Originally posted by 3WE
View Post
As we know, most airliners do not display angle of attack to the pilot and pilots are simply trained to react to stall warnings via procedure with pitch and power. Mostly, if they follow procedure, this works. But in situations such as the one we are discussing, if they lack a strong Gabrielian understanding of AoA vs CL and aerodynamics (fluid dynamics), it often ends with a wrong instinct reaction based on a (subconscious?) association with pulling back and climbing. If you can teach the wrong instinct you should be able to teach the right one, that's my thinking. Since 99.9999% of the time pulling back will result in climbing out, it would take an intensive fundamental education effort to assure that pilots understand that this never works during stall warning. If aspiring pilots already had the physics down, it might be easier for them to understand this intuitively. It would become 'common-sense'. It should be required.
I took photography classes in high-school. We spent the first semester just learning the physics of optics and chemistry (i.e. the elemental chemical reactions involved). I just wanted to take pictures and thought this was just an academic waste of time. Later, when it came time to make exposures, the correct settings came from an understanding of these things. That is how pilot schooling should be. Basic science, then applied skills.
I get the impression that this pilot, despite the jackass stunt, may have had this critical understanding.
Comment