Here's another even better example. A longish video with a student who is reluctant to let the aircraft stall. The instructor demonstrates the DISTINCT nose drop in the first round of stalls then much later in the video, demonstrates a classic stall and large wing drop when stalling with 2 stages of flap. Nearly all light aircraft will drop the nose if you pull right back. They will nearly all show roll instability near the stall (one wing is nearly stalling while the other is just about flying). Flaps enable a lower stall speed at a higher angle of attack and the differential in lift is often more pronounced hence the tendency to drop a wing quite suddenly with a flap assisted stall. 

 

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by robert young
typo

30 minutes ago, robert young said:

Here's an actual C152 stall (best clip is around 3 minutes in). Note, as speed decreases all controls become floppy, with less and less authority. As the stall approaches there is roll instability. A distinct nose drop (with partial wing drop) happens immediately the yoke is pulled right back. This is how a C152 flies. I see no connection between the video below clip and the sim video above. Sorry.

 

It stall like that before pilot pushes yoke down. A lot of actually taught this way which make stalls look very dramatic 

I would rather watch a video from a lumberjack on tree inaccuracy in the sim.

29 minutes ago, robert young said:

Here's another even better example. A longish video with a student who is reluctant to let the aircraft stall. The instructor demonstrates the DISTINCT nose drop in the first round of stalls then much later in the video, demonstrates a classic stall and large wing drop when stalling with 2 stages of flap. Nearly all light aircraft will drop the nose if you pull right back. They will nearly all show roll instability near the stall (one wing is nearly stalling while the other is just about flying). Flaps enable a lower stall speed at a higher angle of attack and the differential in lift is often more pronounced hence the tendency to drop a wing quite suddenly with a flap assisted stall. 

 

There are dozens of 152 pilots saying the stalls are accurate. As of right now, you and the YouTuber seem to be the odd one out 

21 minutes ago, robert young said:

Here's another even better example. A longish video with a student who is reluctant to let the aircraft stall. The instructor demonstrates the DISTINCT nose drop in the first round of stalls then much later in the video, demonstrates a classic stall and large wing drop when stalling with 2 stages of flap. Nearly all light aircraft will drop the nose if you pull right back. They will nearly all show roll instability near the stall (one wing is nearly stalling while the other is just about flying). Flaps enable a lower stall speed at a higher angle of attack and the differential in lift is often more pronounced hence the tendency to drop a wing quite suddenly with a flap assisted stall. 

 

30 minute CFI demo is pretty much show how 152 stalls. There is no dramatic nose just pitch down to level altitude while CFI return yoke to neutral. As mentioned before, there is "falling leaf" exercises when you stall constantly by keeping yoke aft and airplane coordinated. Airplane will reach critical angle of attack and recover by itself aerodynamically while descending. 

Most of the time 152 would not roll on the wing if staled  perfectly coordinated. Unless of course some other phenomena occur - for example sudden wing gust . Famous Rod Machado actually own 152 and flight instruct in it. On occasion,  during safety seminars, he shows some cool exercises in his 152 replicating all sort of emergencies. I lucky enough live nearby so visited few of them. I  have learn a big deal of it even thought I actually span 152 aerobat for during my CFI training many years ago.

In US we teach two stalls departure and approach or power on and power off. Power off is one that performed in full lading configuration (aka approach stall). In contrast, power on in clean configuration. Power on stalls are actually more dramatic as airplane pitches much higher to get critical AoA. 

1 hour ago, snglecoil said:

And someone really needs to explain that a plane's flight characteristics don't really change because it is wet.

They do a little bit, but not so as you'd really notice too much in a Cessna spam can. Nevertheless, we usually keep an old car wiper blade handy to wipe the wings down on gliders prior to launch, if they've been rained on heavily, as it smooths the airflow a bit and does make them generate a bit more lift than they would otherwise do, and you need a glider to fly as well as it can possibly manage.

Anyway, back on topic.

With regard to all the people saying that light aeroplanes are all twitchy, I think they might be surprised to find how 'not twitchy' light aeroplanes are in real life, and especially at low speeds. Up near VNE you could rip the tail off some aeroplanes with a clumsy full rudder deflection, but on short finals when you are slow, you have to really give some aeroplanes big aileron deflections just to get them to even think about rolling a bit. 🤣 You can actually see how cack the controls are on a lot of aeroplanes in some stall practice videos out there, where the control movements necessary to get the thing to drop out of the sky are very large, and that's because designers make aeroplanes to be safe to fly and not twitchy death traps which are a mere flinch aware from going out of control on finals..

But this you tend to forget the first time an instructor gets you doing stalls and spins; the elevator is nowhere near as effective when you're chugging along approaching stall speed with the nose up high. I couldn't even get the goddam thing to stall, much less spin the first few times I tried it because I'd been used to being careful with the control inputs when learning lovely co-ordinated turns to roll out on specific headings, and of course that does bugger all with hardly any airflow going over the control surfaces. It was only when the instructor told me to yank the stick back as hard and as far as I could and shove my foot right to the floor at the same time that the thing actually did go into a spin. Which is great fun incidentally.

So I must admit I'll be disappointed if the flight model in the new sim can't manage a half-decent spin. When you first start doing spins you can be fairly apprehensive, but after about the third go at doing one, you realise its quite possibly the best fairground ride you'll ever go on and you'd cheerfully spend all afternoon doing them if you had the altitude to spare. Unfortunately, a stall or spin in a PC flight sim won't give you that 'going over a hump-backed bridge in your car at fifty' drop feeling you get, but I still want the sim to at least do the movements for the aeroplane.

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by Chock

I don’t think someone is qualified to make flight model judgements if they rotate in the C152 at 60+ kts... 50 kts is Vr in the 152.

52 minutes ago, Chock said:

They do a little bit, but not so as you'd really notice too much in a Cessna spam can

Oh for crying out loud, Alan. 🤦‍♂️ I didn't think I needed to qualify the statement with "significantly." And those little spam cans are about to provide my income for a couple of years so please, referring to them with a little more dignity would be appreciated! 😂 

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by snglecoil

2 hours ago, andrecarli737 said:

 I won't take this man words, he recovered a stalled dropped wing using opposite aileron, irl I would probably be reproved by the CFI 🤣

That definitely proves he has no pilot license!

Guys I suggest you stop beating a dead horse. Is MSFS flight model perfect? No! Is it decent ? Yes!

In fact 152 in my opinion is the best modeled in beta! And I know it for the fact!

 

3 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Oh for crying out loud, Alan. 🤦‍♂️ I didn't think I needed to qualify the statement with "significantly." And those little spam cans are about to provide my income for a couple of years so please, referring to them with a little more dignity would be appreciated! 😂 

Hey I really like the 152, but I still call all the little metal GA aeroplanes spam cans. Fun fact on that nickname incidentally which might make one feel a bit happier about it, 'spam can' was a nickname originally applied to the North American P-51 Mustang believe it or not. This was because many pilots converting from their previous USAAF mount in the ETO (the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, which is huge) often remarked that they felt like spam in a can when they got into the considerably smaller P-51. 🙂

1 minute ago, Chock said:

'spam can' was a nickname originally applied to the North American P-51 Mustang believe it or not.

Well there you go! I shall hold my head high as I squeeze into that spam can next to my student. And as they hold the yoke back for that first stall, I can close my eyes and just imagine that we are not in a tiny 152...that needed a few extra moments in the run-up to burn just enough fuel to make maximum gross weight... NO but in the cockpit of a mighty P-51! 😍

Or you can paint it up like this. At a stretch, it makes it a warbird:

59 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

In fact 152 in my opinion is the best modeled in beta! And I know it for the fact!

I do like what I have seen in the 152 but the lack of a GPS even a 295 or 430 is disconcerting. I'm looking forward to the 172/GNS though.

15 minutes ago, FPStewy said:

I do like what I have seen in the 152 but the lack of a GPS even a 295 or 430 is disconcerting. I'm looking forward to the 172/GNS though.

I think it’s cool they included a plane without a GPS 🙂

Could make for some really cool realistic VFR flights with nav logs