Originally Posted by
djpil
Interesting that for my FAR 23 certified airplane the manual states not to use the aileron as large aileron deflections will aggravate a near-stalled condition - it does indeed. I can demonstrate that a small aileron deflection near the stall will cause the opposite wing to drop, just like simple pilot theory. I'm not an old wife but feel free to call me a dinosaur.
I had a quick look at Stowell's book "Stall/Spin Awareness and the stuff he had on the NASA spin test stuff done in the 70s-80s which looked at several aircraft (types still floating around in GA including some not certified for spinning) and their spin behaviour.
His summary (as I read it) was out of roll aileron was generally found to be pro spin for most of them - hence NASAs recommendation about neutral aileron as a general rule although timing was important - it could be used to prevent spin entry in some at an early entry stage but then became pro-spin soon after.
In Stowell's book there is a list of published spin recovery techniques from many manufacturers and many quote neutral aileron.
I think one problem is instructors are aware of the neutral aileron idea and know rudder is used but I believe many think it is the roll that must be immediately stopped and the aircraft must be brought wings level immediately.
Knowing they are not supposed to use aileron they use rudder "to pick up the wing".
I think some instructors have progressively been underdone on stalling over the years and are wary of it, having been poorly taught themselves and that passes on to students who then become instructors and so it continues.
Originally Posted by
djpil
"It also highlighted that there can be varying interpretations of an ‘incipient spin’, and this has led to aircraft not approved for intentional spins being used for incipient spin training and assessment." Naturally, as CASA has never defined an incipient spin.
Spot on I reckon. It must be taught but they don't define it.