In a Spin are Both Wings Stalled?Is spin recovery possible in an airliner?How long is spin training good for...
Fully-Firstable Anagram Sets
Why are electrically insulating heatsinks so rare? Is it just cost?
Why do I get two different answers for this counting problem?
I'm flying to France today and my passport expires in less than 2 months
Theorems that impeded progress
Forgetting the musical notes while performing in concert
Is it legal for company to use my work email to pretend I still work there?
Where does SFDX store details about scratch orgs?
Etiquette around loan refinance - decision is going to cost first broker a lot of money
Facing a paradox: Earnshaw's theorem in one dimension
Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?
How could indestructible materials be used in power generation?
How much of data wrangling is a data scientist's job?
What is the intuition behind short exact sequences of groups; in particular, what is the intuition behind group extensions?
How to model explosives?
Neighboring nodes in the network
Combinations of multiple lists
What's the point of deactivating Num Lock on login screens?
Why doesn't H₄O²⁺ exist?
prove that the matrix A is diagonalizable
AES: Why is it a good practice to use only the first 16bytes of a hash for encryption?
Blender 2.8 I can't see vertices, edges or faces in edit mode
If human space travel is limited by the G force vulnerability, is there a way to counter G forces?
Why does Kotter return in Welcome Back Kotter
In a Spin are Both Wings Stalled?
Is spin recovery possible in an airliner?How long is spin training good for in the USA?Is it possible to recover from a flat spin?If a commercial airliner enters into a spin at high altitude, is it possible to recover?How to enter an inverted spin?Is it possible to perform a spin recovery in IMC?What is a good spin aircraft for someone that is heavy?What altitude to fly on a STAR when it reads “expect”?Does it really take 9000 feet to recover from a spin in a P-51 Mustang?Why aren't airliners spin-tested?
$begingroup$
I missed a test question which asked that if an airplane was spinning to the left which wing was stalled. The supposed correct answer was that both wings are stalled (I had answered that the left wing only was stalled). However after looking at the this article on Wikipedia it seems to indicate that only one wing needs to be stalled to spin:
In a normal spin, the wing on the inside of the turn stalls while the outside wing remains flying. It is possible for both wings to stall, but the angle of attack of each wing, and consequently its lift and drag, are different. Either situation causes the aircraft to autorotate toward the stalled wing due to its higher drag and loss of lift.
So my question is was it fair for me to have missed that test question since according to Wikipedia a spin can occur with only one wing stalled?
spins faa-knowledge-test
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I missed a test question which asked that if an airplane was spinning to the left which wing was stalled. The supposed correct answer was that both wings are stalled (I had answered that the left wing only was stalled). However after looking at the this article on Wikipedia it seems to indicate that only one wing needs to be stalled to spin:
In a normal spin, the wing on the inside of the turn stalls while the outside wing remains flying. It is possible for both wings to stall, but the angle of attack of each wing, and consequently its lift and drag, are different. Either situation causes the aircraft to autorotate toward the stalled wing due to its higher drag and loss of lift.
So my question is was it fair for me to have missed that test question since according to Wikipedia a spin can occur with only one wing stalled?
spins faa-knowledge-test
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I missed a test question which asked that if an airplane was spinning to the left which wing was stalled. The supposed correct answer was that both wings are stalled (I had answered that the left wing only was stalled). However after looking at the this article on Wikipedia it seems to indicate that only one wing needs to be stalled to spin:
In a normal spin, the wing on the inside of the turn stalls while the outside wing remains flying. It is possible for both wings to stall, but the angle of attack of each wing, and consequently its lift and drag, are different. Either situation causes the aircraft to autorotate toward the stalled wing due to its higher drag and loss of lift.
So my question is was it fair for me to have missed that test question since according to Wikipedia a spin can occur with only one wing stalled?
spins faa-knowledge-test
$endgroup$
I missed a test question which asked that if an airplane was spinning to the left which wing was stalled. The supposed correct answer was that both wings are stalled (I had answered that the left wing only was stalled). However after looking at the this article on Wikipedia it seems to indicate that only one wing needs to be stalled to spin:
In a normal spin, the wing on the inside of the turn stalls while the outside wing remains flying. It is possible for both wings to stall, but the angle of attack of each wing, and consequently its lift and drag, are different. Either situation causes the aircraft to autorotate toward the stalled wing due to its higher drag and loss of lift.
So my question is was it fair for me to have missed that test question since according to Wikipedia a spin can occur with only one wing stalled?
spins faa-knowledge-test
spins faa-knowledge-test
asked 5 hours ago
DLHDLH
2,593829
2,593829
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, one wing has at least partially attached flow. How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?
During a spin the aircraft experiences a linear variation in angle of attack over span. The pitch attitude is between 40° and 60° nose-down, and the local angle of attack is 90° minus the pitch angle, which is between 50° and 30°, at the center wing. Move outward from there and the angle of attack increases on the retarding side and decreases on the advancing side.
As a consequence, the outer advancing wing will experience a moderate angle of attack which can even become negative at the tip. Therefore, a sizeable portion of that wing side has attached flow with high lift and low drag. On the other side the angle of attack grows to 90° and beyond, so the wing is fully separated and the aerodynamic force is normal to the wing surface. See below for a diagram of the flow direction: The dark blue vector is from the falling motion and the red vector is the product of the yawing moment $omega_z$ times the wing station y. Together they combine to the green vector which produces a resulting aerodynamic force R:
On the left is the retarding wing and on the right the advancing wing. Note that the aerodynamic force is in line with the flow vector on the retarding wing with its fully separated flow while the aerodynamic force is normal to the flow vector due to the attached flow on the advancing wing. The difference in the local forces produces a yawing and rolling moment which balances with the damping forces. If there would not be such an asymmetry, the motion would die down quickly.
Even in a flat spin, where the pitch attitude is around 0° (resulting in 90° angle of attack at the center wing), the advancing side of a moderate to high aspect ratio wing produces some nose thrust from partially attached flow. How else would the aircraft keep spinnig? Low aspect ratio designs produce a propelling nose vortex on the forward fuselage which keeps the motion alive.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, both are stalled.
I guess a nit-pick is on "what is stalled"? I adopt that you are at or beyond the point that an increase in AOA results in an increase in lift. That's the top of the blue curve in the plot below.
At low angles of attack (AOA) planes are naturally stable in roll. The downgoing wing sees a higher AOA which results in more lift, and a restoring force. The upgoing wings sees a lower AOA, and less lift, so it is stabilizing too.
At a high AOA, though, you are operating on the backside of the wing lift diagram. In the picture below, this would be at and beyond 20 degrees AOA.
Now, the upgoing wing sees more lift, which leads to positively reinforcing going up. Same but opposite on the downgoing. It sees less lift.
Also, the red line shows drag. That downgoing wing (on inside of the spin) sees a great increase in drag, which will lead to a yaw towards that wing, i.e., pro-spin.
So to get in the situation where a roll/yaw movement is positively reinforcing, you need to be in stalled AOA. You might start with just one wing, you'll get to both.
JMHO!
EDIT
Here’s a NASA video of a wing with tufts when it is both on the inside of the spin and outside. Stalled in both (but different airflow).
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A spin is an autorotation that requires an asymmetric thrust force to sustain. This requires the wing span to be anchored at one end by drag, with the other end developing enough thrust to overcome the (rather weak) stabilizing force of the vertical fin and drive that end forward, rotating the plane. The AOA is highest at the inboard end and decreases as you move outboard due to the higher forward velocity. At some point along the span, the outer end is unstalled or only semi-stalled and is making at least some amount of lift/thrust.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This "test" question may apply to a certain type of aircraft and spin procedure (Cessna 172) that has to be stalled straightforward (there for both wings stalled), followed by the "wrong" inputs (rudder into spin, ailerons away) to make it spin. The important concept is that differences in drag and lift between the 2 wings, whether one is stalled or not, keeps the plane in a self sustaining yaw/slip.
Important is the role of the V stab/rudder in maintaining or ending the spin. Looking at a simple cup shaped anomometer helps visualize the effects of pro-spin rudder into the spin and anti-spin rudder away. Stopping yaw with opposite rudder is key to breaking a spin, and controlling yaw is key to not entering one.
Also key is how uncoordinated aileron input, trying to roll away from a turn, can cause a spin.
(The "inside" slower wing is now compounded with the down aileron creating a higher AOA).
Although aileron roll effect can reverse in the stall AOA regime, rudder will not. But this also means that applying opposite ailerons in a spin can be explored! (Qualified instructor recommended).
But for the 172, just letting go of the yoke, power to idle, and opposite rudder would break the spin if CG was correct.
Every plane and situation is different (as seen by these answers), it is advisable to find out how your plane handles and how to control it, no matter what the "correct" test answer is.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62020%2fin-a-spin-are-both-wings-stalled%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, one wing has at least partially attached flow. How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?
During a spin the aircraft experiences a linear variation in angle of attack over span. The pitch attitude is between 40° and 60° nose-down, and the local angle of attack is 90° minus the pitch angle, which is between 50° and 30°, at the center wing. Move outward from there and the angle of attack increases on the retarding side and decreases on the advancing side.
As a consequence, the outer advancing wing will experience a moderate angle of attack which can even become negative at the tip. Therefore, a sizeable portion of that wing side has attached flow with high lift and low drag. On the other side the angle of attack grows to 90° and beyond, so the wing is fully separated and the aerodynamic force is normal to the wing surface. See below for a diagram of the flow direction: The dark blue vector is from the falling motion and the red vector is the product of the yawing moment $omega_z$ times the wing station y. Together they combine to the green vector which produces a resulting aerodynamic force R:
On the left is the retarding wing and on the right the advancing wing. Note that the aerodynamic force is in line with the flow vector on the retarding wing with its fully separated flow while the aerodynamic force is normal to the flow vector due to the attached flow on the advancing wing. The difference in the local forces produces a yawing and rolling moment which balances with the damping forces. If there would not be such an asymmetry, the motion would die down quickly.
Even in a flat spin, where the pitch attitude is around 0° (resulting in 90° angle of attack at the center wing), the advancing side of a moderate to high aspect ratio wing produces some nose thrust from partially attached flow. How else would the aircraft keep spinnig? Low aspect ratio designs produce a propelling nose vortex on the forward fuselage which keeps the motion alive.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, one wing has at least partially attached flow. How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?
During a spin the aircraft experiences a linear variation in angle of attack over span. The pitch attitude is between 40° and 60° nose-down, and the local angle of attack is 90° minus the pitch angle, which is between 50° and 30°, at the center wing. Move outward from there and the angle of attack increases on the retarding side and decreases on the advancing side.
As a consequence, the outer advancing wing will experience a moderate angle of attack which can even become negative at the tip. Therefore, a sizeable portion of that wing side has attached flow with high lift and low drag. On the other side the angle of attack grows to 90° and beyond, so the wing is fully separated and the aerodynamic force is normal to the wing surface. See below for a diagram of the flow direction: The dark blue vector is from the falling motion and the red vector is the product of the yawing moment $omega_z$ times the wing station y. Together they combine to the green vector which produces a resulting aerodynamic force R:
On the left is the retarding wing and on the right the advancing wing. Note that the aerodynamic force is in line with the flow vector on the retarding wing with its fully separated flow while the aerodynamic force is normal to the flow vector due to the attached flow on the advancing wing. The difference in the local forces produces a yawing and rolling moment which balances with the damping forces. If there would not be such an asymmetry, the motion would die down quickly.
Even in a flat spin, where the pitch attitude is around 0° (resulting in 90° angle of attack at the center wing), the advancing side of a moderate to high aspect ratio wing produces some nose thrust from partially attached flow. How else would the aircraft keep spinnig? Low aspect ratio designs produce a propelling nose vortex on the forward fuselage which keeps the motion alive.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, one wing has at least partially attached flow. How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?
During a spin the aircraft experiences a linear variation in angle of attack over span. The pitch attitude is between 40° and 60° nose-down, and the local angle of attack is 90° minus the pitch angle, which is between 50° and 30°, at the center wing. Move outward from there and the angle of attack increases on the retarding side and decreases on the advancing side.
As a consequence, the outer advancing wing will experience a moderate angle of attack which can even become negative at the tip. Therefore, a sizeable portion of that wing side has attached flow with high lift and low drag. On the other side the angle of attack grows to 90° and beyond, so the wing is fully separated and the aerodynamic force is normal to the wing surface. See below for a diagram of the flow direction: The dark blue vector is from the falling motion and the red vector is the product of the yawing moment $omega_z$ times the wing station y. Together they combine to the green vector which produces a resulting aerodynamic force R:
On the left is the retarding wing and on the right the advancing wing. Note that the aerodynamic force is in line with the flow vector on the retarding wing with its fully separated flow while the aerodynamic force is normal to the flow vector due to the attached flow on the advancing wing. The difference in the local forces produces a yawing and rolling moment which balances with the damping forces. If there would not be such an asymmetry, the motion would die down quickly.
Even in a flat spin, where the pitch attitude is around 0° (resulting in 90° angle of attack at the center wing), the advancing side of a moderate to high aspect ratio wing produces some nose thrust from partially attached flow. How else would the aircraft keep spinnig? Low aspect ratio designs produce a propelling nose vortex on the forward fuselage which keeps the motion alive.
$endgroup$
No, one wing has at least partially attached flow. How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?
During a spin the aircraft experiences a linear variation in angle of attack over span. The pitch attitude is between 40° and 60° nose-down, and the local angle of attack is 90° minus the pitch angle, which is between 50° and 30°, at the center wing. Move outward from there and the angle of attack increases on the retarding side and decreases on the advancing side.
As a consequence, the outer advancing wing will experience a moderate angle of attack which can even become negative at the tip. Therefore, a sizeable portion of that wing side has attached flow with high lift and low drag. On the other side the angle of attack grows to 90° and beyond, so the wing is fully separated and the aerodynamic force is normal to the wing surface. See below for a diagram of the flow direction: The dark blue vector is from the falling motion and the red vector is the product of the yawing moment $omega_z$ times the wing station y. Together they combine to the green vector which produces a resulting aerodynamic force R:
On the left is the retarding wing and on the right the advancing wing. Note that the aerodynamic force is in line with the flow vector on the retarding wing with its fully separated flow while the aerodynamic force is normal to the flow vector due to the attached flow on the advancing wing. The difference in the local forces produces a yawing and rolling moment which balances with the damping forces. If there would not be such an asymmetry, the motion would die down quickly.
Even in a flat spin, where the pitch attitude is around 0° (resulting in 90° angle of attack at the center wing), the advancing side of a moderate to high aspect ratio wing produces some nose thrust from partially attached flow. How else would the aircraft keep spinnig? Low aspect ratio designs produce a propelling nose vortex on the forward fuselage which keeps the motion alive.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
Peter KämpfPeter Kämpf
161k12411654
161k12411654
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
So this is kind of like a helicopter rotor retreating blade stall where the retreating side can stall due to higher angle of attack?
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH: In a way, yes. But not cyclic, which causes all kind of funny oscillations from hysteresis on helicopter blades.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The argument that at least one wing has partially attached flow is meaningless. The question is, is the wing as a whole exhibiting the behavior in the plot I used. Airplanes stall all the time with portions of the wing unstalled. That’s why we twist the wing aero or geometrically, to keep roll control “post stall”.
$endgroup$
– MikeY
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MikeY: I believe that you are referencing washout which means the root of the wing will stall before the tip and this is used to keep some roll stability in the stall. However I believe the situation Peter presents here is that the tip stalls before the root.
$endgroup$
– DLH
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"How else would there be a rolling and yawing moment which keeps the spin movement alive?" Rhetorical questions are unbecoming, Peter! :)
$endgroup$
– Fattie
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, both are stalled.
I guess a nit-pick is on "what is stalled"? I adopt that you are at or beyond the point that an increase in AOA results in an increase in lift. That's the top of the blue curve in the plot below.
At low angles of attack (AOA) planes are naturally stable in roll. The downgoing wing sees a higher AOA which results in more lift, and a restoring force. The upgoing wings sees a lower AOA, and less lift, so it is stabilizing too.
At a high AOA, though, you are operating on the backside of the wing lift diagram. In the picture below, this would be at and beyond 20 degrees AOA.
Now, the upgoing wing sees more lift, which leads to positively reinforcing going up. Same but opposite on the downgoing. It sees less lift.
Also, the red line shows drag. That downgoing wing (on inside of the spin) sees a great increase in drag, which will lead to a yaw towards that wing, i.e., pro-spin.
So to get in the situation where a roll/yaw movement is positively reinforcing, you need to be in stalled AOA. You might start with just one wing, you'll get to both.
JMHO!
EDIT
Here’s a NASA video of a wing with tufts when it is both on the inside of the spin and outside. Stalled in both (but different airflow).
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, both are stalled.
I guess a nit-pick is on "what is stalled"? I adopt that you are at or beyond the point that an increase in AOA results in an increase in lift. That's the top of the blue curve in the plot below.
At low angles of attack (AOA) planes are naturally stable in roll. The downgoing wing sees a higher AOA which results in more lift, and a restoring force. The upgoing wings sees a lower AOA, and less lift, so it is stabilizing too.
At a high AOA, though, you are operating on the backside of the wing lift diagram. In the picture below, this would be at and beyond 20 degrees AOA.
Now, the upgoing wing sees more lift, which leads to positively reinforcing going up. Same but opposite on the downgoing. It sees less lift.
Also, the red line shows drag. That downgoing wing (on inside of the spin) sees a great increase in drag, which will lead to a yaw towards that wing, i.e., pro-spin.
So to get in the situation where a roll/yaw movement is positively reinforcing, you need to be in stalled AOA. You might start with just one wing, you'll get to both.
JMHO!
EDIT
Here’s a NASA video of a wing with tufts when it is both on the inside of the spin and outside. Stalled in both (but different airflow).
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, both are stalled.
I guess a nit-pick is on "what is stalled"? I adopt that you are at or beyond the point that an increase in AOA results in an increase in lift. That's the top of the blue curve in the plot below.
At low angles of attack (AOA) planes are naturally stable in roll. The downgoing wing sees a higher AOA which results in more lift, and a restoring force. The upgoing wings sees a lower AOA, and less lift, so it is stabilizing too.
At a high AOA, though, you are operating on the backside of the wing lift diagram. In the picture below, this would be at and beyond 20 degrees AOA.
Now, the upgoing wing sees more lift, which leads to positively reinforcing going up. Same but opposite on the downgoing. It sees less lift.
Also, the red line shows drag. That downgoing wing (on inside of the spin) sees a great increase in drag, which will lead to a yaw towards that wing, i.e., pro-spin.
So to get in the situation where a roll/yaw movement is positively reinforcing, you need to be in stalled AOA. You might start with just one wing, you'll get to both.
JMHO!
EDIT
Here’s a NASA video of a wing with tufts when it is both on the inside of the spin and outside. Stalled in both (but different airflow).
$endgroup$
Yes, both are stalled.
I guess a nit-pick is on "what is stalled"? I adopt that you are at or beyond the point that an increase in AOA results in an increase in lift. That's the top of the blue curve in the plot below.
At low angles of attack (AOA) planes are naturally stable in roll. The downgoing wing sees a higher AOA which results in more lift, and a restoring force. The upgoing wings sees a lower AOA, and less lift, so it is stabilizing too.
At a high AOA, though, you are operating on the backside of the wing lift diagram. In the picture below, this would be at and beyond 20 degrees AOA.
Now, the upgoing wing sees more lift, which leads to positively reinforcing going up. Same but opposite on the downgoing. It sees less lift.
Also, the red line shows drag. That downgoing wing (on inside of the spin) sees a great increase in drag, which will lead to a yaw towards that wing, i.e., pro-spin.
So to get in the situation where a roll/yaw movement is positively reinforcing, you need to be in stalled AOA. You might start with just one wing, you'll get to both.
JMHO!
EDIT
Here’s a NASA video of a wing with tufts when it is both on the inside of the spin and outside. Stalled in both (but different airflow).
edited 2 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
MikeYMikeY
54516
54516
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think this is a good answer. I've been reading up on spins. While I think that maybe only one wing will stall during the departure phase of the spin, by the time the spin is in the developed stage both wings will be stalled. I think the test question could have been better worded though.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@DLH I think this is a poor answer because it is wrong.
$endgroup$
– Peter Kämpf
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterKämpf: Oh man I wish you had answered sooner, I was persuaded.
$endgroup$
– DLH
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A spin is an autorotation that requires an asymmetric thrust force to sustain. This requires the wing span to be anchored at one end by drag, with the other end developing enough thrust to overcome the (rather weak) stabilizing force of the vertical fin and drive that end forward, rotating the plane. The AOA is highest at the inboard end and decreases as you move outboard due to the higher forward velocity. At some point along the span, the outer end is unstalled or only semi-stalled and is making at least some amount of lift/thrust.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A spin is an autorotation that requires an asymmetric thrust force to sustain. This requires the wing span to be anchored at one end by drag, with the other end developing enough thrust to overcome the (rather weak) stabilizing force of the vertical fin and drive that end forward, rotating the plane. The AOA is highest at the inboard end and decreases as you move outboard due to the higher forward velocity. At some point along the span, the outer end is unstalled or only semi-stalled and is making at least some amount of lift/thrust.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A spin is an autorotation that requires an asymmetric thrust force to sustain. This requires the wing span to be anchored at one end by drag, with the other end developing enough thrust to overcome the (rather weak) stabilizing force of the vertical fin and drive that end forward, rotating the plane. The AOA is highest at the inboard end and decreases as you move outboard due to the higher forward velocity. At some point along the span, the outer end is unstalled or only semi-stalled and is making at least some amount of lift/thrust.
$endgroup$
A spin is an autorotation that requires an asymmetric thrust force to sustain. This requires the wing span to be anchored at one end by drag, with the other end developing enough thrust to overcome the (rather weak) stabilizing force of the vertical fin and drive that end forward, rotating the plane. The AOA is highest at the inboard end and decreases as you move outboard due to the higher forward velocity. At some point along the span, the outer end is unstalled or only semi-stalled and is making at least some amount of lift/thrust.
answered 3 hours ago
John KJohn K
24.4k13674
24.4k13674
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This "test" question may apply to a certain type of aircraft and spin procedure (Cessna 172) that has to be stalled straightforward (there for both wings stalled), followed by the "wrong" inputs (rudder into spin, ailerons away) to make it spin. The important concept is that differences in drag and lift between the 2 wings, whether one is stalled or not, keeps the plane in a self sustaining yaw/slip.
Important is the role of the V stab/rudder in maintaining or ending the spin. Looking at a simple cup shaped anomometer helps visualize the effects of pro-spin rudder into the spin and anti-spin rudder away. Stopping yaw with opposite rudder is key to breaking a spin, and controlling yaw is key to not entering one.
Also key is how uncoordinated aileron input, trying to roll away from a turn, can cause a spin.
(The "inside" slower wing is now compounded with the down aileron creating a higher AOA).
Although aileron roll effect can reverse in the stall AOA regime, rudder will not. But this also means that applying opposite ailerons in a spin can be explored! (Qualified instructor recommended).
But for the 172, just letting go of the yoke, power to idle, and opposite rudder would break the spin if CG was correct.
Every plane and situation is different (as seen by these answers), it is advisable to find out how your plane handles and how to control it, no matter what the "correct" test answer is.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This "test" question may apply to a certain type of aircraft and spin procedure (Cessna 172) that has to be stalled straightforward (there for both wings stalled), followed by the "wrong" inputs (rudder into spin, ailerons away) to make it spin. The important concept is that differences in drag and lift between the 2 wings, whether one is stalled or not, keeps the plane in a self sustaining yaw/slip.
Important is the role of the V stab/rudder in maintaining or ending the spin. Looking at a simple cup shaped anomometer helps visualize the effects of pro-spin rudder into the spin and anti-spin rudder away. Stopping yaw with opposite rudder is key to breaking a spin, and controlling yaw is key to not entering one.
Also key is how uncoordinated aileron input, trying to roll away from a turn, can cause a spin.
(The "inside" slower wing is now compounded with the down aileron creating a higher AOA).
Although aileron roll effect can reverse in the stall AOA regime, rudder will not. But this also means that applying opposite ailerons in a spin can be explored! (Qualified instructor recommended).
But for the 172, just letting go of the yoke, power to idle, and opposite rudder would break the spin if CG was correct.
Every plane and situation is different (as seen by these answers), it is advisable to find out how your plane handles and how to control it, no matter what the "correct" test answer is.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This "test" question may apply to a certain type of aircraft and spin procedure (Cessna 172) that has to be stalled straightforward (there for both wings stalled), followed by the "wrong" inputs (rudder into spin, ailerons away) to make it spin. The important concept is that differences in drag and lift between the 2 wings, whether one is stalled or not, keeps the plane in a self sustaining yaw/slip.
Important is the role of the V stab/rudder in maintaining or ending the spin. Looking at a simple cup shaped anomometer helps visualize the effects of pro-spin rudder into the spin and anti-spin rudder away. Stopping yaw with opposite rudder is key to breaking a spin, and controlling yaw is key to not entering one.
Also key is how uncoordinated aileron input, trying to roll away from a turn, can cause a spin.
(The "inside" slower wing is now compounded with the down aileron creating a higher AOA).
Although aileron roll effect can reverse in the stall AOA regime, rudder will not. But this also means that applying opposite ailerons in a spin can be explored! (Qualified instructor recommended).
But for the 172, just letting go of the yoke, power to idle, and opposite rudder would break the spin if CG was correct.
Every plane and situation is different (as seen by these answers), it is advisable to find out how your plane handles and how to control it, no matter what the "correct" test answer is.
$endgroup$
This "test" question may apply to a certain type of aircraft and spin procedure (Cessna 172) that has to be stalled straightforward (there for both wings stalled), followed by the "wrong" inputs (rudder into spin, ailerons away) to make it spin. The important concept is that differences in drag and lift between the 2 wings, whether one is stalled or not, keeps the plane in a self sustaining yaw/slip.
Important is the role of the V stab/rudder in maintaining or ending the spin. Looking at a simple cup shaped anomometer helps visualize the effects of pro-spin rudder into the spin and anti-spin rudder away. Stopping yaw with opposite rudder is key to breaking a spin, and controlling yaw is key to not entering one.
Also key is how uncoordinated aileron input, trying to roll away from a turn, can cause a spin.
(The "inside" slower wing is now compounded with the down aileron creating a higher AOA).
Although aileron roll effect can reverse in the stall AOA regime, rudder will not. But this also means that applying opposite ailerons in a spin can be explored! (Qualified instructor recommended).
But for the 172, just letting go of the yoke, power to idle, and opposite rudder would break the spin if CG was correct.
Every plane and situation is different (as seen by these answers), it is advisable to find out how your plane handles and how to control it, no matter what the "correct" test answer is.
edited 42 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
Robert DiGiovanniRobert DiGiovanni
2,6201316
2,6201316
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f62020%2fin-a-spin-are-both-wings-stalled%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown