Originally Posted by
Big Pistons Forever
Part of the problem is terminology. What should be specified is spin entry recognition and recovery, not incipient spin training.
The intent should be to recognize that the aircraft is starting to depart from just stalled to stalled and now yawing with the wing dropping which is the entry to the spin. ......... Teaching PPL's how to enter a spin so they can recover from the spin they caused is IMO negative training. .....
Totally agree. Hopefully CASA's promised guidance will get back to that.
Originally Posted by
BillieBob
EASA now requires an 'Advanced UPRT' course to be completed prior to a pilot's first type rating on a single-pilot complex or a multi-pilot aeroplane. ....
I wonder if CASA will introduce that requirement but I've seen no sign of it happening.
Originally Posted by
parkfell
As Incipient Spins are required to be taught .... Therefore spin recovery training will need to form part of the experience.......?
EASA is very specific as to what they want for an incipient spin and it will require the spin recovery actions per the AFM. Interesting that EASA requires UPRT instructors to undertake advanced spin training, far beyond what CASA requires of an instructor teaching spin endorsements.
Originally Posted by
Big Pistons Forever
i don’t agree with your conclusion that therefore spin training is necessary ..
I'm not sure whether parkfell is referring to EASA UPRT (in which case it would be necessary) or CASA ab initio.
Originally Posted by
Big Pistons Forever
What is necessary is clear direction to flight schools that this training never be allowed to progress beyond the initial post stall wing drop and yaw. If the student doesn’t immediately recover the instructor has to take over to prevent the aircraft exceeding its certification envelope
Agreed, but would need a change to Part 61 MOS as it currently mandates incipient spins in a variety of scenarios.