Spin Non-Recovery

[Ridgerunner]

Hello all,

A situation which I have heard and thought about several times has been where an aircraft has entered a spin, but the crew have been unable to recover from it. I fly Cessna 152s and Grob 115E Tutors with the UAS, but I have never seen the instructors experience difficulty recovering. I acknowledge that they have much experience of doing spinning, and I personally have never recovered from a spin myself, only had it demonstrated to me, but I don't understand or have been told how you can enter a non-recoverable situation. Are they talking flat spins? Anyone I have asked about this, or at least for the aircraft I fly, say that the aircraft do not go into flat spins, so negating a flat spin what is the problem. Why does a spin only get demonstrated now for the PPL because so many people were dying? What is it that makes the spin non-recoverable? Low-altitude, lack of experience, mis-interpretation of the event?

I would like to be enlightened upon this as I certainly would not practice spinning on my PPL without an instructor, but even at that, I doubt I would do it unless on the UAS with a chute etc and a QFI for the extra safety if this is such a dangerous manoeuvere. I worry that my ability to handle a spin may be impared since I approach the situation with apprehension and have never entered one for practice.

I look forward to the replies,

RR

[rhovsquared]

spins are fun but the plane must be certicated for them and some aircraft need special recovery techniques, sometimes not centering the ailerons is a culprit or accelerated spins are a bit more dangerous, but i believe all pilots should experience it first hand becuse they almost always occur on that base to final turn...the very worst so 1. check the certifcation of the plane. 2. read the afm for the type specific recovery if applicable. 3 in most case PARE really works 4. practice (until more experienced with the CFI) after a while you'll be addicted:D

rhov

[Uncle Ginsters]

RR,
I think the situations that you may be referring to are now UAS folklore from several years ago now. The Bulldog had 2 instances of 'unrecoverable' spins and we lost a JEFTS Firefly circa 1995 in a similar situation. In each case (if my memory serves me right) either:
1. The incorrect spin recovery action was used.
2. The spin was abnormal, ie high-rotational or flat.

Although, I also remember at least one inconclusive report.

As RhoVSquared has said, so long as the AFM recovery is flown accurately, within AFM limits of weight, balance and fuel asymmetry. It is also worth finding out if your ac has a published "delayed spin recovery" in case of the initial actions not working as published.
All told though, spin recovery training is an enjoyable and important addition to any pilot's armoury who intends to practise aerobatics safely - if anyone dares to say you won't ever need it, they really are naive :sad:
Enjoy,

Uncle G

[P.Pilcher]

As I've posted before, when I learned to fly, not only were we expected to enter and recover from a fully developed spin, but then were subsequently sent to practice this solo! Times change.

P.P.

[FlyingForFun]

I think the question basically boils down to wanting to know what it is about spins which were causing people to die, and spins to be taken off the PPL syllabus???

A correctly maintained aircraft, approved for spinning, within the w+b limits for which spins are approved, when flown in accordance with the POH, will recover within the height specified in the POH.

In the case of common training aircraft, the aircraft will generally recover easily even if an incorrect technique is used. (This makes things quite difficult for the instructor. For example, I have done spinning exercises in a C152 where the student has not used full rudder in the recovery, but the aircraft has recovered with no apparent difference to when full rudder was used. Now try explaining to the student why it is is important to use full rudder.....) This is certainly not true of every aircraft I've ever spun, though, and there are plenty of aircraft out there which will only recover from spins if exactly the right technique is used.

When we are talking about "unrecoverable" spins I think there are a number of possible reasons for the unrecoverability:

1) The aircraft is not approved for spinning, or has not been maintained properly. Let's work on the assumption that this does not apply to flying schools using the aircraft for PPL training.

2) The aircraft is outside its W+B limits for spinning. It is a fact that instructors do not do a W+B before every single flight, and although we know what kind of loads our aircraft can carry and still be within the W+B, I would guess that some instructional flights are carried out with the aircraft outside its limits simply because of the practical constraints placed on instructors. Whilst we can get away with this for many flights (although the insurance company might disagree if an incident were to occur), there's a good chance we won't get away with it for spinning, especially with the CofG outside limits.

3) An unintentional spin at low level, such as when turning base-final. This is probably the area where most accidents, and therefore fatalities, occur. I don't think this situation is relevant to the discussion, though, because the discussion is related to planned spinning.

4) Incorrect technique used due to the pilot not having studied the POH in detail. Again, not relevant to the discussion, because the recovery for most training aircraft is as close to "standard" as it's possible for a spin recovery to be, and they will generally recover even if an incorrect technique is used. But might be very relevant to more advanced types.

5) Not enough height to recover. It is my guess that this is what it boils down to. Instructor knows that he has recovered from a spin in a certain height. So he adds an extra few thousand feet onto that, and uses that as his starting height for spins. But then, once he has a bit more experience, he comes across a student whose progress is being held up by the weather not being suitable for spinning. He knows that the cloudbase is just very slightly lower than he'd normally use, but he decides to do the exercise anyway. It goes without a hitch, and the instructor has just lowered his minimum height. Maybe he lowers it a bit further next time..... and maybe next time the student messes up the recovery........

What my fifth point boils down to is that the requirement to do a spinning exercise might encourage instructors to take students spinning in weather which is not suitable. I would guess that, when people say talk about the removal of the spinning exercise from the syllabus and say "more people get killed practicing it than get killed in an avoidable inadvertant spin after their PPL", this is the scenario they are most likely talking about.

But this post is entirely speculation. I don't have any facts, figures or incidents to back this up, only my own perception. Maybe some of the grizzly old instructors who were around when spinning was mandatory might like to comment???

FFF
--------------

[homeguard]

Well I was around.
The arguements one way or the other didn't surround death or almost death at all.
A PPL student was required to demonstrate a spin entry and recognition from a spiral dive and enact the correct spin recovery but before going solo. Many pre solo students simply packed it in and refused to complete spinning. Also it has to be said many Instructors felt quite ill from spinning and would avoid doing it and leave it to others.
One school of thought considered that there was no value in the taught spin and recovery which was false in that it was aerobatic exercise and did not truly reflect the inadvertant spin resulting from poor loading (the C og G being aft of the limit) and poor handling and that a greater emphasis should be on avoidance. i.e. slow flight handling.
The other school of thought fought furiously to retain spinning. Perhaps they felt that if the student/PPL couln't hack it then there was a doubt as to whether they should be in an aeroplane at all. It was considered an invaluable handling exercise.
However a compromise was reached; Slow flight handling was introduced. mandatory Spinning was removed but full spins were retained within the syllabus as an option.

[bogbeagle]

A few months ago, I searched the NTSB website for spin-related accidents. To the best of my memory, not one of these involved a turn onto final.

If you are dumb enough to spin off the turn onto final, you are surely not going to be smart enough to recover in the 500-or-so feet available to you.

The spin-related accidents on the NTSB website had many factors in common....exhibitionism, low-level aeros, air displays and attempted VFR flight in IMC were amongst those factors.

In my opinion, the bulk of these spinning accidents are caused primarily by Human Factors. I mean that they are not primarily "handling" problems, but are caused by the pilots wilfully placing themselves in impossible situations. All of the spin training in the world would have made no difference in many of these cases.....once control was lost, the outcome was inevitable.

[BigEndBob]

The only videoed spin accidents i've ever seen envolved spinning in from low level aeros or steep climb out showing off (this was going the rounds at the CAA safety evenings). The only other occasion was spinning in from a turn back efato.

I always remembered spinning was dropped from the UK syllabus after few Tomahawk accidents, think they occured at Oxford.

When i learnt in the late 70's on PA28's can remember doing several with my examiner has he wanted to satify himself i could do them. Great fun as the Cherokee would flick roll before it entered a spin!

[rhovsquared]

May I add that regardless of where and spin accidents occur the main reason for practice is to get an understanding and feeling of the flight conditions conducive to spin upsets... in my actual opinion spins (ditto for spirals) should be done visually AND (always with a CFI or another very experienced pilot) under the IFR hood both full and partial panel, and as long as all of the above mentioned precautions are observed ( aircraft limitations, performance, practice altitude, weather, personal limitations etc.) all part of proper ADM anyway.

rhov

[G-KEST]

I am presently on holiday in New Zealand and attended the NZ Moth Club gathering here recently.
After a number of spin accidents and with the support of the NZ CAA a specialised spin and spin avoidance training programme has been developed and this was part of the weekend activity. It had many takers and the two highly experienced instructors were kept busy. Obviously the emphasis was on vintage aircraft like the DH82A and the DH60G along with the DHC1 but the programme can be tailored to any category of aeroplane or, indeed, glider.
With so many of our current instructor fraternity lacking experience on a wide range of aeroplanes with departure characteristics varying from benign to vicious perhaps it is time to consider a similar programme in the UK.
I was given a proof copy of a prototype Powerpoint presentation which is designed to be part of the programme and will be bringing this home in a month or so.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[djpil]

Over the last few years I've thought that there's a lot that we can learn from the what the Kiwi's have been doing. Here's another example. I suggested something similar here but didn't get a lot of support - perhaps I should've pushed it harder or higher.
Trapper - we're on the way back from NZ - are you going to drop in?

[G-KEST]

DJPil,
Much as I would like to visit the outer fringes of Australia as opposed to the proverbial GAFA centre I regret that Cathay Pacific will not deviate from a direct routing Auckland to Hong Kong on 10 May. We will only have the opportunity of viewing the northeastern corner of your fascinating country I fear and this from around FL330.
Our 10week trip to NZ is proving to be excellent in all respects and Avgas prices here are but approximately 0.60GBP per litre................... less than half the UK price....!!
Cheers,
Trapper 69
:ok: :ok: :ok:

[BigEndBob]

Perhaps actual flight revision of extreme manouvers could replace the complete waste of time and money known as instructor seminars.
For what it costs we could have an hour or so of stall/spin revision training or perhaps aeros. and classroom with someone who knows what they are talking about. Seminar could be online, we sign a declaration to say we have completed it.

[bogbeagle]

I elected to do a flight test and a seminar when I last revalidated. It was my first seminar and it was hosted by the Examiner Training Agency.

I have to say that I found it to be most rewarding and educational...not at all a waste of time.

Recently attended a seminar at Cranwell and one thrust there, if I may paraphrase, was "that we are teaching handling, but not airmanship; and that it's the lack of airmanship which is dominating the accident scenarios"

Pilots continue to place themselves in impossible positions. Handling skills will not serve to extricate said pilots from these situations.

Of course, airmanship is difficult to teach, time-consuming and tends not to get the Hobbs meter turning. I make no apologies for being an offender.....gotta eat.

It's as simple as this, " we teach down to a price, not up to a standard".

[Sleeve Wing]

Totally endorse the comments of bogbeagle and his compliments to ETA.

Quote: > It's as simple as this, " we teach down to a price, not up to a standard". <

...............and until we can get the ridiculous tax situation on fuel reviewed, 't will always be thus. The Chancellor only has to sit back and watch the activities of the fuel speculators, and then watch his coffers fill.

Also, £306 profit per second, BP ?

There's got to be a way !!!!

But that's another thread.................................

[foxmoth]

After a number of spin accidents and with the support of the NZ CAA a specialised spin and spin avoidance training programme has been developed
perhaps it is time to consider a similar programme in the UK

Already here! Try UH at Kemble.:ok: