accidents could be avoided if all A-B planes had stall warning devices.

I was a 1/3 partner in a 6A several years ago. One of the co-owners became exactly the kind of awful statistic we are talking about. A newish owner in a maneuvering accident. A stall/spin base to final, with two fatalities.

Personally, I have had a stall warning sound unexpectedly a couple times in 500 hours. It is an eye opener. If that 6A would have had a stall horn or an AOA, my opinion is that there would be two fewer widows in the world today.
Click to expand...
 
stall warner

I had the exact same thought. Apparently so has Van (standard in kits since 2010).

http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin...4433013-448-99&browse=fi&product=stall-warner

And the best thread on it here

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=52720&highlight=stall+warner&page=3

I suspect that a lot (most??) of the current EFIS installs have either AOA or at least a low airspeed warning.

I found that on my particular plane during Phase 1, that there was surprisingly little warning (buffet etc) prior to the stall and I have no buzzer or AOA indicator. Because it was'nt an issue being discussed much (either by Van or other builders) at the time I built, I gave it only a passing thought, even though I never flew in a GA (or military) plane that did'nt have one (buzzer, stick shaker, AOA instrument). I guess what I am saying in simple terms is "that if everyone had been doing it, I would have done it too".

The Lancair guys worked this issue extensively and successfully to address their high stall/spin accident rate, to include devising stall strips.

This certainly seems a prudent measure that would have a positive effect for us. Expecting everyone to have some stall warning device on their airplanes as a matter of course would be one of those cultural changes that improves safety, and no, I would not report to the feds if I found an RV without one.
 
Last edited:
And I will add a fourth agree to that. Not only from a safety standpoint, which is obviously is, but from a performance standpoint. With all of the new fangled AoA indicators it seems that it would allow the pilot to dial the plane in to a more steady angle which, in turn, would allow said pilot to get slower and possibly nail that short field he may have been aiming for. Of course this would need careful calibration of the instrument and testing at altitude...
 
Exactly

That is exactly how they are used in the Navy. Carrier approaches are flown with only reference to the AOA. Waveoffs are performed via AOA (firewall it and transistion to best AOA).

While doing high AOA near stall flying in my -6 (approach to landing, practicing engine out), I find myself constantly scanning airspeed, which is not as accurate a gauge of approaching stall as stall speed varies with weight and g-load etc. AOA does not.

Hmm, Maybe I should have sprung for one.

Sam Buchannon posts some info regarding his use of the LRI (lift reserve indicator) AoA device.
 
Last edited:
LotusSeven said:
And I will add a fourth agree to that. Not only from a safety standpoint, which is obviously is, but from a performance standpoint. With all of the new fangled AoA indicators it seems that it would allow the pilot to dial the plane in to a more steady angle which, in turn, would allow said pilot to get slower and possibly nail that short field he may have been aiming for. Of course this would need careful calibration of the instrument and testing at altitude...
Click to expand...

You will most likely find this link interesting:

http://thervjournal.com/liftreserve.htm

I feel so strongly about the value of AOA that a LRI is the only pitot instrument in my latest project.
 
I want one like the one on my C-150

I liked the one on the 150 because there were no moving parts and it did not depend on electricity. I have been frustrated trying to find one like it for the RV. I don't really like the one Van is selling for a variety of reasons. Does anyone have a suggestion?

BTW - I have and very much like my LRI, but the warning horn is a different thing and, for me, a different purpose.

Thanks in advance.
 
hevansrv7a said:
I liked the one on the 150 because there were no moving parts and it did not depend on electricity. I have been frustrated trying to find one like it for the RV. I don't really like the one Van is selling for a variety of reasons. Does anyone have a suggestion?

BTW - I have and very much like my LRI, but the warning horn is a different thing and, for me, a different purpose.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

If you have a Dynon in your panel you can drive the Dynon audible AOA warning with the LRI probe. I have the LRI probe in my RV-6 plumbed to both the LRI gauge and Dynon. I watch the LRI as the primary indicator but the Dynon will hollar at me if needed.
 
LeeM, you are right, but what if it help eliminate 50% of the stall/spin fatalities? Or 75%
 
Ron Lee said:
LeeM, you are right, but what if it help eliminate 50% of the stall/spin fatalities? Or 75%
Click to expand...

Is there data to support that it would, or is this just supposition? I submit that there are far more differences between certified and non-certified airplanes, equipment, and operations that could be considered causal factors in these types of accidents than simply the lack of a stall warning indication. I seriously doubt the impact would be that dramatic given these other factors. Still, if it prevents one guy from having a stall/spin, I am 100% in favor of that guy putting it in his plane.
 
LeeM_2000 said:
Still, if it prevents one guy from having a stall/spin, I am 100% in favor of that guy putting it in his plane.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Perhaps "that guy" could be you....

I know I know, you're a great pilot just like the rest of us, and accidents only happen to the "other guy".

(sorry I coudn't help it and you left yourself wide open to that one:D)
 
Walt said:
Hmmm... Perhaps "that guy" could be you....

I know I know, you're a great pilot just like the rest of us, and accidents only happen to the "other guy".

(sorry I coudn't help it and you left yourself wide open to that one:D)
Click to expand...

Yes, I left it open on purpose and I include myself in the "that guy" category. ;) I am not against AOA indicators and I would consider one because they look cool and I believe it might be helpful, but I have to be honest with myself. There is a lot of gear I could pack into an airplane to make me a "safer" pilot. I am just not yet convinced that this is necessarily in that category. I have seen no data to bear that out, just a lot of admittedly very appealing-sounding claims of how safe and wonderful it would be if everyone had one.

Personally, I think the problem with stall/spins is that if you are going to have one, it is because you are simply not paying attention to what you should be paying attention to in order to prevent it. It is not because you were not provided an indication of your "reserve lift." I am not one to believe, without concrete data, that simply adding another key indication in the cockpit will proportionally increase my chances of not ignoring key indications. I think stall/spin accidents are a training and proficiency problem combined with a high-performance airframe.
 
LeeM_2000 said:
I guess I would just caution that, like a landing gear warning horn, an AOA indicator is not a panacea.
Click to expand...

I watched the video of the gear-up landing......and am still trying to figure out how it applies to this discussion of AOA indicators.....

I've been using the LRI for every takeoff and landing for over ten years. During that span of time I've observed that nearly all the detractors of AOA indicators are pilots who have never had the chance to fly one for any length of time or who don't comprehend the reasons for using AOA. The pilots who have incorporated an AOA indicator into their flying are steadfast converts to the safety and performance enhancements it brings to their aviating.

AOA is merely a tool, but it can be an extremely valuable one when its use becomes an integral part of our flying routine.
 
Do what the military does.

I have two friends, both retired naval carrier pilots and one of them flew left seat in my -10 to a fly-in this past weekend.

He commented on how nice an AOA would be in my airplane.

The other guy is also retired from Delta, having flown MD-80's and now owns a Christen Eagle. Guess what? He has a mechanical AOA vane on his cabane strut and insists on its use during approaches. Reckon these two guys might just know what they're talking about?

One of the beauties of old age is the wisdom to listen to the voices of experience!

Best,
 
LeeM_2000 said:
I am not against AOA indicators and I would consider one because they look cool and I believe it might be helpful, but I have to be honest with myself. There is a lot of gear I could pack into an airplane to make me a "safer" pilot. I am just not yet convinced that this is necessarily in that category. I have seen no data to bear that out, just a lot of admittedly very appealing-sounding claims of how safe and wonderful it would be if everyone had one.

I am not one to believe, without concrete data, that simply adding another key indication in the cockpit will proportionally increase my chances of not ignoring key indications.
Click to expand...

Commercial carriers argued the same points when they were forced to install expensive safety equipment such as GPWS (ground proximity warning system), EGPWS (Enhanced ground prox) and TCAS (traffic collision and warning). The facts proved that even the best trained pilots in the world would continue to run into mountains and each other if something wasn't done to prevent it. Is it a cure all for everything, no.. can it help..Absolutely! Has this equipment reduced the number of CFIT and midairs, you bet it has!
 
I think most of us know by this point that the AoA display is the carrier pilot's best friend on short final but I will add on additional credence to what Pierre's friends have shown him. I am a flight dynamics engineer with the Navy so we get very familiar with the control systems and how they aid (or hinder) the pilots. When the fly-by-wire control architecture was designed for the Hornet the mode used during landing slaves the pitch axis of the control stick directly to angle of attack, who knows, some times even us engineers get something right.
 
Sam Buchanan said:
I watched the video of the gear-up landing......and am still trying to figure out how it applies to this discussion of AOA indicators.....
Click to expand...

Sam, if that video is the one where two guys kept chatting during the approach (possibly a third person in back filming), then the point is that even with the gear up blaring, no one noticed it.

I would counter with the point that this incident stresses the need for a sterile cockpit during critical flight phases...eg landing.

It stresses the need to go over a landing checklist...not by rote...but actually touching and/or visually checking knobs, settings etc.

The approach to landing stall/spin should be preventable. We are talking about three minutes or so of attention to detail (including airspeed, bank, etc). Unless you can find a way to ensure that every RV pilot does this 100% of the time, an indicator (call it a crutch if you wish), that provides at least audible indication of an impending stall should reduce these events.

There was such an event in recent years in Colorado where two guys died. I do not recall the details so cannot suggest what went wrong and how it should have been prevented.

But clearly, pilots need to be vigilant for those few minutes during landing. They have to know what to do if the approach becomes marginal. A go-around is acceptable. Reduce AOA? Add power? Lower bank angle? Use whatever is appropriate to not let a marginal situation become deadly.
 
Has anyone tested his device in uncoordinated turns where pitot info is less accurate? The typical stall/spin occurs from an uncoordinated flat skidding turn from base to final. It would be interesting to test accuracy at altitude in skids and slips. any takers??
 
Knowledge is power and having the AOA info when you're operating at the edges of the envelop can save your bacon. Simple as that.

In this month's issue of Sport Aviation, read the interview with Mike Seager. His observation of general piloting skills is telling of a generic problem. It is food for thought for all of us.
 
dsmith1055 said:
Has anyone tested his device in uncoordinated turns where pitot info is less accurate? The typical stall/spin occurs from an uncoordinated flat skidding turn from base to final. It would be interesting to test accuracy at altitude in skids and slips. any takers??
Click to expand...

Dwight,

This question has been raised over the years in regard to AOA indicators, and the LRI in particular. I've never performed those tests because I have no desire to flirt with spinning my RV-6. I'm not trained in spins and the RV-6 has the reputation of spinning very quickly.

I will add that watching the slip ball is as important in my scan as keeping an eye on the LRI. I think these two indicators will go a very long way toward preventing stall/spins in the pattern and allow safe max performance landings.
 
Most AOA indicators and LRI units use the pitot and another angle reference port (or something similar) in their calculation be it electronic or mechanical. I don't know of any that use the static system at all. (CORRECTION: THE AFS Unit appears to use the Static system as well, contact them to see how static error affects their display)

The static system is what is impacted the most by the condition you relate to below. This can significantly impact the accuracy of the ASI.

Most pitot's will remain fairly accurate +- 45° to the relative airflow per people on here with tons of experience testing them.

I have watched my AOA indicator just above the Yellow caution zone while going uncoordinated left and right and the indication does not waiver up and down so I don't think it has much effect on the reading. I am using the Dynon AOA pitot. I won't test further than that since I am not current in spins.


dsmith1055 said:
Has anyone tested his device in uncoordinated turns where pitot info is less accurate? The typical stall/spin occurs from an uncoordinated flat skidding turn from base to final. It would be interesting to test accuracy at altitude in skids and slips. any takers??
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
AOA Pro

Dwight,
I have been in a high bank turn at 110 IAS with the AOA probes on the inside of a turn and it gave me the " Angle , Angle, Push". It also talked to me this past weekend when I was at gross weight on take-off in gusty winds. It gave me the warning as the plane was getting mushy and indicating 80 MPH on a short field take-off. I would not fly without one now.....
 
Walt said:
I know lots of folks are going to say "man up" and learn how to fly your plane but the reality is sometimes we are less than perfect and get distracted from the task of flying the aircraft.
Click to expand...

I pulled the stall horn fuse in my Pitts...very distracting doing aerobatics, which IMO is more of a negative than removing the dubious (IMO) value of stall warning in planes like this.
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Dwight,

This question has been raised over the years in regard to AOA indicators, and the LRI in particular. I've never performed those tests because I have no desire to flirt with spinning my RV-6. I'm not trained in spins and the RV-6 has the reputation of spinning very quickly.

I will add that watching the slip ball is as important in my scan as keeping an eye on the LRI. I think these two indicators will go a very long way toward preventing stall/spins in the pattern and allow safe max performance landings.
Click to expand...

I agree the information is good when the ball is centered. However, if the ball is centered, a stall/spin is unlikely. A stall maybe,but no spin without aggravition from the pilot. I still think it would be good information to know how the AOA reacts in a skidding turn. A skidding turn to final due to the pilot's discomfort with the bank required is the classic set up for a stall/spin. I get Flight Review students on a regular basis who fly skidding turns to final usually because they overshot the turn and don't like the steep bank at low altitude. Instead of a go around they perform a skid to final. If the question has been raised over the years, it should be resolved. It shouldn't be a big deal. I would like to know the answer.
 
The answer is it depends....

I use the Dynon AOA and their AOA pitot. it does not reference the static system. I have seen no error in the AOA info coordinated or not. Other systems may or may not..

dsmith1055 said:
I agree the information is good when the ball is centered. However, if the ball is centered, a stall/spin is unlikely. A stall maybe,but no spin without aggravition from the pilot. I still think it would be good information to know how the AOA reacts in a skidding turn. A skidding turn to final due to the pilot's discomfort with the bank required is the classic set up for a stall/spin. I get Flight Review students on a regular basis who fly skidding turns to final usually because they overshot the turn and don't like the steep bank at low altitude. Instead of a go around they perform a skid to final. If the question has been raised over the years, it should be resolved. It shouldn't be a big deal. I would like to know the answer.
Click to expand...
 
For the record, I never implied that AOA indicators would not enhance safety and performance while winning over delighted pilots. I admitted to perhaps not yet being one of those delighted pilots, and I postulated that they will not prove statistically relevant to the number of stall/spin accidents. I said that because an AOA indicator does not provide the missing preventative element in what I personally believe is the typical stall/spin scenario. Therefore, the only thing I am "detracting" from is the claim that we will have fewer stall/spins if everyone flies with an AOA.
 
Last edited:
Brantel said:
The answer is it depends....

I use the Dynon AOA and their AOA pitot. it does not reference the static system. I have seen no error in the AOA info coordinated or not. Other systems may or may not..
Click to expand...

Are you sure it does not use the static system?

Since the Dynon AOA probe is also the basic airspeed system it is definitely tied into the static port at the "central computer".

It would be hard to believe that the AOA is not dependent on airspeed, so static pressure must come into the calculations somewhere.

Perhaps Dynon can enlighten us on the formulae used?
 
az_gila said:
Are you sure it does not use the static system?

Since the Dynon AOA probe is also the basic airspeed system it is definitely tied into the static port at the "central computer".

It would be hard to believe that the AOA is not dependent on airspeed, so static pressure must come into the calculations somewhere.

Perhaps Dynon can enlighten us on the formulae used?
Click to expand...

Gil,

As I'm sure you are aware, the LRI is based on differential pressure between a high pressure ram port (aligned with the axis of the plane) and a low-pressure port fixed at an angle which results is higher pressure as AOA is increased. I assume the Dynon system likewise senses pressure differential between pitot port and AOA port because I'm driving my Dynon AOA indicator with the low-pressure port on the LRI probe. The actual airspeed is irrelevant, the warning is issued when the pressure differential reaches a set point.

Regardless, I've found the Dynon AOA to be in agreement with the LRI indicator in every condition I've flown it. I really like having the audible alarm.
 
Last edited:
The Dynon AOA calculation is based on the differential pressure of the pitot and the AOA port on the pitot. It does not use the static system to calculate AOA.

The Dynon does however use the airspeed indication only in reference to the minimum airspeed parameter where you will start getting AOA audible alarms. In this case it does use the static system, this however is unrelated to the question.

az_gila said:
Are you sure it does not use the static system?

Since the Dynon AOA probe is also the basic airspeed system it is definitely tied into the static port at the "central computer".

It would be hard to believe that the AOA is not dependent on airspeed, so static pressure must come into the calculations somewhere.

Perhaps Dynon can enlighten us on the formulae used?
Click to expand...
 
Great find bkilby

It could be mounted just like the LRI probe with some flat side plates holding the probe 6" from the wing (again just like the LRI probe).

In this discussion, we have jumped onto AoA devices at the expense of the much more simple "stall warner". To those skeptical about the effectiveness of such devices, think back to your typical reaction when the stall horn sounds - most people immediately lower the nose and add power. That is a good reaction (good dog!!!). As opposed to what most people do when they enter and un-expected and un-recognized stall (that is what most of them are if you don't have a warning device, think about it - if you expected the stall was coming you would'nt have stalled). In those cases, many people react by holding the nose up (on no, don't go down!!) while trying to figure out what just happened - that is a bad thing!!!

To me the big advantage of the AoA device is it is an indicator, not a stall warning horn or stick shaker. The advantage (and possible disadvantage) of the indicator is that it can be ignored when not appropriate (taxing for instance), and therefore would not require a cancelling device such as a manual cancel switch or a weight on wheels switch.

A weight on wheels switch would be tough to do on an RV.

In either case, either device is way better than not having either. They did'nt put stall horns on spam cans all those years because they were bad!!! And unfortunately the old Navy addage "screaming creates lift" is really just an urban legend. It does'nt really help.
 
Last edited:
Brantel said:
The Dynon AOA calculation is based on the differential pressure of the pitot and the AOA port on the pitot. It does not use the static system to calculate AOA.

The Dynon does however use the airspeed indication only in reference to the minimum airspeed parameter where you will start getting AOA audible alarms. In this case it does use the static system, this however is unrelated to the question.
Click to expand...

Does the actual differential pressure number (at stall, say) change with altitude?

If it does then there is another term in the equation....
 
az_gila said:
Does the actual differential pressure number (at stall, say) change with altitude?

If it does then there is another term in the equation....
Click to expand...

Actual pressure, yes, but differential, no, so the device senses correctly.

Gil, the LRI works, been in use for over thirty years in various versions. I haven't seen any instances in my ten+ years with the device where it hasn't worked splendidly. It is my primary instrument for all takeoffs and landings. If there are corners of the envelope where it has problems they are outside my range of operations. I will fly an approach slower with the LRI than with just an airspeed indicator.
 
bkilby said:
I was perusing the net researching AOA indicators and came across this:

http://www.pipcom.com/~cowcam/AOAr.htm

They are selling for $175 which seems like a pretty good deal rather than $1,000.. any ideas on how it could mounted under the RV wing?
Click to expand...

You can build your own LRI for less than $75. The indicator is a Dwyer differential pressure gauge:

2-5002

The high pressure port of the gauge is teed into the existing pitot line, and the low pressure port goes to a standard Vans pitot probe that has been bent down at ~50 degree angle. That's all there is to it.

Here is the home-brew version I'm putting on my latest project. This plane will have no airspeed indicator, just the LRI:

http://eaglexl-58.com/lri.htm
 
No, the pressure values have the same reference. It works similar to a manometer....

az_gila said:
Does the actual differential pressure number (at stall, say) change with altitude?

If it does then there is another term in the equation....
Click to expand...
 
Brantel said:
No, the pressure values have the same reference. It works similar to a manometer....
Click to expand...

So an absolute differential pressure number (say 3 inches water column) is the same AOA at sea level and at 18,000 ft?

Just went to the LRI links, and now I don't feel so bad. The Professor doesn't get it either...:)

Despite the fact that I don't completely understand the LRI, I like the system and I even trust it enough to use it as the primary traffic pattern indicator. In fact, I'm even installing one in my personal airplane, a Cherokee 140.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Neate

Associate Professor, Aeronautical Engineering Department, Embry-Riddle University, Daytona Beach
 
Last edited:
Sam Buchanan said:
You can build your own LRI for less than $75. The indicator is a Dwyer differential pressure gauge:

2-5002

The high pressure port of the gauge is teed into the existing pitot line, and the low pressure port goes to a standard Vans pitot probe that has been bent down at ~50 degree angle. That's all there is to it.

Here is the home-brew version I'm putting on my latest project. This plane will have no airspeed indicator, just the LRI:

http://eaglexl-58.com/lri.htm
Click to expand...

OK, Now you have my attention. How about adapting the idea to a system with pitot heat and which differential gauge didi you use? Sounds like a fun project. Thanks for posting it.
 
Sam Buchanan said:
You can build your own LRI for less than $75. The indicator is a Dwyer differential pressure gauge:

2-5002

The high pressure port of the gauge is teed into the existing pitot line, and the low pressure port goes to a standard Vans pitot probe that has been bent down at ~50 degree angle. That's all there is to it.

Here is the home-brew version I'm putting on my latest project. This plane will have no airspeed indicator, just the LRI:

http://eaglexl-58.com/lri.htm
Click to expand...

dsmith1055 said:
OK, Now you have my attention. How about adapting the idea to a system with pitot heat and which differential gauge didi you use? Sounds like a fun project. Thanks for posting it.
Click to expand...

Dwight,

My original post quoted above states which gauge is used, even has a link to the Dwyer catalog. :)

Doesn't matter whether the pitot tube is heated or not, just tee the lines as I stated in the post above. ;)
 
Last edited:
display location?

Seems to me I read something in the RVator about Van's testing an AFS AOA device and liking it. Anyone remember that? In any case I read some compelling stories that led me to buy an AFS AOA Sport system when a second hand but never installed system showed up in the classifieds here several years ago.

As my signature line shows I haven't flown yet, but I am looking forward to flying with the device. After scratching my head about where to put it in my panel, I took the advice of a local RV-7 builder/A&P and made a console for it that I intend to mount on the glareshield somewhere.

The pic below shows it before it received a final coat of flat black. Holes adjacent to the display cutout are for the pushbuttons supplied with the device- I decided to keep all the related hardware together- hopefully it won't be too obstructive.

Next question is where on the glareshield is best. Centered under the roll bar brace (slider)? In front of me? Is it a dumb idea to have it that high?

1237728149_ScQMB-L.jpg
 
The differential pressure reading vs AOA remains constant (or pretty darn close to it) and the critical AOA is static regardless of density altitude, gross weight, center of gravity, or bank angle.

This is one of the reasons why AOA is such a good tool.

az_gila said:
So an absolute differential pressure number (say 3 inches water column) is the same AOA at sea level and at 18,000 ft?

Just went to the LRI links, and now I don't feel so bad. The Professor doesn't get it either...:)

Despite the fact that I don't completely understand the LRI, I like the system and I even trust it enough to use it as the primary traffic pattern indicator. In fact, I'm even installing one in my personal airplane, a Cherokee 140.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Neate

Associate Professor, Aeronautical Engineering Department, Embry-Riddle University, Daytona Beach
Click to expand...
 
The LRI is a great unit. But I would still like to have an audio warning. I don't think that base to final stalls happen because the pilot was paying attention...... It usually happens when there is a distraction.

A warning in your headset to make you look at the LRI when you enter the zone would be a plus. I have not been able to find a differential pressure switch that reads that low......

Does anyone have any leads???
 
I had looked into building a tone generator for LRI's and other AOA systems that did not have audio alerts built into them. The price for these low pressure transducers is high so I dropped the idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top