B767 From Norway, joined Feb 2008, 126 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3490 times:
In the early sixties when the T tail design was very populaer it was some accidents caused by deep stall.Not sure but I think the BAC 1-11 prototype was lost because of it,As a resault the stick pusher was invented.It pushed the stick forward and redusing the angle of attack before a deep stall could occure.But who invented it?Was it Boeing when the 727 was introduced,or BAc as a resault of the crash.A former DC9 capt told me that even the earliest DC9 were fitted with stickpushers.But I don,t think Douglas was first,because the nine first flew in 65 where the others were flying FEB (727)1963,and AUG(BAC 1-11) the same year.
Anyone with knowledge please comment.
MissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3480 times:
I can't find a definite answer, but my guess would be the HS Trident. It flew about a year before the BAC 1-11 & had a number of innovative features, including the first autoland system, a flight data recorder, & a primitive moving map display (involving a stylus & paper map).
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5962 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3462 times:
Don't forget the related invention-the stick shaker, invented because most jets didn't exhibit stall buffett, and if they did, you couldn't feel it through the hydraulic controls like you could through a strictly mechanical control system
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, RR: 17 Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3404 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 2): Don't forget the related invention-the stick shaker, invented because most jets didn't exhibit stall buffett, and if they did, you couldn't feel it through the hydraulic controls like you could through a strictly mechanical control system
I haven't come across one yet which doesn't exhibit stall buffet. The stick shaker is a tactile stall warning system designed to warn the pilot before they get into the buffet area. Even aircraft with boosted or fully manual controls may have them.
Quoting B767 (Thread starter): Was it Boeing when the 727 was introduced
I may be wrong, but I don't think any 727s had a stick pusher, not even the few UK registered ones, and the CAA was always very keen on adding stick pushers.
Some CAA registered Boeings (737s and 747 classics) had "stick nudgers" installed, which provide a more gentle nose down pitch and can be overcome by the crew more easily.
Early military jets were the first aircraft to encounter such nasty stall characteristics. Apparently in the Gloster Javelin (a two seat delta with a T tail) if the aircraft got into a deep stall, the recovery technique was for the navigator to eject (thus shifting the CG forward). I read somewhere that the F-104 had a stick pusher from the outset, which therefore predates all these airliners.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
Stratosphere From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1622 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3397 times:
The DC-9 does not have stick pushers either they have stick shakers..
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3356 times:
Quoting MissedApproach (Reply 1): a primitive moving map display (involving a stylus & paper map).
And, very accurate it was, too.
Called the Decca Navigator, and it was also used in the western USA, installed on DHC-6 and BE99 aircraft, circa 1968, during a trial period.
Very similar to Loran-C, but with a pictorial display.
Quite nice.
PS. The Brits also used Decca during WWII, with quite good success.
Oldtimer From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 191 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3307 times:
B727 on UK register did have a stickpusher(at least the -100's) that Dan-Air had did as Mr Davies insisted. Not sure about -200's as I had left Dan-Air by the time they came in.
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3296 times:
But weren't stick shakers optional on the FO's side for some time? I remember AA 191, the FO had no indication of a stall on his side, and it was his leg.
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3283 times:
Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 4): The DC-9 does not have stick pushers either they have stick shakers..
The DC-9 and MD80 have a system to power the elevators (normally unpowered) fully nose down to prevent a stall. It may not be a stick pusher, but it has the same effect.
Quoting Oldtimer (Reply 6): B727 on UK register did have a stickpusher(at least the -100's) that Dan-Air had did as Mr Davies insisted. Not sure about -200's as I had left Dan-Air by the time they came in.
My mistake. I had thought Dan Air managed to escaped the CAA's mania for stick pushers.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71 Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3280 times:
Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 4): The DC-9 does not have stick pushers either they have stick shakers..
Correct. And hydraulic assist on the elevator when the control column is pushed well forward.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Tb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1398 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3112 times:
Another plane from of 1960's design, the Learjet 24 and 25, has a shaker, pusher and a puller. The 23's didn't have them. The puller is quite an eye opener if you over-speed the plane at altitude. The Lear wing has a bad reputation of entering Mach tuck if it is over sped far enough. I've never had the pusher go off in flight but you test it during the first pre-flight of the day and it generates 80 pounds of force.
I honestly don't care for the system at all but given how squirrelly and "aerodynamically fragile" that plane is, I could see why it has it. A couple more reasons why I keep turning the upgrade down in that thing!
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Feb 2008, 126 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5962 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
