I couldn't resist copying this from a posting on alt.usage.english. Language abuse is alive and kicking!
Went to RBC (a bank) on Georgia. "We're temporarily closed," said a woman at the door. "Is that it?" I asked. "Is that really all you're going to say?" "We've had an unauthorised withdrawal attempt." "Oh. You mean you've been held up." Vancouver is the capital of mealy-mouthed communication. "Unauthorised withdrawal attempt." I"m not making this up.
What was that other one..the plane crash.. "Unintended contact with terrain" or something like that. There's a few of those around, hopefully this thread will cough up a few.
Bet that caused an unintended sphincter relaxation in their Calvin Kleins ...
What was that other one..the plane crash.. "Unintended contact with terrain" or something like that. There's a few of those around, hopefully this thread will cough up a few.
I'll never forget the pretty face anchor gal on the local news reporting about an incident where an airplane landed and went off the runway.
She exclaimed! The airplane skidded into a crash!
Probably because it over turned, although it did not "turn over".
Close. Controlled flying into terrain.
Which isn't always a crash. I recall reading about a PBY that made an unintended landing on the Greenland icecap. The terrain was so flat and sloped so gradually that the first indication that the pilot had that he had touched ground was when at full throttle he had zero airspeed.
I don't recall if they got it off.
I think the stall warning alarm would have caused a sphinctal malfunction long before zero airspeed occurred. Art
Stall warning works by angle of attack, not by airspeed. Angle of attack was never unusual.
That is incorrect.
They work together (sort of). If the stall warning worked by airspeed alone, it would be going off when the plane was parked.
The stall warning (and airspeed indicator) is triggered when the dynamic air pressure detected by the Pitot tube is compared to the static pressure and the result is processed.
It IS possible to stall an aircraft at ANY airspeed if the angle of attack is sufficiently advanced.
Do you reckon a PBY had a stall warning system?
As there are many methods to detect disturbed air flow/cavitation at the trailing edge of the upper wing surfaces.
Indeed. Airspeed is a factor in stalling conditions as well as angle of attack. Angle of attack alone doesn't give us enough to set off a stall alarm. An F-16 with it's nose almost straight up but doing 400 kn is not necessarily in a stall condition.
If the angle of attack is a constant and the air speed is varied, so does the stall condition.
Therefore, the statement: "Stall warning works by angle of attack, not by airspeed." is wrong.
Depends on the aircraft. On a Cessna or the like there's a tab that is normally pressed down by its own weight and by dynamic pressure, but when angle of attack becomes high enough the low pressure area moves forward far enough on the wing to lift the tab, activating the warning.
On an aircraft with an angle of attack sensor, the angle of attack sensor would be the primary means of sensing an impending stall.
Not sure how one could get an effective stall warning from the difference in pressure between the pitot and static ports, all that gives you is airspeed.
In any case the incident occurred on a ferry flight during WWII, and the stall warning horn was not invented until sometime around 1947.
You're being trolled, Toy.
-- Ask not what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive... then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive. -- Howard Thurman
That makes sense. I sit corrected. Art
No I'm not.
If you're in discourse with Clarke, you're being trolled.
-- Ask not what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive... then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive. -- Howard Thurman
An F-16 has a thrust-to-weight ratio greater than 1.0 (if memory serves). Therefore it can fly straight up exactly like a rocket ship - only different.
Even then, it still has an "angle of attack." And airspeed.
Actually it does.
And it is not necessarily operating at a high angle of attack either. An F-16 with its nose pointed straight up while it's doing 400 knots horizontally is operating at a 90 degree angle of attack and most assuredly _is_ stalled. On the other hand if it's in a vertical climb at 400 knots with the nose straight up then it's operating at zero angle of attack and is not stalled.
Yes.
End of discussion as you have clearly demonstrated that you know nothing about the subject.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.