The Typhoon which is one of the World's most automated A/C ever has simple solution to stalls.
No input whatsoever,no panick,no worrying about nothing.
A simple RTL "Return To Level" switch which takes care of everything.
This should be made compulsory on every airliner.
RTL feature:
http://typhoon.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/flight-sys.html
"Upon pushing this button, part of the VTAS function set, the aircraft is automatically returned to nose-up, wings level flight with the throttles set at an intermediate position.

Boeing airplanes already have stall protection built in via various ways for the mechanically controlled airplanes. 747-8 has a Pitch Augmentation Control System that will automatically move the elevator without pilot input. The 767 has an actuator called a stick nudger that moves that pushes the control column forward to 1 degree nose up attitude when a stall is detected. The 737NG automatically moves the stabilizer to trim the airplane to nose down.

All of these require direct pilot input to counteract. The airplane can still be stalled, but the pilot will be forcing it to. It will automatically try to correct from a stalled condition. The features are also designed not to be overridden electronically by the autopilot or flight computers. They must be overridden by direct pilot command.

In general you do not want a button that when switched takes control away from the pilot. The failure modes to prevent such a system from inadvertantly activating are worse than the protection that it provides. The airplane is already designed to have static stability and in a panic condition the airplane has controls such as those I described earlier so that it will self correct.

AF 447 and XL888 are a cases where such protections, pilot loss of situational awareness, and attitude/speed/etc sensors failing can still bring a plane down. If the inputs to the computer that controls the self leveling protection computer fail, the airplane is in no better with a computer or pilot flying it. If both AOA sensors and pitot static fail and the airplane defaults to direct mode, such a system is not going to help you much. Having built in protections as there are and redundant systems are what prevent accidents like AF 447. Not every failure mode can be designed around as some conditions are deemed to be rare enough not to have design protections. In the case of XL888 they had a failed AOA sensor and when testing the limits of a low speed go around, the fault trees caught up and the pilots lost control.

Or we could just train pilots from the beginning to recognize stalls and how to recover from them, and to not rely on automation. We could even have them do demonstrate the ability to do so on recurring check rides, and emphasize basic airmanship. It is a million dollar solution to a one dollar problem.

I think a feature like this is designed to address disorientation moreso than stalls. Even small airplanes like the Cirrus SR-22 have it: http://whycirrus.com/advancements/Cirrus-perspective-cockpit.aspx. They call it the "LVL"button, which does something similar.

But, I wonder how useful this is. If you're disoriented, chances are your inner ear is telling you something (that you believe) and your instruments are telling you something else (that you probably don't believe as much). I think it's a natural reaction to think that something is wrong with the instruments. How likely are you to turn over complete control to a machine that you suspect (correctly or incorrectly) is malfunctioning?

This looks more like a system for dealing with unusual attitudes and spatial disorientation, particularly when the pilot is aware that spatial awareness has been lost, probably not a bad idea for such an agile combat aircraft. The word "stall" doesn't seem to appear anywhere in the article.

Quoting lowrider (Reply 2): Or we could just train pilots from the beginning to recognize stalls and how to recover from them, and to not rely on automation

... or, at least to understand the automation. But good luck with that radical idea.   

Quoting Chamonix (Thread starter): The Typhoon which is one of the World's most automated A/C ever has simple solution to stalls.

As said, it's not a solution to stalls as stalls aren't related to attitude. You can be stalled, but at the same time be nose up, wings level with throttles set to an intermediate position.

Quoting Chamonix (Thread starter): The Typhoon which is one of the World's most automated A/C ever has simple solution to stalls.

They system you describe is not a solution to stalls. In fact, if activated in a stall, it could kill you (eventually, if you didn't realize how stupid what you'd just done actually was).

Quoting Chamonix (Thread starter): "Upon pushing this button, part of the VTAS function set, the aircraft is automatically returned to nose-up, wings level flight with the throttles set at an intermediate position.

If you're stalled, you usually want nose-down with power. The opposite of what this system does.

Quoting Lemmy (Reply 3): I think a feature like this is designed to address disorientation moreso than stalls.

Quoting David L (Reply 4): This looks more like a system for dealing with unusual attitudes and spatial disorientation,

Exactly. This doesn't even apply to modern airliners since, as RoseFlyer nicely described, airliners will return to a stable attitude and speed if you just let go. They effectively have this type of system active all the time and you "activate" it by just letting go of the controls.

In a degraded flight control situation the last time you want to invoke more automation since you have no idea which part is going to be correct when the aircraft tries to return to straight and level...if the IRU is the part that died it could well flip you upside down.

Quoting 9VSIO (Reply 5): As said, it's not a solution to stalls as stalls aren't related to attitude. You can be stalled, but at the same time be nose up, wings level with throttles set to an intermediate position.

Exactly. Hitting this type of function after a stall would probably result in an accident that looked a whole lot like AF447.

Tom.

Spin recovery in the British Spitfire was best accomplished by the pilot taking his hand off the stick and placing his feet flat on the floor while increasing power gradually. I tried this in a C152 and it worked perfectly, bringing me out of the spin in about half a turn or so. The airplane had to be held in a spin or it would fly out of it all on its own.

Yes, I am very much in favor of people getting spin recovery training for the PPL.

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 7): Yes, I am very much in favor of people getting spin recovery training for the PPL.

Me too - it was included in my PPL training - though not required. Actually on my first phase check - the check instructor said - gee - you ever spun it? No? Let's do it.

During hood training, my instructor (he could be evil) - snapped us into a spin during a power on stall under the hood. I recovered to discover he had turned the fuel off during my recovery - so just about the time I recovered - the engine stopped.

This was during PPL, not instrument training. He believed in pushing his students a bit....

All this was in a 152...