Hi Ferg
I'm not saying that AOA isn't required. I just wouldn't substitute it for an
ASI and try to convince the FAA (or other goverment equal) that I don't need
to install an ASI. AOA is a valuable tool, especially where max performing
the plane is required (flying out of windshear at 0.9 Cl). They are more
useful in jets that require lots of altitude to recover from a stall than in
light planes that recover much quicker. But for stall recognition, nearly all
aircraft (particularly jets) give the pilot adaquate warning approaching the
stall without having to refer to AOA. When you stall, you'll know it. AOA
would be useful in recovering with minimum altitude loss. Therefore, AOA is
more for flying at max performance (at a given, fixed angle of attack), like
consistant approaches to a carrier deck. Don't get me wrong. I love AOA
indicators. But I also love my ASI since it tells me my energy state.
Anyone going without an ASI, thinking that AOA will give all the info they
seek, will be disappointed. Certainly, add an AOA to your ASI. All I'm saying
is that AOA in a light plane isn't the same "bang for the buck" as in a jet
or other high performance plane (read that as high wing loading).
To answer your question on the B-777 (which also has an AOA indicator); its a
REALLY nice plane to fly. If all future planes handle this well, then
aviation has a bright future. Anyone out there that can fly a Europa can
easily fly and land a B-777. Its the only plane I've been able to grease on
EVERY landing (so far). They make 'em easy to fly so that us ex-Air Force
types don't break them.
Ben Clerx
|