Practicing Stalls in Mooneys (Poll)

[Alan Fox]

Opposite rudder to the FLOOR , yoke full forward and  level , power to idle , wait.......It took at least  a full spin for the plane to start to "fly"  again , and it was a slow recovery ....

[201er]

Bet that's good enough a reason to avoid stalls.

[johnggreen]

Do you push forward or simply release the back pressure? How does the trim condition affect this?

201er,

 

Whether it be a Mooney or other different aircraft, I would be moving the elevator past neutral to some degree.  Your real focus should be on keeping the rudders neutral.  You can be assured of this by making sure that you have pressure on both rudders and neutralizing them with even pressure.  Referring to N74795 admonition, I understand what he is saying, but DO NOT apply full rudder during the break.  Even if you have done so in the proper direction, i.e., opposite the break, if the wing is stalled, it will simply snap the other direction and enter a stall with the opposite rotation.  It is amazingly easy, even in an aerobatic aircraft, while recovering from a spin to simply go from a spin in one direction to a spin in the other.

 

Recover from a stall with a coordinated rudder, meaning a centered ball.  This can usually be accomplished with neutral rudder.

 

Remember.  No REMEMBER!! That it takes two things to spin an aircraft, a stalled wing and yaw (uncoordinated rudder).  Without those two elements, you may fall out of the sky, but you will not spin.

 

Also remember PARE.  POWER-off, AILERONS-neutral, RUDDER-opposite to rotation, ELEVATOR-forward to break stall.  Power off is a biggie.  Pull that sucker to the stop or the rest of your inputs may do nothing.

 

If, Heaven forbid, you are ever in an inadvertent spin, merely moving the elevator forward may only produce an accelerated rotation.  Push the yoke forward and break the stall.

 

Jgreen

[WardHolbrook]

You can't fly a Mooney like you do a Cessna.  Well, you can, only it will eventually kill you.  The Mooney wing reacts rather abruptly from the effects of a deep stall.  If it is uncoordinated in the least during a deep stall, it will make an instantaneous roll toward a spin condition.  If the the pilot does not make the correct control inputs it will enter a spin.  If this occurs at pattern altitude, recovery is not possible.

 

Every Mooney pilot should read the NTSB report on the accident that killed Joel Smith in Texas a few years ago.  Who was Joel Smith?  He was the Mooney test pilot that probably signed off the initial flight of 90% of the Mooneys owned by the members of this site.  No, Joel was not the pilot, he was in the right seat, but the scenario is the classic example of a pattern altitude stall/spin accident.

 

We can talk about practicing stalls, which you should, and getting spin training, which you should, but the most important thing is to recognize the flight attitudes that can get you to the point of "no return".  I have probably done a thousand spins in my flying hours, upright, inverted, accelerated, flat, etc. in Aeronca Champs, Pitts Specials, Waco's biplanes, Decathlons, Stearmans, and Cessna 172's to name a few.  That doesn't make me an expert, but it does make me aware.  Aware that I don't want to spin a Mooney from any altitude and especially from pattern altitude.

 

In the last 25 fatal Mooney accidents, 5 were stall/spin.  It is not an academic subject.  It happens.

 

The two characteristics that I have observed and will share here about stalling Mooneys is this.  From a deep stall, the Mooney wing requires a sharp pitch down to recover.   A pitch down that will fill the wind screen with mother earth which is a sight that most pilots are not used to seeing.  Secondly, after the pitch down, if you try to recover too soon, you will enter a secondary stall that is ALWAYS a deep stall and the next break will be a close relative of violent and almost surely kick over into a spin entry.

 

Finally, I will leave you with this observation.  Most "instructors" don't know squat about spinning an airplane.  As previously pointed out, they did at least one to get their rating and that's probably it.

 

The Mooney is a very good and stable airplane, and predictable.  Just know its flying characteristics and don't monkey with the monkey.

 

Jgreen 

Amen, plus one, mega dittos,..

 

We recently sent every pilot in our flight department through this training.

 http://cpaviation.com/emergency-maneuver-and-aerobatics-training/

 

It's something that every fixed-wing pilot should do. You will not learn everything you need to know about flying from the Private Pilot PTS. These types of courses are readily available. Find one near you and step out of your comfort zone, it will be money well spent. 

[johnggreen]

Bet that's good enough a reason to avoid stalls.

Yes, but the stall that will kill you will happen when you are distracted and pull the aircraft into a stall/spin configuration without being aware of it.  I strongly encourage you to go to an aerobatic instructor and do some spins; even an hour or two will make a huge difference.  If nothing else, you will learn just how disorienting the entry to a stall can be, usually a roll of at least 120 degrees, and just how much you will have to get the nose down to recover, BEFORE PULLING BACK ON THE YOKE.

 

Non-aerobatic pilots are conditioned to, whenever they get in trouble, pulling the yoke back to avoid the ground and over speeding.  If you are trying to recover from a deep stall or from an upset when you are inverted, pulling back on the yoke will kill you almost everytime.

 

Oh, yea, learning what it feels like to "hang from the belts" is quite an eye opener too.

 

Jgreen

[201er]

I've done spins in cubs, gliders, and cessnas. But they're easy to get out of. Since we're not going to practice spins in our Mooneys, why bother practicing actual stalls then?

 

One piece of advice I heard about recovering from a spin is to pray. By taking your hands off the yoke and putting them together, it gives the plane a chance to recover instead of tugging back on the yoke. This seems to hold true in trainers but somehow I doubt this will work in a Mooney? Sounds like you have to be very proactive at spin recover or it will spin into the ground?

 

 

Yes, but the stall that will kill you will happen when you are distracted and pull the aircraft into a stall/spin configuration without being aware of it.

At that point, isn't it already too late? From what I understand, you'll lose a minimum of 1000ft and more likely 2000+ spinning a Mooney. We don't bother flying close to stall speed any time except in the pattern but that's the one time you're too close to the ground to have a prayer at recovering. So isn't it pretty much life and death, not to allow it to happen in the first place rather than to know how to recover?

 

To me it sounds like the only time knowing how to do spin recovery can be life saving is when you intentionally go practicing stalls and accidentally let one develop into a spin. This is why my personal philosophy has been to avoid the stall in the first place and then there's no need to worry about spin recovery.

[johnggreen]

Gene Beggs, a well known aerobatics competitor/instructor and air show performer actually pioneered the Beggs spin recovery technique.  It was to simply pull power and take your hands off the yoke/stick, push opposite rudder (the one that gives resistance) and when it stops turning, neutralize rudder and pull out.

 

I spoke with Gene many years ago when I first started aerobatics in earnest.  He had tried the maneuver on scores of airplanes and had not found one on which it didn't work.  Whether he tried it on a Mooney, I don't know.  Personally, I'm not going to try.

 

201er, you have every right to be apprehensive about stalls, but I think you might be a little too much so.  Get ten hours of spin training and I think you will be about as prepared as you need to be.  I hate I sold the Decathlon or I'd invite you down for a free intro.  That is not to say that I consider myself an aerobatics instructor.  There are some really good ones out there.

 

Personally, I always try to err on the conservative side.  No matter what the airplane, I never bank more than 30 degrees in the pattern and never slow to final approach speed until, uh, final approach.  And don't ever be too proud to simply go around and try again.

 

Jgreen

[Cruiser]

I've done spins in cubs, gliders, and cessnas. But they're easy to get out of. Since we're not going to practice spins in our Mooneys, why bother practicing actual stalls then?

 

One piece of advice I heard about recovering from a spin is to pray. By taking your hands off the yoke and putting them together, it gives the plane a chance to recover instead of tugging back on the yoke. This seems to hold true in trainers but somehow I doubt this will work in a Mooney? Sounds like you have to be very proactive at spin recover or it will spin into the ground?

 

 

At that point, isn't it already too late? From what I understand, you'll lose a minimum of 1000ft and more likely 2000+ spinning a Mooney. We don't bother flying close to stall speed any time except in the pattern but that's the one time you're too close to the ground to have a prayer at recovering. So isn't it pretty much life and death, not to allow it to happen in the first place rather than to know how to recover?

 

To me it sounds like the only time knowing how to do spin recovery can be life saving is when you intentionally go practicing stalls and accidentally let one develop into a spin. This is why my personal philosophy has been to avoid the stall in the first place and then there's no need to worry about spin recovery.

and this I believe is why the FAA and most CFIs have gotten away from including spin training for basic PPL. 

 

I agree that everyone should be better prepared to prevent spins than to recover from them.

[aviatoreb]

I am hearing here from the more experienced spinners that the Mooney is not well behaved like a 172 and would more easily inadvertently enter a spin if a deep stall and a poor job keeping the ball centered.  I have heard that previously but it is a reminder why I am reading this thread in detail.  I do still believe that stall training and currency is important if nothing else to learn the feel and look of stall onset so that recovery may be earlier if it is inadvertent and also to keep the concept of this scenario closer to the forefront of our working mind to avoid inadvertently.

 

Here is my question for the more experienced folks.  I am not surprised that a Mooney may not be well behaved stall/spin wise like a 172. Is this a Mooney thing or can the same thing be said of any high performance single - Bonanza, Cirrus, etc.  And even more high performance - the corporate twins and so forth.

[WardHolbrook]

I am hearing here from the more experienced spinners that the Mooney is not well behaved like a 172 and would more easily inadvertently enter a spin if a deep stall and a poor job keeping the ball centered.  I have heard that previously but it is a reminder why I am reading this thread in detail.  I do still believe that stall training and currency is important if nothing else to learn the feel and look of stall onset so that recovery may be earlier if it is inadvertent and also to keep the concept of this scenario closer to the forefront of our working mind to avoid inadvertently.

 

Here is my question for the more experienced folks.  I am not surprised that a Mooney may not be well behaved stall/spin wise like a 172. Is this a Mooney thing or can the same thing be said of any high performance single - Bonanza, Cirrus, etc.  And even more high performance - the corporate twins and so forth.

It all depends upon the airplane. I used to own a glider that had a very short notation cautioning against uncoordinated stalls. It was a single-seater so on my first flight I was getting a feel for it and did a few stalls. I allowed myself to get a bit too sloppy on one of them and I let the yaw string get a little off center at the break. The next thing I knew I was hanging upside-down by my straps in a spin. That was the last time I allowed myself to get sloppy in that particular glider. Conventional twins have a few additional considerations when it comes to stalls and spins. Ideally, you want a twin's stall speed to be higher than its Vmc. Also, it you get one into a spin the rotational mass out of the wings can make spin recovery difficult or impossible. When it comes to jets, I've flown some that didn't even have a stall warning system, there was enough aerodynamic warning (airframe buffet) that one wasn't necessary and it had the most impeccable manners if you took it to the break. One of the things that we would demonstrate was holding the yoke all the way in our gut and driving the airplane around fully stalled. Then on the other hand, there was the Lear. Those puppies have stick shakers and stick pushers. That's Mother Nature's way of telling you not to get anywhere near a stall in one of those. As you approached a stall the stick shaker goes off to let you know it's time to start paying attention and do something about it. If you ignore the shaker, the stick pusher will activate and push the yoke forward for you. You don't really want to stall a Lear and heaven help you if you get one in a spin. I'm sure it would be unrecoverable with those tip tanks.

 

There's no reason to fear aircraft that have those "less than friendly" stall or spin characteristics, you just have to respect the aircraft and its limitations. I can't recommend strongly enough the need to obtain some basic spin and aerobatic training. It is money well spent.   

[carusoam]

EB,

I would think the twin with the critical engine out flips on it's back faster than a mooney can spin. These are both situations to be avoided at low altitudes...

Best regards,

-a-

[Alan Fox]

Mike the Bonanza stalls very docile , Its definitely a Mooney thing....I don't fear the Bonanza stall as I do the Mooney , that being said , Im not practicing stalls in the Bo either....

[jetdriven]

Ward that reminds me about the CRJ, it has a computer designed supercritical wing that makes a laminar flow Mooney seem like a Cub. It has a stick shaker and stick pusher.  Believe it or not we (not ME)  actually stalled a few at the last regional airline I worked at and it was not pretty. Further, some guys were fooling around in a CRJ-200 over Missouri and stalled the airplane so deeply that Canadair actually was surprised, they had not stalled it that deeply even during test flights.  Y'all be careful, you hear?

[mikefox]

Stalls in the Mooney should not be feared.  The Mooney does give a bit less warning before the stall break, and the stall break is a bit more dramatic than some other aircraft, but otherwise the stall characteristics are conventional.  Stay coordinated, and do not try to pick up a wing with aileron - that just adds to the yaw - the aerobatic folks call it "pro-spin" aileron.  

 

I have always found that a brisk forward movement of the yoke will unload the wings (reduce the angle of attack) and get the plane flying again.  

 

Of course, stalls should be practiced at sufficiently high altitude that a poor recovery never makes one nervous about the ground!

[WardHolbrook]

Ward that reminds me about the CRJ, it has a computer designed supercritical wing that makes a laminar flow Mooney seem like a Cub. It has a stick shaker and stick pusher.  Believe it or not we (not ME)  actually stalled a few at the last regional airline I worked at and it was not pretty. Further, some guys were fooling around in a CRJ-200 over Missouri and stalled the airplane so deeply that Canadair actually was surprised, they had not stalled it that deeply even during test flights.  Y'all be careful, you hear?

In the Lears, a complete stall series was required after certain inspections. The factory provided pilots to do the stalls. Stalling a Lear was not something for mere mortals. 

[midlifeflyer]

and this I believe is why the FAA and most CFIs have gotten away from including spin training for basic PPL. 

 

 

 

The history of the FAA and spin training indicates the reason was a high fatality rate during spin training. This is from the commentary to the 1991 FAR amendment that brought airplane spin training back - but only for CFIs:

 

==============================

The spin, a controlled or uncontrolled maneuver or performance in which the glider or airplane descends in a helical path while flying at an angle of attack greater than the angle of maximum lift, was a required training maneuver for pilot certification until 1949. It was deleted from the pilot certification requirements based on the high number of fatal stall and spin accidents, most of which occurred during training. 

============================== 

[johnggreen]

In response to some of the above, and Ward, add your comments freely PLEASE..

 

Remember my first post on this thread?  That you can fly a Mooney like a Cessna, only it will kill you.  There are dramatic differences in the way different GA aircraft behave "at the edge of the envelope".  That is, or should be, the point I am trying to make.  Most of us learn to fly in Cessnas or the Cherokee derivatives.  They are all puppies in the air, especially the Cessna.  I rarely take on students, but recently, I did, as sort of a special favor.  The student, a 50ish old gentleman had been made a nervous wreck by his first instructor.  After 39 hours of dual, he was not ready to solo.  The first thing that I had to teach him was that, properly trimmed and powered, the airplane would fly itself.  We went up and I made him put that 172 in the most extreme attitudes, then MADE him turn loose of the yoke.  What happened?  Nothing.  The Cessna just simply went back to flying.  At times, we would do this from a 40 degree pitch up in a 40 degree bank.  Before he soloed, I was determined to make him abuse the controls to the point that the 172 would spin.  He is a large man, over 300# so we were well forward CG.  It was almost impossible to make the aircraft enter an unintentional spin.  In fact, the flight configuration from which we finally kicked over could hardly be called unintentional.  We were full power, 30 degree bank, yoke full back, as in an exaggerated departure stall. Finally, I told him to kick full opposite rudder and FINALLY, she broke.  I talked him through the recovery and it was hardly even a stall/spin event.

 

So, what I'm saying is: That's the problem.  You learn in a bullet proof airplane like the 172 and you get complacent.

 

Now, if I may, let me reference Mikefox's comment.  "Stalls in a Mooney should not be feared."  I agree to a point.  Onset stalls should not be feared.  Deep stalls and secondary stalls should be feared.  I fear them.  Understand, a secondary stall is a deep stall.  What is a deep stall?  I think I should take the time to define that, but I can't right now. Tonight I will.  Ward and others who understand these concepts might wish to give their interpretation.

 

You all have a good, safe, productive day and we will talk more tonight.,

 

Jgreen

[Hank]

This is what Don Kaye has posted on his website:

 

http://www.donkaye.com/donkaye.com/Inadvertent_Spins_in_a_Mooney.html

 

Stay coordinated, recover at the break, no problem. Wait a little too long, though, and watch out! Read what's in your Owner's Manual/POH; the stall discussion in mine is longer than the entire "Section V:  Emergencies" and the spin discussion [mostly how to recover] is even longer.

 

No, I'm not afraid of stalls in my Mooney. I've done them in training, I've done them in BFRs, I've done them on my Instrument checkride. But I don't go out and do them for fun. My Owner's Manual has this to say about stall practice:

 

It is important to remember that while stalls are a permissable maneuver; [sic] they should not be practiced to learn how to stall the airplane but, rather, to learn how to recognize an incipient stall and to take prompt corrective action before the aircraft completely stalls.

 

This is good advice.

[WardHolbrook]

Since you asked me to chime in I will, but you said pretty much everything that needed to be said. I'll just add a few random thoughts...

 

In response to some of the above, and Ward, add your comments freely PLEASE..

 

Remember my first post on this thread?  That you can fly a Mooney like a Cessna, only it will kill you. There are dramatic differences in the way different GA aircraft behave "at the edge of the envelope".  That is, or should be, the point I am trying to make.

 

When I first checked out in a Mooney, I was a 17 year old PP with around 100 hours TT. The instructor told me that "fat wing" Cessnas and Pipers flew with angle of attack and "thin wing" Mooneys needed speed. Although that's not exactly correct and I cringe when I hear stuff like that, it gave me what I needed to know at the time.

 

Most of us learn to fly in Cessnas or the Cherokee derivatives. They are all puppies in the air, especially the Cessna. I rarely take on students, but recently, I did, as sort of a special favor. The student, a 50ish old gentleman had been made a nervous wreck by his first instructor.  After 39 hours of dual, he was not ready to solo.  The first thing that I had to teach him was that, properly trimmed and powered, the airplane would fly itself.  We went up and I made him put that 172 in the most extreme attitudes, then MADE him turn loose of the yoke.  What happened?  Nothing.  The Cessna just simply went back to flying.  At times, we would do this from a 40 degree pitch up in a 40 degree bank.  Before he soloed, I was determined to make him abuse the controls to the point that the 172 would spin.  He is a large man, over 300# so we were well forward CG.  It was almost impossible to make the aircraft enter an unintentional spin.  In fact, the flight configuration from which we finally kicked over could hardly be called unintentional.  We were full power, 30 degree bank, yoke full back, as in an exaggerated departure stall. Finally, I told him to kick full opposite rudder and FINALLY, she broke.  I talked him through the recovery and it was hardly even a stall/spin event. So, what I'm saying is: That's the problem.  You learn in a bullet proof airplane like the 172 and you get complacent.

 

Over the years "they" have made flying simple so more people could get involved. Although not the first, Cessna came up with "Land-O-Matic" (tricycle) landing gear in the mid-1950's and it's been pretty much the standard ever since. Both Cessna and Piper went to work making airplanes that were easier to fly, safer and more economical... to the point that they became pretty poor trainers - because they don't require the newbie to REALLY learn some very basic skills like what you're feet are really for and what adverse aileron yaw really does. Unfortunately there are a lot of instructors that lack any meaningful experience in "high demand" airplanes and so it goes... Couple all this with the mindset that many pilots have about initial and recurrent training (ie What's the very minimum I have to do to complete the requirements for the checkride? and "Let's make this BFR quick, I've got important things to do.")  and you end up with both students and instructors that walk away from basic maneuvers "slightly shaken". 

 

Now, if I may, let me reference Mikefox's comment.  "Stalls in a Mooney should not be feared."  I agree to a point.  Onset stalls should not be feared.  Deep stalls and secondary stalls should be feared.  I fear them.  Understand, a secondary stall is a deep stall.  What is a deep stall?  I think I should take the time to define that, but I can't right now. Tonight I will.  Ward and others who understand these concepts might wish to give their interpretation.

 

Spot on and so it Mikefox's comment about training. We recently sent all 6 of our company's pilots through the EMT (Emergency Maneuvers Training) and Basic Aerobatics course at CP Aviation. For a couple of us it was a nice refresher and a chance to knock some of the rust off. For the rest of the guys, it was a real eye-opener. They finally had to learn what their feet were for and a few other things like what to do it they got rolled near inverted in a wake turbulence encounter. They also did stalls and spins, lots of stalls and spins, to the point that they got really good at knowing how to avoid them. The point of EMT courses isn't to make you a skilled aerobatic pilot, it's to try to fill in the some of the blanks in the training that most guys end up getting these days. It's well worth the money.

 

You all have a good, safe, productive day and we will talk more tonight.,

 

Jgreen

 

Finally, one last thought...

The assumption has to be made that your airplane is properly rigged and that it has all of the required stall strips. If your airplane is behaving poorly AND you're using the proper techniques and inputs it's time to get the airplane into the shop to be checked. But don't expect that wing to ever be as docile as that 172 or Cherokee that you learned to fly in. It's not that kind of wing. 

[bumper]

This is what Don Kaye has posted on his website:

 

http://www.donkaye.com/donkaye.com/Inadvertent_Spins_in_a_Mooney.html

Worth reading.

 

Only thing I would take mild issue with is Don's suggestion that a Mooneys don't "snap" like a Cessna in a cross controlled stall. That was not my experience of what happened when I stalled my 201 during a MCA left turn. Instructor wanted to hear the stall warning horn on steady during the turn. Unbeknownst to me, the stall vane switch was adjusted too close to the stall. Plane was clean, I was not coordinated, holding left rudder and right aileron to keep from over banking in the 30 degree turn. There was absolutely no pre-stall buffet, no warning at all. The plane snap rolled to the right, inverted, and the nose fell through to vertical straight down and we were spinning all in one very quick motion. Fortunately, I was at 3.5K when this happened. Left an indelible mark on my little soul, that did . . . and a clear understanding that I do not want to get slow and uncoordinated in a Mooney ever again. I also adjusted that vane switch to 4-5 knots above the stall.

[201er]

^ Again, it's because of stories like this and many others like it that I avoid practicing stalls in my Mooney. Others keep saying get spin instruction but when it's a different plane it's different. I don't see value in practicing stalls in Mooney because it's the most likely way to get yourself in a spin or even an unrecoverable deep stall. Why chance it? I know how to recover stalls and avoid stalls. Why take the risk by practicing them in Mooney?

[Marauder]

Mike -- when we met I shared part of my Mooney spin experience with you and Alan. I agree with many of the comments here, especially Ward's & John's comments that resonated with me. I went through a 141 school for my private, back when stall/spin training was required to a much deeper level and before the FAA started using the word "awareness". After my private, I rented a bunch of different planes to find out more about them and to determine what suited my mission -- weekend vacations with some distance. A person at work owned a J and after riding with him, I settled on the Mooney. Before I bought my F model I checked with insurance companies and they all required dual in a Mooney before they would insure me. I signed up with the only local school that had a Mooney and went on to fly with a CFI in a J model. After a couple of familiarity flights, the CFI told me he wanted to demonstrate a Mooney stall. He played around with the power to set up a power off stall and then started pulling back on the yoke. I noticed the slip indicator was starting to slide out but didn't say anything (and to this day because of that, it is something I incorporate into my scan -- especailly when in the pattern). There was a very short buffet and then all hell broke loose. The left wing dropped sharply and in what felt like a fraction of a second, we were entering a spin. We are all told to decide who will be PIC and stick with it. But when you are faced with one of those "I'm gonna die" moments, you react. Although the instructor had begun pushing forward on the yoke, I had to force the ailerons neutral since he was trying to correct with them. And we both ended up stomping on the correct rudder. We were very fortunate that day. Not because of our superior skills, because the moron was demonstrating stalls in a Mooney at 2000 feet AGL and because we ended up flying low enough to be a weed whacker by the time we were done. I learned a few valuable lessons on that flight. One being, don't trust a CFI (sorry CFIs) to know more than you do. I found out later that the CFI who was instructing me only had 20 some hours in the Mooney he was instructing me in. The rest of his complex time was in an Arrow. The unfortunate outcome of all this was an unhealthy fear of stalls in my Mooney. In fact the next couple of BFRs I did in Cessnas and not in my own Mooney. Over the past 15 years, the unhealthy fear has migrated to a healthy respect. In part because I only do BFRs with CFIs who have Mooney experience. And in part because they have the same healthy respect I do.

[fantom]

I was trained to fly by the Air Force, and I've both rolled and stalled a Mooney. I've got only three words for you junior birdmen:

 

_{^{Don't try it!}}

[Dave Marten]

My $0.02.  To be proficient in your plane you should be able to execute all maneuvers required by the PP Standard or the type standard.  But for a single engine piston, I firmly believe you should be competent in stall recovery.  

 

If you have not, you need to get some training with a CFI who is well versed in Mooneys.  You should do some unusual attitude recovery work with him/her.  Knowing your planes envelope will help you avoid the bad areas as well as recover if you get somewhere you should not ordinarily be.  

 Well said.

[scottfromiowa]

Every pilot that has ever died in an accidental stall/spin probably thought the same way... right up until that wing unexpectedly dropped, and the earth came rushing up to meet them. This kind of arrogance reveals the real maroon.

Yes, that arrogant thrill seeker installed an aural stall warning and cheats death on a daily basis...

Super assessment Dave....