Why does the P-47 have such a strange stall?

[DaveBB]

I'm just getting back into Aces High, and I've gotten into some good fights in the P-47.  I forgot how good the plane was in a rolling scissors.  Anyhow, I've noticed that when I stall the aircraft (an accelerated stall I believe), the nose actually pitches up.  This seems a bit counterintuitive to me.  Why would the nose pitch up in such a manner?

[Golfer]

Hard to say without seeing first hand or knowing whether you're turning, coordinated or what your general attitude is to offer an explanation. If you're right wing down and in need of some right rudder I can see the airplane's torque pulling the nose left which would look like a nose up moment.

Post a video?

[FLS]

I'm just getting back into Aces High, and I've gotten into some good fights in the P-47.  I forgot how good the plane was in a rolling scissors.  Anyhow, I've noticed that when I stall the aircraft (an accelerated stall I believe), the nose actually pitches up.  This seems a bit counterintuitive to me.  Why would the nose pitch up in such a manner?

When you stall it's because your AOA is too high. A high AOA is a nose up attitude. The center of pressure on the wing moves forward at high AOA.

Film it offline or in the TA with smoke on so you can see the airflow in the stall. Keep in mind that a variety of forces are balanced in flight and that balance is disturbed when you stall.

[colmbo]

A high AOA is a nose up attitude.

That is misleading.  You can stall in any attitude including going straight down which is certainly not nose up.

[FLS]

That is misleading.  You can stall in any attitude including going straight down which is certainly not nose up.

We're just using a different frame of reference. I was referring to AOA, orientation in relation to relative wind, not attitude in relation to the horizon. Sorry if that was confusing, it was the word that came to mind at the time.

[Serenity]

We're just using a different frame of reference. I was referring to AOA, orientation in relation to relative wind, not attitude in relation to the horizon. Sorry if that was confusing, it was the word that came to mind at the time.

It's accurate for most stalls, as a nose-high stall is going to be MUCH more common than the accelerated departures in other planes of motion.

[DaveBB]

I just tested offline. Turning left, turning right, in a climb, and in a dive. I found that the majority of the time that I'm hearing the stall horning, I'm holding right rudder.  Then when the aircraft truly stalls, the nose pitches up.  Still not sure what is taking effect.  Its similar to how the 262 will let you over-rotate, but nowhere near as dramatic. 

[Dawger]

It's accurate for most stalls, as a nose-high stall is going to be MUCH more common than the accelerated departures in other planes of motion.

Actually this is wrong. The most common accelerated stall is nose low when folks are panicked while headed for the ground or trying to tighten a turn up in reference to a point on the ground.

The most common stall is during traffic pattern operations with a nose low attitude.

Of course I am referring to the real world.

[Serenity]

Actually this is wrong. The most common accelerated stall is nose low when folks are panicked while headed for the ground or trying to tighten a turn up in reference to a point on the ground.

The most common stall is during traffic pattern operations with a nose low attitude.

Of course I am referring to the real world.

Your real world is very different from mine. Where accelerated departures aren't uncommon, it's going to be flat trying to pull lead. Nose low, you're going to G-loc before you depart. Nose high, you're worried about compressor stalls more than wing stalls. When talking aircraft with the type of performance here in AH, you're far more likely to stall nose-high due to improper energy management than you are to depart. That's my experience though in both realms.

[DaveBB]

So if someone is turning on final and they stall, is it really an accelerated stall? They are already slow and they are banking. Doesn't stall speed go up as bank angle increases? They just bank themselves right below stall speed.

[Serenity]

So if someone is turning on final and they stall, is it really an accelerated stall? They are already slow and they are banking. Doesn't stall speed go up as bank angle increases? They just bank themselves right below stall speed.

Yes, that's the effect of AOB on stall. While you could TECHNICALLY call that an accelerated stall, I think that's a bit disingenuous.

[FLS]

The term "accelerated stall" refers to a stall at more than 1g wing loading. You generally exceed 1g while turning.

[Dawger]

Yes, that's the effect of AOB on stall. While you could TECHNICALLY call that an accelerated stall, I think that's a bit disingenuous.

You need to study your AFNA a bit more.

Bank angle has almost no influence on stall speed.

The bank angle versus stall speed chart folks are familiar with assumes a G load to maintain altitude. The relationship of stall to G is a simple formula. 1G stall speed times square root of the G.

Any stall over 1G is an accelerated stall.

[Serenity]

You need to study your AFNA a bit more.

Bank angle has almost no influence on stall speed.

The bank angle versus stall speed chart folks are familiar with assumes a G load to maintain altitude. The relationship of stall to G is a simple formula. 1G stall speed times square root of the G.

Any stall over 1G is an accelerated stall.

ALMOST no influence is not NO influence. When you're slow in the approach turn, the conditions that started my portion of that discussion, an increased angle of bank will make an appreciable difference.

How much G do you sustain in an approach turn?

The term "accelerated stall" refers to a stall at more than 1g wing loading. You generally exceed 1g while turning.

I understand this. You'll notice I did say that it would TECHNICALLY be an accelerated stall. But I believe that's disingenuous. When we talk about accelerated stalls, we're talking about stalls at 3, 4, even 5G. Stalling an aircraft 100, even 200kts above the stall speed, not 3 to 4 knots above stall speed. While a stall in the approach turn meets the definition of an "accelerated stall", in every training environment I've been in, it's not called an accelerated stall because it's not handled like an accelerated stall. It has it's own name, not surprisingly, "approach turn stall".

[FLS]

I understand this. You'll notice I did say that it would TECHNICALLY be an accelerated stall. But I believe that's disingenuous. When we talk about accelerated stalls, we're talking about stalls at 3, 4, even 5G. Stalling an aircraft 100, even 200kts above the stall speed, not 3 to 4 knots above stall speed. While a stall in the approach turn meets the definition of an "accelerated stall", in every training environment I've been in, it's not called an accelerated stall because it's not handled like an accelerated stall. It has it's own name, not surprisingly, "approach turn stall".

I was answering DaveBB not you. I should have quoted him to make that clear. I'm confident the Navy is giving you adequate training. 

Are you using CNATRA P-1289 for ACM FTI?  I'm wondering if they still use the same illustration for one circle and two circle flow, I found that confusing.