Piper Tomahawk Spin Question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: North Yorkshrie
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piper Tomahawk Spin Question
Hi,
I am looking for spin test data for the Piper PA-38 Tomahawk. Any ideas where I could get hold of this information?
Regards
I am looking for spin test data for the Piper PA-38 Tomahawk. Any ideas where I could get hold of this information?
Regards
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This link info seems fairly comprehensive.
Darren Smith's CFI Homepage Flight Instruction Website Tampa
Graham
Darren Smith's CFI Homepage Flight Instruction Website Tampa
Graham
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful in that piece of junk. They don't call it the "Traumahawk" for nothing.
I used to conduct spin training in that thing until one day it went FLAT on me, for seemingly no good reason.
My entry method was identical to every other spin. I had just completed one series with another CFI on board and we got a "conventional" spin. After recovery, we climbed back up to try one more. Everything seemed normal during the entry, but it quickly pitched up flat enough for me to see the horizon through the windscreen (rather than a window full of furrowed fields, as I expected).
I made a recovery from that and swore I would never spin another Tomahawk.
Admittedly, my experience is subjective and anecdotal, but there are many like mine.
Good luck, and be safe.
I used to conduct spin training in that thing until one day it went FLAT on me, for seemingly no good reason.
My entry method was identical to every other spin. I had just completed one series with another CFI on board and we got a "conventional" spin. After recovery, we climbed back up to try one more. Everything seemed normal during the entry, but it quickly pitched up flat enough for me to see the horizon through the windscreen (rather than a window full of furrowed fields, as I expected).
I made a recovery from that and swore I would never spin another Tomahawk.
Admittedly, my experience is subjective and anecdotal, but there are many like mine.
Good luck, and be safe.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZeroZero
I have to differ very strongly with your opinion, the PA38 is one of the better trainers to be made in the USA.
It has had it's problems but these are well understood and can be safley managed by good maintenance practices.
As for spinning the aircraft it is very predictable and as long as the person flying it undersands the spinning and more important the forces during the spin recovery there are no problems.
I have spun the PA38 countless times as an instructor an have had no problems, I also worked in the hangar and was able to see that all the SB's & AD's were done properly.
All that having been said I would not spin a PA38 that did not know the maintenance history of, I am sure that there are some real deathtraps that have had the AD's & SB's done badly or not done at all, these aircraft you should steer clear off.
It has had it's problems but these are well understood and can be safley managed by good maintenance practices.
As for spinning the aircraft it is very predictable and as long as the person flying it undersands the spinning and more important the forces during the spin recovery there are no problems.
I have spun the PA38 countless times as an instructor an have had no problems, I also worked in the hangar and was able to see that all the SB's & AD's were done properly.
All that having been said I would not spin a PA38 that did not know the maintenance history of, I am sure that there are some real deathtraps that have had the AD's & SB's done badly or not done at all, these aircraft you should steer clear off.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not a test pilot, engineer or mechanic.
I'm a pilot. It was more than 17 years ago, but I have a hard time imagining I used ailerons for a spin entry and I have an even harder time imagining how that would cause the nose to PITCH UP and go flat. Last time I checked, ailerons affect ROLL not PITCH.
Anyway, I have no idea about the mx history of those airplanes, I'm just glad I don't earn my pay flying them any longer.
P.S. Have a look at that study posted by embraerman.
Be lucky!
I'm a pilot. It was more than 17 years ago, but I have a hard time imagining I used ailerons for a spin entry and I have an even harder time imagining how that would cause the nose to PITCH UP and go flat. Last time I checked, ailerons affect ROLL not PITCH.
Anyway, I have no idea about the mx history of those airplanes, I'm just glad I don't earn my pay flying them any longer.
P.S. Have a look at that study posted by embraerman.
Be lucky!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spinning the Pa38
The Tomahawk certainly divides opinions .. I flew Cessna's for the first few years, before moving across to the Pa38 in the early 80's .. in fact I had the pleasre of flying the first in in the country down to Greenham Common for a static exhibit at an air display, going on to teach/examine in them very regularly over the next 15 years. It is in my opinion a superior trainer to the Cessna for a number of reasons, in the low speed regime it has a profound ability to teach respect for an aircraft, in the spin it DEMANDS it.
Whilst demonstrating spin entry and recovery myself, I have always found it predictable: after 3 turns the spin axis becomes close to vertical but recovers per text book, HOWEVER ..... one of the joys of advanced instruction is that you get to sit there whilst other people spin it, and that is where the fun can start.
I don't know the percentages, but a high proportion of people did their initial spin training on Cessna 150/152 or other relatively benign types where a tweak of aileron here or there, or a less than comitted push forward during recovery will not make a significant difference to the outcome.. the same cannot be said of the Pa38, my advice to anyone spinning the aircraft is read the section on spinning thoroughly, there is a warning regarding a secondary spin mode which was not included in the manual to take up space.
Mess with the ailerons in the spin it WILL go flat, if you maintain that deflection whilst pushing the "control column forward until the rotation stops" you WILL encounter the secondary spin mode .. and it is definately to be avoided .. it will frighten you as it did me on the two occasions I was present !
That said, after correction (and a couple of additional rotations) the recovery was also per the POH.
READ THE MANUAL PROPERLY and respect the limitations.
There is also a "trick of the trade" when stalling or spinning this aircraft ... slot the elbow of the arm you are using on the control column into the notch between the door and the little armrest (left elbow flying from the left) and keep it there.. it will prevent you from making the roll inputs that complicate matters.
Our company rule was that a full recovery must been made by 3000 feet AGL: sensible planning meant an entry @ 5000 AGL demonstrating and 6000 AGL for a new user .. takes ages to get there too
Fly safe
TR
Whilst demonstrating spin entry and recovery myself, I have always found it predictable: after 3 turns the spin axis becomes close to vertical but recovers per text book, HOWEVER ..... one of the joys of advanced instruction is that you get to sit there whilst other people spin it, and that is where the fun can start.
I don't know the percentages, but a high proportion of people did their initial spin training on Cessna 150/152 or other relatively benign types where a tweak of aileron here or there, or a less than comitted push forward during recovery will not make a significant difference to the outcome.. the same cannot be said of the Pa38, my advice to anyone spinning the aircraft is read the section on spinning thoroughly, there is a warning regarding a secondary spin mode which was not included in the manual to take up space.
Mess with the ailerons in the spin it WILL go flat, if you maintain that deflection whilst pushing the "control column forward until the rotation stops" you WILL encounter the secondary spin mode .. and it is definately to be avoided .. it will frighten you as it did me on the two occasions I was present !
That said, after correction (and a couple of additional rotations) the recovery was also per the POH.
READ THE MANUAL PROPERLY and respect the limitations.
There is also a "trick of the trade" when stalling or spinning this aircraft ... slot the elbow of the arm you are using on the control column into the notch between the door and the little armrest (left elbow flying from the left) and keep it there.. it will prevent you from making the roll inputs that complicate matters.
Our company rule was that a full recovery must been made by 3000 feet AGL: sensible planning meant an entry @ 5000 AGL demonstrating and 6000 AGL for a new user .. takes ages to get there too
Fly safe
TR
Last edited by Teddy Robinson; 18th Feb 2012 at 19:29. Reason: note on entry altitude
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've had two spin scares; one in a T67 and the other in a PA 38.
The Slingsby was a reluctant recovery but the PA38 spun happily in and out. It was the whole back end trying to shake itself loose that freaked me.
Only a few days later the a/c was in for check with lots removed. I commented how insubstantial all the brackets around the horizontal stab to fin were with all the supports removed.
"We haven't removed any supports" came the dour reply. I never flew one again.
SGC
The Slingsby was a reluctant recovery but the PA38 spun happily in and out. It was the whole back end trying to shake itself loose that freaked me.
Only a few days later the a/c was in for check with lots removed. I commented how insubstantial all the brackets around the horizontal stab to fin were with all the supports removed.
"We haven't removed any supports" came the dour reply. I never flew one again.
SGC
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T67
Ironically (and sadly) that aircraft killed my aerobatic instructor about 3 weeks after I had checked out on it ... spun all the way down from F70.
I read the piece on stall certification on the Pa38, on the stalling aspect they DO have a point, but personal experience across a fleet of 8 was that they all tended to depart to the left, and if held in would pitch quite vigourously between a nominally level attitude and the stall attitude, most of the time this effect was masked by a very abrupt drop of a wing which became rapidly divergent in both directions unless the rudder was used in a very subtle manner to contain rather than correct the wing drop.
The stall strips provided plenty of buffet (and the tin-canning referred to) in all scenarios, especially max rate turns where you could happily pull to the buffet onset, and given altitude deep into it before the aircraft did what it was supposed to do .. stall and roll out.
With the modifications to the tail bulkheads, regular crack inspections of the tail post rivets, the full harness ... and so on, my feeling is that it did what it said on the packet, and did it rather well.
I can also see how and why people climbing into one from a C152 or Archer without appropriate awareness training can come seriously (terminally) unstuck. It has to be flown accurately and in balance all of the time, and whilst that is the strength of a good training aircraft, the same trait at low level during something like a poorly planned forced landing, or poor speed management on the final turn is sufficient for it to turn around and bite.
Reading the report, I notice that they did'nt spin it, and whilst the point regarding the pitch down or lack thereof was explored, it came across to me at least as a pitch to support a product liability claim, which is a popular persuit in some parts of the world.
I have 2 main issues with the "report", which is long on statistics and short on background, firstly "I flew four of them for nearly 50 hours" is not a lot of time on type, secondly, loading the aircraft to the aft limit with 100lbs of lead shot is not very representative of a typical training wieght and balance. As I recall, there is a designated C of G range for operation in the utility catagory ie. spinning, and loading ANY aircraft to the aft limit will affect the pitching moment adversly, the rest looks like a lawyers brief.
WARNING: IF YOU ENTER A SPIN CLOSE TO THE GROUND YOU MAY DIE !!
and that applies to anything.
TR
I read the piece on stall certification on the Pa38, on the stalling aspect they DO have a point, but personal experience across a fleet of 8 was that they all tended to depart to the left, and if held in would pitch quite vigourously between a nominally level attitude and the stall attitude, most of the time this effect was masked by a very abrupt drop of a wing which became rapidly divergent in both directions unless the rudder was used in a very subtle manner to contain rather than correct the wing drop.
The stall strips provided plenty of buffet (and the tin-canning referred to) in all scenarios, especially max rate turns where you could happily pull to the buffet onset, and given altitude deep into it before the aircraft did what it was supposed to do .. stall and roll out.
With the modifications to the tail bulkheads, regular crack inspections of the tail post rivets, the full harness ... and so on, my feeling is that it did what it said on the packet, and did it rather well.
I can also see how and why people climbing into one from a C152 or Archer without appropriate awareness training can come seriously (terminally) unstuck. It has to be flown accurately and in balance all of the time, and whilst that is the strength of a good training aircraft, the same trait at low level during something like a poorly planned forced landing, or poor speed management on the final turn is sufficient for it to turn around and bite.
Reading the report, I notice that they did'nt spin it, and whilst the point regarding the pitch down or lack thereof was explored, it came across to me at least as a pitch to support a product liability claim, which is a popular persuit in some parts of the world.
I have 2 main issues with the "report", which is long on statistics and short on background, firstly "I flew four of them for nearly 50 hours" is not a lot of time on type, secondly, loading the aircraft to the aft limit with 100lbs of lead shot is not very representative of a typical training wieght and balance. As I recall, there is a designated C of G range for operation in the utility catagory ie. spinning, and loading ANY aircraft to the aft limit will affect the pitching moment adversly, the rest looks like a lawyers brief.
WARNING: IF YOU ENTER A SPIN CLOSE TO THE GROUND YOU MAY DIE !!
and that applies to anything.
TR
Last edited by Teddy Robinson; 18th Feb 2012 at 23:47. Reason: additional comment
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having done hundreds of spins teaching aerobatics have never encountered a problem. They are very controllable. Just use opposite rudder and relax the elevator back pressure.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did maybe 6 PPL flight test examinations in them, made the mistake of looking back at the tail during a spin. It was flopping about like it was about to fail .... a complete layman's take on the structure. I'd never seen a flight surface move like that, nor since.
Never went near one again.
Never went near one again.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
l think Zerozero is talking about a spin that goes flat, ie the nose is on or
around the horizon.
High sink, low noise, lack of control effectiveness.
Not quite what others are describing.
ln my youth l would insist on demonstrating the incipient turning onto
base, after the third time of calling to the third chappie in front " release
your straps and move forward" l stopped doing that.
Unpredictable. Real fuel mass, wing condition, pilot and baggage weight.
Scared the poo out of me !
around the horizon.
High sink, low noise, lack of control effectiveness.
Not quite what others are describing.
ln my youth l would insist on demonstrating the incipient turning onto
base, after the third time of calling to the third chappie in front " release
your straps and move forward" l stopped doing that.
Unpredictable. Real fuel mass, wing condition, pilot and baggage weight.
Scared the poo out of me !
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overun, yes.
The spin entry was NORMAL (i.e., pitch very steep nose down).
But then, with no other control input by either pilot, the plane pitched UP in the spin, high enough I could see the horizon, but still slightly nose low.
At that time, the rate of rotation *seemed* to increase.
AGAIN, this happened over 17 years ago, but it burned such a memory in mind that I have no interest in repeating it.
The spin entry was NORMAL (i.e., pitch very steep nose down).
But then, with no other control input by either pilot, the plane pitched UP in the spin, high enough I could see the horizon, but still slightly nose low.
At that time, the rate of rotation *seemed* to increase.
AGAIN, this happened over 17 years ago, but it burned such a memory in mind that I have no interest in repeating it.
In another life I spent over 1000 hours instructing in the Tomahawk.
Use to spin it all the time, students developed a healthy respect for the dangers of stall / spin close to the ground and the necessity of an assertive, correctly sequenced recovery.
Very good training.
Leaving aside that issue it was a far more comfortable, spacious trainer to sit in
for hours than the extremely cramped C150/ 152 !
Use to spin it all the time, students developed a healthy respect for the dangers of stall / spin close to the ground and the necessity of an assertive, correctly sequenced recovery.
Very good training.
Leaving aside that issue it was a far more comfortable, spacious trainer to sit in
for hours than the extremely cramped C150/ 152 !
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ex-DXB
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
made the mistake of looking back at the tail during a spin. It was flopping about like it was about to fail .... a complete layman's take on the structure. I'd never seen a flight surface move like that, nor since.
Hublot watches have bigger ones!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaah... the good old Traumahawk. 
There's a mention of that in this PDF where the CAA test pilot briefly describes experiencing a "fast disorientating and unnerving secondary spin mode which was most uncomfortable".
there is a warning regarding a secondary spin mode which was not included in the manual to take up space.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by telecaster
zerozero. The PA38 should only be intentionally spun in utility category (C of G limitations). Could that be the reason for the effect you described?
THE POINT IS: The same technique of entering the spin resulted in two different types of spins. One was conventional, the other was flat. NOTHING was changed between the two spins except for the minuscule amount of fuel that was burned.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zero you will have altered the Ailerons.
Its just like the stalls when I first started demo them I always got a wing drop.
A year later and gawd only knows how many stall demos the aircraft never dropped a wing when I demo'd them.
I couldn't remember putting any inputs in when I started and they still dropped a wing when the student was doing them in the same aircraft.
As for the flat spin been there and done it as well.
Its just like the stalls when I first started demo them I always got a wing drop.
A year later and gawd only knows how many stall demos the aircraft never dropped a wing when I demo'd them.
I couldn't remember putting any inputs in when I started and they still dropped a wing when the student was doing them in the same aircraft.
As for the flat spin been there and done it as well.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zerozero
I wish I could be as confident as you what I did with my hands when flying. It is so easy for a right handed person to apply a bit of right aileron when pulling the stick back. Especially when pulling the stick all the way back.
A lifetime of flying instrumented aircraft and looking at the traces of what I actually did after the event cured me of all certainty - except when the control in question (in this case aileron) was being deliberately held on the stop. The physical enviroment of a spin entry makes life even harder to know what you have actually done.
A lifetime of flying instrumented aircraft and looking at the traces of what I actually did after the event cured me of all certainty - except when the control in question (in this case aileron) was being deliberately held on the stop. The physical enviroment of a spin entry makes life even harder to know what you have actually done.