Ask The Pilot

  • Thread starter Thread starter NM
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
What's the method to get it submerged. It there some kind of a pickup tool?

If it's a small battery, like a phone, for some airlines, flight attendants are instructed to pick it up with ice tongs and put it in their bucket of ice. The ice/water will cool the fire (removing heat is one method of stopping a fire, as per the "fire tetrahedron," as it isn't possible to remove fuel or interrupt the chemical reaction in most battery fires). Legacy airlines generally have a metal bucket of ice in the flight attendants' trolley, so it's actually fairly useful in that it's on wheels, already loaded with ice, so can quickly be brought to the location of the burning phone. Even there is not enough ice or water in the trolley, placing the burning phone in the metal container can be useful as it will allow the battery to "burn itself out" without catching adjacent materials on fire.

The ability to fight a battery fire like this is the key reason that such electronics are allowed in the cabin and not in checked luggage. But I am not sure what the level of compliance or detection is , do checked baggage x-ray operators look for batteries for example?
 
The ability to fight a battery fire like this is the key reason that such electronics are allowed in the cabin and not in checked luggage. But I am not sure what the level of compliance or detection is , do checked baggage x-ray operators look for batteries for example?

No recent experience, but a few years back was at DMK airport (when is was still called (BKK) and heard my name being paged.

Went to investigate and was escorted to a baggage area and asked to open my previously checked luggage. They search the bag and found my nasal hair trimmer with a single AA battery and removed the battery and disposed of it and then let me repack my bag and let me return to the lounge.
 
There is land/ice in Antartica, but not too many runways as we think of them. Yes, certainly possible though, and better than the sea.
Thanks - when I looked at it, most suitable (?) "ice fields" seem to be closer to Cape Town but less so mid-way or closer to Western Australia. So, a major "issue" with the aircraft in that area is probably not a good thing then.
 
I don't know all the details but I've seen reports of U.S. firefighters having to resort to digging a big hole and filling it with water and then submerging Tesla's in it for up to a week. A lot of fire departments in the U.S. are now making stainless steel boxes to put escooters in when they catch fire and then fill with water. They have tried a lot of other extinguishing methods without success - foam, dry powder, CO2, even some of the exotic methods like hydrochem used for high pressure flammable liquid fires don't work. I haven't heard of any results with burying it with sand yet - that is one of the methods that often work with combustible metals that react with water when ignited.
Did some asking around amongst some firefighting friends in the U.S. and one of them pointed me to this product - LIBIK - New Innovations in Fire and Smoke Suppression - CellBlock FCS

Already in use with Virgin Atlantic apparently and being tested by other airlines
 
If it's a small battery, like a phone, for some airlines, flight attendants are instructed to pick it up with ice tongs and put it in their bucket of ice. The ice/water will cool the fire (removing heat is one method of stopping a fire, as per the "fire tetrahedron," as it isn't possible to remove fuel or interrupt the chemical reaction in most battery fires). Legacy airlines generally have a metal bucket of ice in the flight attendants' trolley, so it's actually fairly useful in that it's on wheels, already loaded with ice, so can quickly be brought to the location of the burning phone. Even there is not enough ice or water in the trolley, placing the burning phone in the metal container can be useful as it will allow the battery to "burn itself out" without catching adjacent materials on fire.

The ability to fight a battery fire like this is the key reason that such electronics are allowed in the cabin and not in checked luggage. But I am not sure what the level of compliance or detection is , do checked baggage x-ray operators look for batteries for example?

A few years ago at MEL, QF baggage called my colleague to come collect his power tool batteries he had in his checked bag.
 
Yeti was Left wing down:

So to counteract/recover it would be (assuming enough altitude)
1)Nose down
2)Increase power

3)would right rudder help? - increase airspeed over left wing?
I think these are solid suggestions, and would have been perhaps doable, if the initial stall happened a few thousand feet above when they hit problems. But when the left wing stalled, they suddenly had no ability to have any control of the airframe. Thus notions such as "nose down" or "right rudder" are meaningless.
 
Thus notions such as "nose down" or "right rudder" are meaningless.
My post and question is a subsequent to a similar one I asked in the Yeti thread, and I decided to put this one here because I did not want it to be specifically related to Yeti.
My question is purely for understanding aircraft aerodynamics - particularly with the aerodynamics of a right rudder input in a situation of a left wing down stall.

And i said "assuming enough altitude" - but that is not why I asked the question.

Suggest go look at my initial question over at Yeti to get the context
 
Last edited:
My post and question is a subsequent to a similar one I asked in the Yeti thread, and I decided to put this one here because I did not want it to be specifically related to Yeti.
My question is purely for understanding aircraft aerodynamics - particularly with the aerodynamics of a right rudder input in a situation of a left wing down stall.

(and as i said "assuming enough altitude" - but that is not why I asked the question)

Suggest go look at my initial question over at Yeti
Quickstatus, I get your question. A stall at almost ground level is essentially an impossible thing to recover from. Once that wing stalls, essentially no inputs to any control surfaces have any effect.
 
I get your question
No that is not the question. As his is specifically an "Ask the Pilot "thread, can we please let one of the pilots answer the question - which is about right rudder input. If you are a pilot, i would value your input regarding right rudder input - again assuming enough altitude.
Again Purely an aerodynamic question.

Ill make it a very clear question so there is no doubt: What does a right rudder input do in a left wing down stall?. does it increase airspeed over the left wing?
 
Last edited:
No that is not the question. Can we please let one of the pilots answer the question - which is about right rudder input.
Purely an aerodynamic question.

This is specifically an "Ask the Pilot "thread.
Agreed, let one one of the pilots answer. they will no doubt answer the same, that when a wing stalls, you have bucklies of having control inputs. But i respect that you want to hear that from an actual pilot, and I am not.
 
[Mod hat]

This seems a good time to remind people of Post #1 in this thread.

"As this is an "ask the pilot" thread, we ask that non-pilot members refrain from answering questions that have been directed to pilots until the pilots members have had a good opportunity to answer the question (i.e. at least 7 days). Posts contrary to this request or discussions that get too far off topic may be removed or moved to a more appropriate thread or forum so we can retain order and respect in this thread." [/Mod Hat]
 
Last edited:
No that is not the question. As his is specifically an "Ask the Pilot "thread, can we please let one of the pilots answer the question - which is about right rudder input. If you are a pilot, i would value your input regarding right rudder input - again assuming enough altitude.
Again Purely an aerodynamic question.

Ill make it a very clear question so there is no doubt: What does a right rudder input do in a left wing down stall?. does it increase airspeed over the left wing?
I am sure someone will answer with a little more detail but suffice to say that the basic premise is correct. The rudder will help but how much it will help depends upon a whole host of variables and can get into some quite complex aerodynamics.

Airliners are not designed for the control surfaces to be able to make large and rapid responses. ie they are very stable and a consequence of that they have a relatively slow rate of response to control inputs. At the other end of the spectrum are high performance aircraft (fighters) that are far less stable and (again) as a consequence are very responsive to control inputs.

That's the very abridged version of potentially a long answer.
 
So to counteract/recover it would be (assuming enough altitude)
1)Nose down
2)Increase power

3)would right rudder help? - increase airspeed over left wing?
To recover from a stall, all you have to do is reduce the angle of attack. To do that, you need nose down control input. Remember, by nose down, I mean towards the aircraft floor, not towards the centre of the earth. You're going to need power, but perhaps not immediately. It will have it's own effects on pitch (though it would be nose down in an ATR and might help the AoA reduction) but the change in airflow may not be helpful. So, generally power after you've got wings level.

I can see where you're going with the rudder, and it may have helped stop the wing drop in the first place, but remember that lots of rudder at stall entry is how we initiate spins.
I think these are solid suggestions, and would have been perhaps doable, if the initial stall happened a few thousand feet above when they hit problems. But when the left wing stalled, they suddenly had no ability to have any control of the airframe. Thus notions such as "nose down" or "right rudder" are meaningless.
No, they couldn't control the aircraft with what they were doing. Regaining control would have taken some time and altitude, but if the ground hadn't intervened, there's no reason that they couldn't have done so. Nose down and right rudder mean exactly what they always do. These are referenced from the coughpit floor. If I'm flying inverted I'll still be using a nose down control input to hold the nose up!

Quickstatus, I get your question. A stall at almost ground level is essentially an impossible thing to recover from. Once that wing stalls, essentially no inputs to any control surfaces have any effect.
Not at all. Rudder and elevator remain effective. The aircraft does not convert itself into a rock. Ailerons have adverse behaviour which is why trainees are taught not to use them, but other forms of roll control may remain totally effective. Spoilers behave normally for roll control post stall.

We used to practice stall recoveries in the A380 sim in direct law (i.e. none of the protections) with one of the setups being a mishandled turn on to finals. You'd get close to the ground, but it was recoverable. It wasn't prone to wing dropping though.
What does a right rudder input do in a left wing down stall?. does it increase airspeed over the left wing?
Marginally, yes. Whilst reducing it slightly on the other side, which will give you a reduction in the roll. What you're looking at here is pretty much a spin entry. Given enough altitude, it may have stabilised into a spin, in which case the control inputs for recovery would have been full nose down elevator, full right rudder, and full left aileron.

Rudder has even more effect on aircraft with swept wings, as any rudder input will effectively decrease the sweep on one wing whilst increasing it on the other.
Agreed, let one one of the pilots answer. they will no doubt answer the same, that when a wing stalls, you have bucklies of having control inputs. But i respect that you want to hear that from an actual pilot, and I am not.
A stall is simply an aircraft being taken beyond it's stalling angle of attack. That can be done at almost any speed by pulling a bit of G. Steepen up that turn because you've misjudged the turn on to finals, and you can find the stall speed rising rapidly. At 45º of bank, it will be 20% faster. Conversely, an aircraft can be flown well below its 1G stall speed, by being pushed below 1G. What's the stall speed at 0G?
 
Last edited:
To recover from a stall, all you have to do is reduce the angle of attack. To do that, you need nose down control input. Remember, by nose down, I mean towards the aircraft floor, not towards the centre of the earth. You're going to need power, but perhaps not immediately. It will have it's own effects on pitch (though it would be nose down in an ATR and might help the AoA reduction) but the change in airflow may not be helpful. So, generally power after you've got wings level.

I can see where you're going with the rudder, and it may have helped stop the wing drop in the first place, but remember that lots of rudder at stall entry is how we initiate spins.

No, they couldn't control the aircraft with what they were doing. Regaining control would have taken some time and altitude, but if the ground hadn't intervened, there's no reason that they couldn't have done so. Nose down and right rudder mean exactly what they always do. These are referenced from the coughpit floor. If I'm flying inverted I'll still be using a nose down control input to hold the nose up!


Not at all. Rudder and elevator remain effective. The aircraft does not convert itself into a rock. Ailerons have adverse behaviour which is why trainees are taught not to use them, but other forms of roll control may remain totally effective. Spoilers behave normally for roll control post stall.

We used to practice stall recoveries in the A380 sim in direct law (i.e. none of the protections) with one of the setups being a mishandled turn on to finals. You'd get close to the ground, but it was recoverable. It wasn't prone to wing dropping though.

Marginally, yes. Whilst reducing it slightly on the other side, which will give you a reduction in the roll. What you're looking at here is pretty much a spin entry. Given enough altitude, it may have stabilised into a spin, in which case the control inputs for recovery would have been full nose down elevator, full right rudder, and full left aileron.

Rudder has even more effect on aircraft with swept wings, as any rudder input will effectively decrease the sweep on one wing whilst increasing it on the other.

A stall is simply an aircraft being taken beyond it's stalling angle of attack. That can be done at almost any speed by pulling a bit of G. Steepen up that turn because you've misjudged the turn on to finals, and you can find the stall speed rising rapidly. At 47º of bank, it will be 30% faster. Conversely, an aircraft can be flown well below its 1G stall speed, by being pushed below 1G. What's the stall speed at 0G?
But jb747, they stalled at just a few feet above ground. Once this happened , they were stuffed. Or do you disagree?
 
But jb747, they stalled at just a few feet above ground. Once this happened , they were stuffed. Or do you disagree?
A stall at low level may be recoverable. It will take a couple of hundred feet, but keep it wings level, full power, and you have chance of flying away. The issue is that the wing dropped. Once that happened, the altitude required to fix increased dramatically.

What we have here is a departure from controlled flight (or just a departure). That takes time to fix. Stalls are basic items that students with only a few hours do solo. Most will never see a proper "departure".
There is no stall speed at 0 g.
Because the airfoil does not need to generate lift at 0g?
Food for thought perhaps. No induced drag either.
 
Last edited:
Food for thought perhaps
Actually at 0g, the airfoil is not generating lift. That must mean the AoA is zero. (Symmetrical airfoil??) When AoA is zero, the airfoil is always below the stalling AoA and cannot stall.

Induced drag is therefore zero because the airfoil is not generating lift at 0g
 
Read our AFF credit card guides and start earning more points now.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

jb,

this stall, as per the footage, occurred at extremely low level. A departure from controlled flight. No time to recover from. The basics of their misfortune were decided in advance.
 

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Staff online

  • NM
    Enthusiast
Back
Top