Originally published at: Hey, FAA … How About Some AoA Money? - AVweb
First Word.
I like it. I agree. What’s not to like? This instrument will save lives if people learn to use it regularly and smartly. Good catch, bring it on!
Wrong question! The correct question is, where’s the data? Just because somebody says something is for “safety,” doesn’t mean it’s effective. Or workable. The examples cited in the SAIB have nothing to do with low end GA.
Want data? I actually did the research on AOA and GA accidents. Part 1 is at What NTSB Reports Say About Impossible Turns and AOA (Part I) : Air Facts Journal. It includes a link to Part 2, which has the statistics: NTSB reports from 2012-22, single engine, Part 91. How easy is it to mandate AOA for GA? Again, here’s the data: Visual Angle of Attack Indicators and Systems Engineering Theory : Air Facts Journal. Still think that all base to final accidents are stall/spin? The correct answer is only about half of them. Airfactsjournal has an article on that, but the website thinks I’m a new user and won’t let me post another link. The first article on the subject was published seven years ago in Plane & Pilot.
Come fly with me in Savannah, GA (I’m an ATP/CFII), and I’ll demonstrate some of these phenomena. Or if you want an article on why an AOA mandate won’t work, I’ve got 1,300 concise words looking to get the word out. The summary is, of course, if an accident pilot is too distracted to watch existing instrumentation, adding one more won’t help. And no gadget will make up for poor skills and/or poor training.
1 Like
An AoA would not have prevented the 2009 Colgan Air Dash 8 airliner crash in New York. The route cause of this accident was do to poor training and checking by training department.
1 Like
Completely agree that for light GA, AOA is just another distractor.
Real AOA value is in aircraft with a substantial weight change during flight (fuel burn and/or expendables…e.g. ordnance, airdropped cargo, etc) that changes critical airspeeds substantially, tactical ops at corner airspeeds (upper left limit of envelope, or irreversible hydraulic systems and/or airframe characteristics that provide no airframe aero or control feedback.
In light GA we have the luxury of minimal weight change during flight, talkative control force feedback and no combat need to operate at upper left corner of envelope (but it is a fun area to operate with correct trng/acft). Training and proficiency allow you to unlock GA acft feedback cues so that the entire acft becomes an AOA indicator IF you learn to feel what the airframe/controls are telling you…and they are tactile which is a powerful feedback loop (wonder why stickshakers are used?)
Some practical considerations for AOA in GA…no redundancy (Air France and 737 Max type false input issue), recalibration/damage inspection before each flt, trng to use AOA and understand limits…$$ spent that could have been used for proficiency flying. The overwhelmed, less proficient GA pilot who can’t interpret airframe/control feedback is going to have just another input they can’t interpret in extremis…see article on recent Canadian mishap for similar issue.
AOA refs are not going to correspond to actual performance of an iced up airframe.
Opinion above based on years of USN TACAIR experience with AOA, and non-AOA in aerobatic GA.
As far as $$ from heaven (or FAA), I’ll settle for a waiver on ELT install with “ADS-B out” installed on flight within ADS-B coverage areas.
1 Like
22 years with EAL, most in B727 which had a small AOA needle on their presentation. Tried to look at it on an approach - just could not do it. Why? Because the air speed was a much earlier indication of error! At a meeting with an EAL weather expert I ask what is the most dangerous landing situation. He replied landing East with a storm over your left shoulder! Could apply to take offs also. But the AOA can be the best training aid ever created!
Basically good but what’s not to like is the spring loaded vane. Think icing or mechanical failure. But, maybe I’m missing something.
Share concerns…as far as icing affecting vane, if you have ice on vane then any AOA ref is useless, iced airframe will stall at different AOA than non-iced reference values…you now have a different wing profile.
2 Likes
Aspen’s proven AoA is all self contained—no sensors to ice up.
This anti-AoA argument is getting old. why not have properly installed and calibrated AoA in addition to solid state instruments? The NTSB reports are littered with runway wrecks, where better speed management through a speed indexer (and better skill) might have made a difference.
An essential IFF.
Clarity is needed in flight decks.
AOA vanes on aircraft like B737 are heated.
(Heat does have to be turned on.)
Icing awareness is essential - did an ATR fall down in Brazil a year or three ago when pilots did not appreciate how bad icing was and behaviour of the specific type of airplane?
The problem in GA is not a failure to spend large $$ on flight deck equipage, it’s a failure to know how to operate the acft when the going gets tough. There is no shortage of smoking holes that were, up until that point, perfectly good, well equipped acft flown by non-proficient PICs.
AOA for a non-proficient pilot is like $300 Nikes for a donut run.
1 Like
Heated AOA will report AOA as calibrated, but issue lost on most not well versed in AOA is that an iced airframe is one time that stalling AOA will vary from ref…and we’ve all seen what a little frost can do.
I agree with Edwisch and Rich R. In the two jets I am typed in both have an AoA indicator that is used for reference. Determining proper approach speeds are still used as primary indication for approach speed at the approach weights. As far as I know the manufacturers of small jets haven’t changed this. I fail to see how in an airplane that might weight 2300lb at gross when the fuel load probably doesn’t exceed 240lb. Not much change in weight for such a plane. Now the jet I fly now holds 10000lb of fuel, making the change in weight after fuel burn much more dramatic. Also icing will reduce the angle of attack of an airfoil making the AoA gauge inaccurate unless it is designed to compensate for icing, something most light airplanes aren’t even certified or equipped for.
I have flown with AoA in jets, large and small, and I like it, but the average GA pilot will not gain anything from it. Anyone who can not interpret slack controls or a buffeting airframe has no business in the left seat and another doohickey won’t help.
I’m sadly reminded of the recent B-787 crash that apparently took off with zero flaps deployed and sunk nose high into the ground. That’s simply poor airmanship/training.
This doohickey will probably save a number of folks who get saturated with the stick and rudder stuff when on takeoff or approach. It won’t do much for the “Ace of the Base” until things really go sideways. For the rest it may mean the difference of going home for dinner or being fondly remembered days later.
Retail therapy is not the answer, training and proficiency are. For those who are not $$ limited, knock yourself out and add another doohickey you can show off as part of your $50k glass panel in your 172 you fly once a month.
For those who are time limited, I’ll let you in on a secret, if you are not proficient in stick/rudder, then you probably won’t be in AOA ops either, AOA helps in steady state approach to onspeed. When you’re fighting snakes in the cockpit, large control inputs will blow past AOA utility, it won’t be in your scan and any warning will be as the stall break occurs, lost in the sensory overload.
Go spend your $$ on training and gas, if you don’t have time for that, buy a simulator and sell the acft, that too will save lives.