Please excuse my posting if this has already been answered....RSR quoted: " the aerodynamic forces of the 800 are nearly perfectly simulated on the NGX." I assume from that being said that the 800NGX will exhibit the actual stall characteristics of the 800 NG, or is there a limitation to this because of FSX programming? jen noulet

Please excuse my posting if this has already been answered....RSR quoted: " the aerodynamic forces of the 800 are nearly perfectly simulated on the NGX." I assume from that being said that the 800NGX will exhibit the actual stall characteristics of the 800 NG, or is there a limitation to this because of FSX programming? jen noulet

Who ever intentionally stalled a 737 to find out? HeheJackColwill

Is there even a way for a tech team to calculate the stalled characteristics of an airfoil? I'm not sure those strings they attach to the wings of test planes, to get airflow data, work right when no airflow is present.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8Soy6C9Ynw

Is there even a way for a tech team to calculate the stalled characteristics of an airfoil?

Yes. It is called the lift equation.http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/lifteq.htmlThe bigger question is has PMDG got around the apparent FSX limitation of constant stall alpha across the altitude range?? IRL as altitude increases, the stall alpha decreases (e.g. sea level stall alpha is +13 degrees, at 35000 ft +6 degrees).Have PMDG also managed to model accelerated stalls? If so beware turbulence on that turn to final, and respect V_MA. :( Best regards,Robin.

Who ever intentionally stalled a 737 to find out? HeheJackColwill

I did it in the 700NG simulator at an Alteon facility located at the Atlanta Int'l airport. I was curious if you would be able to get the same flight characteristics.Regards,jen noulet

bump! I haven't used this in quite awhile..Sorry for the bump..Regards to all,jen noulet

Aerodynamics down in that 'corner of the envelope' are pretty poor in FSX itself. Only a few GA add-on manufacturers seem to have made any real advances in terms of spin modelling. Set up a stall at FL350 in any airliner add-on you like and the results are not pretty. You'll drop straight down like a stone (you know, the way that the public thinks airplanes stall!)I had a nasty ASE-induced wind shift a month or so back at FL350 in the MD11 and - while I didn't fully stall - the speed went well back into the yellow. I had a heck of a time getting the aircraft stabilised and back up to cruise speed. I respectfully blamed ASE in this case (or more to the point, the data it was trying to interpret, ASE itself is brilliant!)As Jack C already mentions, it's something you really REALLY wouldn't want do in the real thing anyway, so I wouldn't be surprised if PMDG has deliberately stayed out of that area in favour of simulating things more on the beaten path.

Jack every airliner certified to Part 23 is taken out and intentionally stalled. Their are videos on youtube of the 777, 747, 787 being FULLY stalled at altitude. It is AMAZING to see the pitch rate when the nose falls through. They aren't pusher induced recoveries either. They have to perform the stalls without the pusher. There are videos of the stalls in multiple configurations as well. The only thing they don't have to do are spin tests. Most airplanes larger than a big Cessna aren't spun because the recovery will be highly unpredictable and possibly impossible. Bombardier lost the prototype CRJ in the early 90's after a stall test turned into a spin. The spin recovery parachute hadn't been properly attached to the airframe. When the test pilots deployed the chute it just blew away and they spun into the ground. There is a tape of the pilots talking all they way into the ground describing the spin recovery techniques they are applying that aren't working. Creepy. Hiram Hunt

Flight Test with stall of the older 737-400 using auto slats

Jack every airliner certified to Part 23 is taken out and intentionally stalled. Their are videos on youtube of the 777, 747, 787 being FULLY stalled at altitude. It is AMAZING to see the pitch rate when the nose falls through. They aren't pusher induced recoveries either. They have to perform the stalls without the pusher. There are videos of the stalls in multiple configurations as well. The only thing they don't have to do are spin tests. Most airplanes larger than a big Cessna aren't spun because the recovery will be highly unpredictable and possibly impossible. Bombardier lost the prototype CRJ in the early 90's after a stall test turned into a spin. The spin recovery parachute hadn't been properly attached to the airframe. When the test pilots deployed the chute it just blew away and they spun into the ground. There is a tape of the pilots talking all they way into the ground describing the spin recovery techniques they are applying that aren't working. Creepy. Hiram Hunt

Well of course it has to be testd. My point is how many of us here stalled a 737 intenionally. None? JackColwill

Well of course it has to be testd. My point is how many of us here stalled a 737 intenionally. None? JackColwill

Maybe someone wants to simulate testing? Or worst case scenarios?

Jack every airliner certified to Part 23 is taken out and intentionally stalled. Their are videos on youtube of the 777, 747, 787 being FULLY stalled at altitude. It is AMAZING to see the pitch rate when the nose falls through. They aren't pusher induced recoveries either. They have to perform the stalls without the pusher. There are videos of the stalls in multiple configurations as well. The only thing they don't have to do are spin tests. Most airplanes larger than a big Cessna aren't spun because the recovery will be highly unpredictable and possibly impossible. Bombardier lost the prototype CRJ in the early 90's after a stall test turned into a spin. The spin recovery parachute hadn't been properly attached to the airframe. When the test pilots deployed the chute it just blew away and they spun into the ground. There is a tape of the pilots talking all they way into the ground describing the spin recovery techniques they are applying that aren't working. Creepy. Hiram Hunt

Actually the Bombardier accident was not due to stall testing going south. They did side-slipping maneuvers that led to spin. And the chute didn't fly away because it was improperly attached. It became unattached due to co-pilot error in configuring it during the fall.More information on this accident: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19930726-2Tero

I stand corrected on the details of the CRJ crash. Jack I have intentionally stalled a Dash 8, CRJ-200, and Beech 1900 on post maintenance test flights. I never had the oppurtunity to stall the EMB-145. I'm sure plenty of pilots have stalled the 737. Maybe not on this forum but I bet it happens more than you think.Hiram Hunt

I appreciate all the replies. As I stated before, I was just curious if PMDG did anything (code-wise) to alter the aerodynamic glitches that may be present in the existing FSX code.Regards, jen noulet

Well of course it has to be testd. My point is how many of us here stalled a 737 intenionally. None? JackColwill

I would. I like those scenarios where the pilot needs all his skills (or a good copilot :( ) to get the aircraft under control again. That includes stalls at low altitudes or stalls shortly after takeoff at a few hundred feets, which could appear if you retract the flaps to early. Those are things I do when training for the first fligths for my VA with a new addon.